you're reading...
Economic and Social Policies, Institutional and Legal Affairs, PUBLICATIONS

Criminal sanctions for financial market abuse

6 language versions available in PDF format
Strafrechtliche Sanktionen für Marktmissbrauch in der Finanzbranche
Sanciones penales para el abuso de los mercados financieros
Sanctions pénales contre les abus de marché dans le secteur financier
Sanzioni penali per gli abusi nei mercati finanziari
Sankcje karne za nadużycia na rynku finansowym
Criminal sanctions for financial market abuse

In order to deter insider dealing and market manipulation, and restore confidence in financial markets, the European Commission has proposed a framework that would require all Member States (MS) to impose criminal sanctions for market abuse.

Market abuse

Recent cases of financial market abuse, e.g. the manipulation of the Libor benchmark rate, have damaged investor confidence. Market abuse comprises behaviour such as insider dealing or market manipulation, which undermine the integrity of financial markets. Insider dealing is the trading of a financial instrument on the basis of privileged infor­mation which is not yet available to other market participants and is therefore not reflected in market prices. Market mani­pulation occurs when a market participant spreads misleading information or executes trades in order to influence market prices.

EU framework

The EC therefore proposed in October 2011 a reform consisting of a Regulation on insider dealing and market manipulation (informally the Market Abuse Regulation, MAR) and a Directive on criminal sanctions for insider dea­ling and market manipulation (CSMAD). These are part of a wider package of measures aimed at regulating financial markets and establishing a banking union. The MAR, for which the European Parliament approved in September 2013 a compromise agreed in trilogue, replaces the Market Abuse Directive (2003/6/EC). MAR broadens the scope to other types of financial instruments, introduces clearer definitions, clarifies procedures for handling insider information, reduces administrative burdens on SMEs and strengthens national authorities.

Criminal sanctions

Criminal sanctions for financial market abuse

© Vladislav Gajic / Fotolia

Criminal sanctions for market abuse are the responsibility of Member States. MS currently have diver­gent definitions of the offen­ces and impose different penalties. Most MS have both administrative and crimi­nal sanctions. In some MS, administrative and criminal sanctions can be applied cumulatively. Maxi­mum prison sen­ten­ces – where specified – range from 30 days (Estonia) to 12 years (Italy and Slovakia) for insider dealing, and from 30 days (Estonia) to 15 years (Slovakia) for market manipula­tion. These discrepancies allow offen­ders to carry out market abuse across borders, operating from the most lenient jurisdictions.

The CSMAD would require all MS to make market abuse punishable with “effective, propor­tionate and dissuasive” criminal sanctions. It would be the first use of the criminal law competen­ces of the Lisbon Treaty (Article 83(2) TFEU), harmonising criminal sanctions to ensure effective implementation of EU policy.

European Parliament and Council

The Economic and Monetary Affairs Commit­tee (ECON) adopted a report in October 2012 (rapporteur Arlene McCarthy, S&D, UK), which supported harmonisation of the maximum sanctions and called on MS to provide national authorities with the resources, training and tools needed for investigation and prose­cution.

In December 2012, Council adopted a general approach. Denmark and the UK, where market abuse is already punishable by imprisonment, will not participate in the CSMAD, whereas Ireland decided to opt in.

On 20 December 2013, Parliament and Council reached a trilogue agreement that would impose maximum prison sentences of at least four years for serious cases of insider dealing and market manipulation, and at least two years for improper disclosure of privileged information, as requested by Parliament. In January 2014, the ECON committee voted unanimously in favour of the compromise text.

Discussion

No comments yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

High Level Conferences
EU Legislation in Progress
Topical Digests
EPRS Podcasts

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 2,430 other followers

Disclaimer and Copyright statement

The content of all documents (and articles) contained in this blog is the sole responsibility of the author and any opinions expressed therein do not necessarily represent the official position of the European Parliament. It is addressed to the Members and staff of the EP for their parliamentary work. Reproduction and translation for non-commercial purposes are authorised, provided the source is acknowledged and the European Parliament is given prior notice and sent a copy. Copyright © European Union, 2014. All rights reserved

%d bloggers like this: