ARTICLE
1 April 2021

Firm Settles FINRA Charges For TRACE Reporting Violations - March 29, 2021

CW
Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP

Contributor

Cadwalader, established in 1792, serves a diverse client base, including many of the world's leading financial institutions, funds and corporations. With offices in the United States and Europe, Cadwalader offers legal representation in antitrust, banking, corporate finance, corporate governance, executive compensation, financial restructuring, intellectual property, litigation, mergers and acquisitions, private equity, private wealth, real estate, regulation, securitization, structured finance, tax and white collar defense.
A firm settled FINRA charges for incorrectly and inadequately reporting Treasury transactions to the Trade Reporting and Compliance Engine ("TRACE").
United States Finance and Banking

A firm settled FINRA charges for incorrectly and inadequately reporting Treasury transactions to the Trade Reporting and Compliance Engine ("TRACE").

In a Letter of Acceptance, Waiver, and Consent, FINRA stated that: "the over-reporting occurred when the firm transferred Treasury securities within its internal accounts because the firm unintentionally removed the logic to prevent these internal transfers from being automatically reported." FINRA found that this led to improperly reported Treasury transactions to TRACE in violation of FINRA Rule 6730 ("Transaction Reporting"). Additionally, FINRA found that the firm's "logic" (i) did not automatically code Treasury transactions with an affiliate that were at cost with the required "No Remuneration" indicator and (ii) misreported affiliate transactions as customer transactions.

FINRA determined that the firm also violated FINRA Rules 2010 ("Standards of Commercial Honor and Principles of Trade") and 3110 ("Supervision") for failing to establish a supervisory system reasonably designed to ensure compliance with TRACE reporting requirements.

To settle the charges, the firm agreed to a censure and a $275,000 fine.

Commentary Steven Lofchie

FINRA's practice of treating every violation of a FINRA Rule as being also a Rule 2110 violation should lead to one of two conclusions: Rule 2010 should be deleted as duplicative; or Rule 2010 should be renamed "Violation of a FINRA Rule." That way, it will be clear that any firm that violates another FINRA Rule has also violated Rule 2010. 

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More