|
|
|
楼主 |
发表于 2012-7-6 13:54
|
显示全部楼层
Barclays’ US deal recasts process that sets Libor
Barclays’ US deal recasts process that sets Libor
By Kara Scannell,Brooke Masters in New York, in London
Barclays’ settlement with US regulators over the rigging of Libor is likely to have far-reaching implications for how benchmark interest rates are set.
Under the terms of the pact with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission of the US, Barclays agreed to a six-pronged plan to “encourage” benchmark publishers, such as the British Bankers' Association, to improve the rate-setting process by increasing transparency and creating rigorous methodologies to determine submissions.
The pact is unusual because it requires Barclays not only to beef up its internal compliance systems but to take on a role as an advocate for increased oversight for the industry.
“We’re going to use every tool we can, whether enforcement or rule-writing, to try to benefit the US public and make sure markets are clean of fraud and manipulation,” said Gary Gensler, CFTC chairman.
Martin Wheatley, of the UK’s Financial Services Authority, has been asked by the UK government to lead a review of the legal framework for Libor and other rates. He said the FSA would consider the CFTC’s demands. The BBA is conducting its own review and a person familiar with the process said the settlement demands were “quite sensible” and could provide a template for reform.
The deal is the latest example of the practice of using enforcement pacts as a means to change compliance.
In the 2003 Wall Street research settlement, US authorities imposed analyst independence and disclosure requirements on a dozen investment banks as part of the deal.
Barclays must make changes to compliance, including basing submissions on transactions, creating firewalls to separate rate submitters from traders and annual audits of its rate-setting process by a third party.
While the settlement does not bind the BBA, Libor’s sponsor since the 1980s, it will add pressure to the bank-run association to put teeth into any revisions it makes to address the system uncovered by the investigation.
Currently, banks base submissions on the cost of unsecured borrowing. Barclays admitted to submitting artificially low bids to improve its reputation and altering other submissions to benefit derivatives positions.
Regulators have grown frustrated with the BBA for failing to act quickly once questions about the veracity of the rate-setting process were raised in 2007 news articles. Then, the BBA reviewed its process and issued guidance.
The CFTC settlement papers allege that in 2008 a senior ­Barclays manager told a BBA official that it had not submitted accurately: “We’re clean, but we’re dirty-clean.” The BBA representative allegedly said: “No one’s clean-clean.”
In March the BBA launched a full review of its practices.
Mr Wheatley said he expected to finish his review by autumn, in time for the government to incorporate any recommended changes into the financial ­regulation reform bill moving through parliament. |
|
|
[复制链接]
发表于 2012-7-5 20:50
