We use cookies to understand how you use our site and to improve your experience. This includes personalizing content and advertising. To learn more, click here. By continuing to use our site, you accept our use of cookies, revised Privacy Policy and Terms of Service.
You are being directed to ZacksTrade, a division of LBMZ Securities and licensed broker-dealer. ZacksTrade and Zacks.com are separate companies. The web link between the two companies is not a solicitation or offer to invest in a particular security or type of security. ZacksTrade does not endorse or adopt any particular investment strategy, any analyst opinion/rating/report or any approach to evaluating individual securities.
If you wish to go to ZacksTrade, click OK. If you do not, click Cancel.
Banks, Brokerage Firms Sued for Australian Rate Rigging
Read MoreHide Full Article
Rate rigging scandals continue to haunt global financial entities with 16 banks including JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM - Free Report) , Morgan Stanley (MS - Free Report) and Citigroup Inc. (C - Free Report) being sued for manipulating a key Australian interest rate benchmark. Two international brokerage firms – Tullett Prebon and ICAP Plc – have also been sued.
A class action lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, has been brought by Sonterra Capital Master Fund, FrontPoint Asian Event Driven Fund and Florida-based derivatives trader Richard Dennis.
Rate Rigging Led to Undue Profits for Banks
The lawsuit accuses the banks of rigging the Bank Bill Swap (“BBSW”) rate, the Australian equivalent of LIBOR, which is used to price billions of dollars worth of floating-rate bonds and syndicated loans.
Further, it refers to the details from the civil actions launched by the Australian regulator, the Australian Securities & Investments Commission (“ASIC”) against three local banks – Australia & New Zealand Banking Group Ltd. AZNBY, National Australia Bank Ltd. (NABZY - Free Report) and Westpac Banking Corp. . Notably, these banks are also defendants in the case.
Banks are accused of rigging BBSW by "artificially increasing or decreasing the supply of prime bank bills" during the time when it is being set. Also, they allegedly shares information on their BBSW rate exposure and coordinated in "manipulative trades to maximise their impact on BBSW rates".
Further, plaintiffs accused the two brokerage firms of actively being the part of “the conspiracy by facilitating manipulative trading for the bank defendants.”
Other defendants include Deutsche Bank AG (DB - Free Report) , HSBC Holdings plc HSBC, Lloyds Banking Group plc (LYG - Free Report) , The Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc , UBS Group AG (UBS - Free Report) , Credit Suisse Group AG , Royal Bank of Canada (RY - Free Report) , BNP Paribas SA (BNPQY - Free Report) and Macquarie Group Ltd.
Per the complaint filed, “Defendants generated hundreds of millions of dollars in illicit profits by artificially fixing BBSW-based derivatives prices at levels that benefited their trading books.” Further it stated “Defendants’ ultimate goal was to increase the profitability of their BBSW-based derivatives positions.”
The lawsuit seeks a court order to force banks to “disgorge their ill-gotten gains.”
Banks' Response to the Case
While Westpac, ANZ Bank and Lloyds Banking in separate statements said that they would “vigorously” defend themselves against the U.S. complaint, National Australia restated that it did not agree with claims made by the ASIC. Further, spokespersons for several other defendants refused to comment on the issue.
We believe business malpractices by banks will remain a concern in the near term. This is expected to hurt banks’ profitability and also lead to a rise in legal costs.
Want the latest recommendations from Zacks Investment Research? Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report >>
See More Zacks Research for These Tickers
Normally $25 each - click below to receive one report FREE:
Image: Bigstock
Banks, Brokerage Firms Sued for Australian Rate Rigging
Rate rigging scandals continue to haunt global financial entities with 16 banks including JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM - Free Report) , Morgan Stanley (MS - Free Report) and Citigroup Inc. (C - Free Report) being sued for manipulating a key Australian interest rate benchmark. Two international brokerage firms – Tullett Prebon and ICAP Plc – have also been sued.
A class action lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, has been brought by Sonterra Capital Master Fund, FrontPoint Asian Event Driven Fund and Florida-based derivatives trader Richard Dennis.
Rate Rigging Led to Undue Profits for Banks
The lawsuit accuses the banks of rigging the Bank Bill Swap (“BBSW”) rate, the Australian equivalent of LIBOR, which is used to price billions of dollars worth of floating-rate bonds and syndicated loans.
Further, it refers to the details from the civil actions launched by the Australian regulator, the Australian Securities & Investments Commission (“ASIC”) against three local banks – Australia & New Zealand Banking Group Ltd. AZNBY, National Australia Bank Ltd. (NABZY - Free Report) and Westpac Banking Corp. . Notably, these banks are also defendants in the case.
Banks are accused of rigging BBSW by "artificially increasing or decreasing the supply of prime bank bills" during the time when it is being set. Also, they allegedly shares information on their BBSW rate exposure and coordinated in "manipulative trades to maximise their impact on BBSW rates".
Further, plaintiffs accused the two brokerage firms of actively being the part of “the conspiracy by facilitating manipulative trading for the bank defendants.”
Other defendants include Deutsche Bank AG (DB - Free Report) , HSBC Holdings plc HSBC, Lloyds Banking Group plc (LYG - Free Report) , The Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc , UBS Group AG (UBS - Free Report) , Credit Suisse Group AG , Royal Bank of Canada (RY - Free Report) , BNP Paribas SA (BNPQY - Free Report) and Macquarie Group Ltd.
Per the complaint filed, “Defendants generated hundreds of millions of dollars in illicit profits by artificially fixing BBSW-based derivatives prices at levels that benefited their trading books.” Further it stated “Defendants’ ultimate goal was to increase the profitability of their BBSW-based derivatives positions.”
The lawsuit seeks a court order to force banks to “disgorge their ill-gotten gains.”
Banks' Response to the Case
While Westpac, ANZ Bank and Lloyds Banking in separate statements said that they would “vigorously” defend themselves against the U.S. complaint, National Australia restated that it did not agree with claims made by the ASIC. Further, spokespersons for several other defendants refused to comment on the issue.
We believe business malpractices by banks will remain a concern in the near term. This is expected to hurt banks’ profitability and also lead to a rise in legal costs.
Want the latest recommendations from Zacks Investment Research? Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report >>