EU antitrust regulators on Thursday fined Barclays, Credit Suisse, HSBC and NatWest 344 million euros ($390 million) for foreign exchange market rigging, reported Reuters.
UBS avoided a 94 million euro fine by alerting the European Commission to the cartel, which was set up via a chatroom known as “Sterling Lads”.
HSBC received the largest fine at 174.3 million euros, followed by Credit Suisse at 83.3 million euros, Barclays at 54.3 million and RBS at 32.5 million.
Barclays, HSBC and RBS – known as NatWest since a rebranding – admitted wrongdoing in return for a reduced penalty. NatWest said the misconduct took place about a decade ago in a single chatroom, involved a former employee and that its culture and controls had since fundamentally changed.
UBS said it had been the first bank to disclose potential misconduct and was pleased the matter was resolved. Some of the world’s biggest banks have been fined more than $11 billion collectively by U.S. and European regulators since allegations first surfaced around 2013 that dealers were rigging the world’s largest financial market. Dozens of traders were suspended or fired.
The latest investigation focused on foreign exchange (forex) spot trading of G10 currencies, the most liquid and traded currencies in the world, which include the US dollar, pound and euro.
Traders exchanged sensitive information and trading plans and sometimes coordinated strategies through the online chatroom, the Commission said.
“Today we complete our sixth cartel investigation in the financial sector since 2013 and conclude the third leg of our investigation into the foreign exchange spot trading market,” EU antitrust chief Margrethe Vestager said in a statement.
She said the collusive behaviour of the five banks undermined the integrity of the financial sector at the expense of the European economy and consumers.
Featured News
Federal Judge Orders Google to Open Android App Store Amid Antitrust Pressure
Oct 7, 2024 by
CPI
Federal Judge Greenlights FTC’s Antitrust Lawsuit Against Amazon, Tosses Some State Claims
Oct 7, 2024 by
CPI
Supreme Court Rejects Uber and Lyft’s Appeal in California Gig Worker Suits
Oct 7, 2024 by
CPI
Supreme Court Sidesteps 5-Hour Energy Pricing Case, Allowing Antitrust Claims to Proceed
Oct 7, 2024 by
CPI
Tempur Sealy and Mattress Firm Argue FTC Proceedings Are Unconstitutional in New Suit
Oct 7, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Refusal to Deal
Sep 27, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust’s Refusal-to-Deal Doctrine: The Emperor Has No Clothes
Sep 27, 2024 by
Erik Hovenkamp
Why All Antitrust Claims are Refusal to Deal Claims and What that Means for Policy
Sep 27, 2024 by
Ramsi Woodcock
The Aspen Misadventure
Sep 27, 2024 by
Roger Blair & Holly P. Stidham
Refusal to Deal in Antitrust Law: Evolving Jurisprudence and Business Justifications in the Align Technology Case
Sep 27, 2024 by
Timothy Hsieh