Salz Review - Wall Street Journal

2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
53
Salz Review
An Independent Review of Barclays’ Business Practices
Figure 6.1 – Values and Number of FSA Fines Imposed by the FSA, per
annum (2002-March 2013)
Value, £m
Number of fines
400
+1,274%
100
+4%
300
200
100
0
7
11
-28%
25
17
13
5
23
35
89
66
312
102
50
0
9
17
+156%
32
20
27
23
51
42
80
59
53
10
% Difference between two years (in %)
Note: 2013 data is as of 11 March
Source: FSA website: www.fsa.gove.uk
6.4 Between 2009 and 2011, Barclays paid a total of £11.3 million in three fines imposed
by the FSA, not materially different from the amounts paid by other UK banks,
whereas it had not been subject to an FSA fine prior to 2009 (see Figure 6.2). In June
2012, however, it was fined £59.5 million by the FSA for its role in the LIBOR
scandal. The investigation of LIBOR continues, but the FSA has since fined UBS
£160 million in December 2012 and RBS £87.5 million in February 2013.
Figure 6.2 – Barclays’ UK Fines
Date Event Failure Fine amount (£)
19 August 2009
Transaction
reporting
For failing to provide accurate
transaction reports to the FSA and for
serious weaknesses in systems and
controls in transaction reporting
2,450,000
18 January 2011 Aviva Bonds
For failures in relation to the sale of
two funds
7,700,000
26 January 2011
Client Assets
sourcebook (CASS)
For failing to protect and segregate
client money
1,127,559
27 June 2012 LIBOR
For misconduct relating to the LIBOR
and EURIBOR
59,500,000
Total 70,777,559
Source: FSA
6.5 In the US, there are several financial regulators and they tend to impose fines much
more frequently than their UK counterparts – even allowing for the fact that the US
is a larger market. For instance, between 2005 and 2011, the Financial Industry