Who was sanctioned, and for what?

Because revenue had been overstated at the company and its consolidated subsidiary or subsidiaries, the quarterly report for the third quarter of 2023 (filed on 10 November 2023) showed a consolidated loss of 1,382,861 thousand JPY instead of 1,662,516 thousand JPY; the registration statement for a share issue relied on this report, and on 26 February 2024 3,784,200 shares were issued for 3,999,899,400 JPY. After the company admitted the facts and the amount, an administrative monetary penalty (kachōkin) of 91,495,000 JPY was imposed: 1,500,000 JPY for the quarterly report and 89,995,000 JPY for the registration statement.

Authority / court

Financial Services Agency (FSA, 金融庁) auf Empfehlung der Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission (SESC, 証券取引等監視委員会)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Financial Instruments and Exchange Act (FIEA, 金融商品取引法) Art. 172-4 Abs. 2 a. F., Art. 172-2 Abs. 1 Nr. 1, Art. 185-7 Abs. 1 und 14

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Energy and utilities

Mitigating circumstances

Both partial amounts were halved because the company had filed a report for a reduction before the inspection began (Art. 185-7(14) FIEA).

Published

17 Sep 2026

Original amount 91,495,000 JPY, converted at the ECB reference rate of 16 Sep 2026.

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

As a so-called fund hotel, the company had its funds managed by other firms, but examined these delegation agreements only insufficiently, did not take the related decisions properly and did not monitor the funds’ returns in relation to risk closely enough. The Swedish financial supervisory authority Finansinspektionen (FI) issued a remark and imposed 2 million SEK; no damage to investors was established.

Authority / court

Finansinspektionen (FI)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Schwedisches Fondsrecht – Regeln zur Delegation der Fondsverwaltung und deren Überwachung

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Mitigating circumstances

No established damage to investors; remedial measures already taken during the investigation.

Published

16 Sep 2026

Original amount 2,000,000 SEK, converted at the ECB reference rate of 16 Sep 2026.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The BCB (central bank) sanctions committee COPAS imposed a fine of BRL 2,576,000.00 on Lebes Financeira S.A. – Sociedade de Crédito, Financiamento e Investimento because from January 2022 to March 2023 it engaged in prohibited credit transactions with a related company: its banking correspondent retained collected loan instalments, and the arrears reached BRL 147m at the end of November 2022, or 207.66% of adjusted equity against a limit of 10%. In addition there was a BRL 20m loan routed through a third company. The decision is not final.

Authority / court

Banco Central do Brasil (Comitê de Decisão de Processo Administrativo Sancionador – COPAS)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Lei 13.506/2017, Art. 3 II; Lei 4.595/1964, Art. 34 § 3 V d und § 4 I; Resolução CMN 4.693/2018, Arts. 5, 6 und 7 II

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

under appeal

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not set out here.

Original amount 2,576,000 BRL, converted at the ECB reference rate of 12 Aug 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The KNF imposed five fines totalling PLN 47,500,000 on PKO BP in connection with structured deposits: PLN 26m for failing to inform clients of existing conflicts of interest, PLN 8m each for not analysing costs and charges and for an imprecise definition of the risk category and target market, PLN 4m for selling without checking target-market suitability and PLN 1.5m for misleading sales material on two products. The decision is not final.

Authority / court

Komisja Nadzoru Finansowego (KNF)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Art. 88c Abs. 1 und 2, Art. 88m Abs. 5 und 9 Prawo bankowe i. V. m. Verordnung des Finanzministers vom 21.01.2019 über Dienstleistungen der Banken bei strukturierten Einlagen

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Original amount 47,500,000 PLN, converted at the ECB reference rate of 5 Aug 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The CFTC fined the futures commission merchant 8 million USD for failing to supervise diligently the configuration and operation of its anti-money laundering transaction monitoring. From January 2019 to June 2023, thousands of foreign currency wire transfers through retail customers' commodity accounts were insufficiently monitored or not monitored at all: first because of an incomplete manual report which UBS, contrary to commitments made in earlier proceedings in 2018, replaced only more than two years later, and then because of incorrectly fed data in the new automated system. FinCEN, the SEC and FINRA announced their own settlements with UBS Financial Services at the same time. The authority allegedly made the findings set out here; this account is not based on a final judgment.

Authority / court

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

CFTC Regulation 166.3 (17 C.F.R. § 166.3)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Repeat case

yes

Mitigating circumstances

The CFTC recognised the remediation described; according to the order, the core problems of the automated system had been fixed by the fourth quarter of 2022.

Published

3 Aug 2026

Original amount 8,000,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 31 Jul 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The SFC publicly reprimanded China Industrial Securities International Asset Management (CISIAM) and fined it HKD 6.8 million because, between August 2019 and September 2020, the manager of a private fund set up for the insurer Tahoe Life acquired complex structures with notes linked to bonds of a related company at the request of the insurer's chief investment officer, without identifying and properly examining the red flags. CISIAM also failed to observe the fund's investment restrictions and objectives and did not manage its risks effectively. In setting the penalty, the SFC also took into account management fees of around HKD 1.9 million received from the fund.

Authority / court

Securities and Futures Commission (SFC), Hongkong

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Section 194 Securities and Futures Ordinance (Cap. 571); General Principle 2 Code of Conduct; Paragraphen 1.2(d), 3.1 und 3.11.1 Fund Manager Code of Conduct; Abschnitt VIII Management, Supervision and Internal Control Guidelines

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Repeat case

no

Mitigating circumstances

Remedial measures (new policies on risk management and dubious investment arrangements, compliance training), cooperation with the SFC and an otherwise clean disciplinary record.

Published

27 Jul 2026

Original amount 6,800,000 HKD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 27 Jul 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Bright Smart Securities International (H.K.) was publicly reprimanded and fined 2,800,000 HKD because between November 2023 and September 2025 its controls did not prevent 615 clients from executing 1,021 pairs of wash trades (trades without a change in beneficial ownership) in 736 shares and warrants. Monitoring was mostly after the event and manual, and several wash trades by one client on the same day counted as a single occurrence. Similar deficiencies had been identified and raised repeatedly before but were not fully remedied in any instance.

Authority / court

Securities and Futures Commission (SFC)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Market abuse and insider dealing

Legal basis

s. 194 SFO (Cap. 571); Code of Conduct GP 2, para. 4.3

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Mitigating circumstances

Enhanced systems and a commitment to an independent effectiveness review, cooperation.

Published

27 Jul 2026

Original amount 2,800,000 HKD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 27 Jul 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The financial services provider had not made sure that its clients were protected against losses from theft, fraud or other dishonest acts by its employees; one individual's misconduct caused clients substantial losses. The company was directed to introduce, within two months, a policy protecting against such risks. The amount and the facts have not been confirmed against the primary source.

Authority / court

Financial Sector Conduct Authority (FSCA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Sections 2 und 11 General Code of Conduct for Authorised Financial Services Providers and Representatives (2003); Section 13(3)(a) Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act 37 of 2002; Section 42(1) Determination of Fit and Proper Requirements for Financial Services Providers (2017)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Mitigating circumstances

According to the authority's update of 22 July 2026, the company had itself discovered and reported the contraventions, which occurred in 2021.

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not set out here.

Published

17 Jul 2026

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The NYDFS imposed a penalty of USD 50 million on Swedbank AB (publ) and its New York branch. In response to several requests by the regulator under section 37 of the New York Banking Law concerning links between its Baltic subsidiaries and the law firm Mossack Fonseca (Panama Papers) and the status of European investigations, the bank did not provide the requested information, in breach of section 125(3) of the New York Banking Law. The authority allegedly made the findings set out here; this account is not based on a final judgment.

Authority / court

New York State Department of Financial Services (NYDFS)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

New York Banking Law § 125(3) i. V. m. § 37; Sanktion nach Banking Law §§ 39, 44

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Employees

10,000 or more

Liability of senior managers

According to the order, the bank has since, among other things, dismissed its then Chief Compliance Officer and its former CEO and parted ways with numerous other employees; the majority of the board has been replaced.

Published

16 Jul 2026

Original amount 50,000,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 16 Jul 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The PRA fined HDI Global SE, an insurer headquartered in Hanover that operates in the UK through a branch, 4,165,000 GBP. Between August 2021 and August 2024 the firm repeatedly submitted incorrect data on liabilities protected by the FSCS and on the FSCS levy tariff, including in supposedly corrected submissions; it lacked written procedures, clear accountability and internal oversight, and before summer 2023 it did not consult the PRA's rules and guidance.

Authority / court

Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA), Bank of England

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

PRA Fundamental Rules 2 und 6; s. 206 FSMA 2000

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Culpability

negligent

Mitigating circumstances

Detailed account under the Early Account Scheme, settlement with a 30% discount (otherwise 5,950,000 GBP), corrected historical data and additional FSCS levies paid; in the PRA's view the breaches were neither deliberate nor reckless.

Published

20 Jul 2026

Original amount 4,165,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 16 Jul 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Germany's Federal Financial Supervisory Authority (Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht, BaFin) imposed a fine of 240,000 EUR on the software company because it had not disclosed the information about a cyberattack it had suffered as inside information without delay. The fine notice is final.

Authority / court

Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht (BaFin)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Art. 17 Abs. 1 UAbs. 1 MAR (EU) Nr. 596/2014

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Telecoms, IT and software

Published

20 Jul 2026

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The Baltimore-based US asset manager had not submitted voting rights notifications to the issuer and BaFin in time; the deadline is four trading days after reaching a notifiable threshold. BaFin imposed a fine of 187,500 EUR; the notice is final.

Authority / court

Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht (BaFin)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

§ 33 Abs. 1 Satz 1 WpHG

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Published

22 Jul 2026

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The Federal Court of Australia, on application by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC, Australia's corporate, markets and financial services regulator), imposed a penalty of 20.5 million AUD on the exchange operator because a market announcement of 10 February 2022 stated that the project to replace its CHESS clearing and settlement system was progressing well. About six weeks later ASX announced a likely delay and paused the project in November 2022; in June 2026 it admitted contraventions of ss 12DA and 12DB of the ASIC Act.

Authority / court

Federal Court of Australia (auf Antrag der Australian Securities and Investments Commission, ASIC)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001 (Cth) ss 12DA, 12DB(1)(a) und (e)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Published

3 Jul 2026

Original amount 20,500,000 AUD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 3 Jul 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The credit rating agency did not submit up-to-date rating information to the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), did not provide complete historical performance data to the central repository and lacked adequate procedures and internal control mechanisms. ESMA found negligent infringements and imposed fines totalling 2,145,000 EUR.

Authority / court

Europäische Wertpapier- und Marktaufsichtsbehörde (ESMA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1060/2009 (CRA-Verordnung), Art. 24, 36a, Anhang III

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Culpability

negligent

Repeat case

yes

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Because Paysera did not comply with the order to submit its 2024 annual financial statements by 30 September 2025, the Lietuvos bankas (Bank of Lithuania, financial supervisor) first imposed 20,000 EUR in November 2025 and then a daily fine of 1,000 EUR (rising to 2,000 and 3,000 EUR respectively). As the infringement was only remedied after 6 May 2026, the daily fine added up to 362,000 EUR. Source: archived copy of the press release.

Authority / court

Lietuvos bankas (Litauische Zentralbank, Finanzaufsicht)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Aufsichtsrechtliche Anordnung und Berichtspflichten nach litauischem E-Geld-Recht

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Repeat case

yes

Published

30 Jun 2026

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The FCA barred the debt advice firm Curtis Faraday Limited with immediate effect from accepting new customers or referrals for debt, insolvency and IVA-related activities and required it to refer existing customers to other advice providers. Based on file reviews and call recordings, the FCA saw indications that customers' financial information was distorted during the advice process, that the business model, with close links to insolvency service providers, created conflicts of interest and a bias towards commission-generating solutions, that staff circumvented controls and that the firm repeatedly gave the FCA incomplete or inconsistent information.

Authority / court

Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

s. 55L(3)(a) FSMA 2000; Threshold Conditions nach Schedule 6 FSMA (paras. 2C, 2D, 2E und 2F)

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The CFTC fined Netrios LP Ltd., incorporated in Saint Lucia, 1,750,000 USD and Maltese Red Acre Ltd. 750,000 USD, totalling 2,500,000 USD. From 2019 to September 2025, Netrios sold a white-label service (website, trading software, margin accounts, execution, back office) through which offshore platforms offered US retail customers who were not eligible contract participants leveraged forex, precious metals, crypto and equity transactions outside a registered exchange; Red Acre assisted with customer support and marketing. The SEC took parallel action over the same conduct. The authority allegedly made the findings set out here; this account is not based on a final judgment.

Authority / court

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Section 4(a) Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. § 6(a)); Beihilfe nach Section 13(a) (7 U.S.C. § 13c(a))

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Published

29 Jun 2026

Original amount 2,500,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 26 Jun 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

In stock option plans for employees of client companies (2018–2023), the bank did not fully inform the beneficiaries about costs, had initially not recorded the conflicts of interest in this business and assessed clients’ knowledge only with a yes/no question. The Autorité des services et marchés financiers (Belgian Financial Services and Markets Authority, FSMA) accepted a settlement of 1 million EUR with publication by name and commitments on cost information.

Authority / court

Autorité des services et marchés financiers (FSMA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Loi du 2 août 2002; Wohlverhaltensregeln (Loyalität, Kostentransparenz, bestmögliche Ausführung, Interessenkonflikte, Kundenkenntnis)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Repeat case

yes

Mitigating circumstances

Remediation of all deficiencies (appropriateness test, conflicts policy, cost disclosure, waiver of CVA/KVA discounts).

Published

26 Jun 2026

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The Sanctions Committee of the FSMA (Belgian Financial Services and Markets Authority) found that the shipping company Exmar NV, listed on Euronext Brussels, had not disclosed as soon as possible inside information it held on 19 May and 18 June 2020; the information related to a customer's missing payments for the charter of a floating LNG facility. It imposed a fine of 350,000 EUR and ordered publication by name for one year. Exmar has lodged an appeal with the Market Court.

Authority / court

Autoriteit voor Financiële Diensten en Markten / Autorité des services et marchés financiers (FSMA) – Sanctiecommissie

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Art. 17 Verordnung (EU) Nr. 596/2014 (MAR); Art. 36 § 2 und Art. 72 § 3 Gesetz vom 2. August 2002 über die Aufsicht über den Finanzsektor

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

under appeal

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Direct link

According to the AMF (Autorité des marchés financiers, French financial markets authority) Enforcement Committee, the online broker Bourse Direct did not properly submit its transaction reports under Art. 26 MiFIR between January 2021 and November 2023 and did not maintain an adequate system to detect and report suspicious orders and transactions under Art. 16(2) MAR. The company received EUR 800,000. The amount covers only the sanction imposed on the company.

Authority / court

Autorité des marchés financiers (AMF), Commission des sanctions

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Art. 26 Verordnung (EU) Nr. 600/2014 (MiFIR); Art. 15 Delegierte Verordnung (EU) 2017/590; Art. 16 Abs. 2 Verordnung (EU) Nr. 596/2014 (MAR); Art. 2, 3 Delegierte Verordnung (EU) 2016/957

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Employees

50 to 249

Published

25 Jun 2026

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Direct link

BaFin imposed fines on the battery manufacturer because it had not disclosed inside information without delay and had not published the half-yearly financial report for the 2024 financial year.

Authority / court

Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht (BaFin)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Art. 17 Abs. 1 UAbs. 1 MAR; § 115 Abs. 1 Satz 1 WpHG

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Manufacturing and mechanical engineering

Published

1 Jul 2026

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

From 2 October 2023 to 22 October 2024, contrary to a 2023 ECB decision, Banque Internationale à Luxembourg did not apply the newly approved internal models for the expected loss best estimate (ELBE) of defaulted retail and corporate exposures and therefore reported an IRB shortfall to be deducted from Common Equity Tier 1 capital that was too small. The ECB regarded the breach as intentional and severe and imposed 3,255,000 EUR; remedial action was taken into account as mitigating.

Authority / court

Europäische Zentralbank (EZB), Bankenaufsicht

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Art. 18 Abs. 7 VO (EU) Nr. 1024/2013 (Verstoß gegen einen EZB-Beschluss zu internen Modellen)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Culpability

intentional

Mitigating circumstances

Remedial action to alleviate the effects and to prevent future breaches.

Published

29 Jun 2026

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link

From February to May 2025 the online broker wrongly displayed at least 77 US ETFs and ETNs as eligible for NISA (59 clients traded 25 of them in the tax-advantaged account) and repeated this for a further security after discovery, handled affected clients carelessly and unequally, had since 2024 refused all transfers of holdings to other institutions, carried out no suspicious-transaction assessment for at least 1,531 rejected account applicants and managed cyber and system risks inadequately. Soliciting and accepting new accounts was prohibited from 19 June to 18 September 2026, together with a business improvement order.

Authority / court

Kanto Local Finance Bureau (関東財務局) auf Empfehlung der Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission (SESC, 証券取引等監視委員会)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Financial Instruments and Exchange Act (FIEA, 金融商品取引法) Art. 52 Abs. 1, Art. 51; Art. 38 Nr. 1, Art. 43, Art. 40 Nr. 2 FIEA i. V. m. Art. 123 Abs. 1 Nr. 14 Cabinet Office Order on Financial Instruments Business; Act on Prevention of Transfer of Criminal Proceeds (犯罪収益移転防止法)

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Published

19 Jun 2026

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

HSBC admitted that from May 2023 to May 2024 it lacked adequate controls against unauthorised payments via its internal transfer channel, that from January 2020 it handled scam reports under the ePayments Code too slowly (144 days on average) and without applying the liability rules, and that until April 2024 it gave affected customers no orderly way back into their accounts. The Court imposed AUD 35 million (AUD 10 million for the fraud controls, AUD 22.5 million for the contraventions relating to the ePayments Code, AUD 2.5 million for restoring account access) and ordered notices on the website, in the app and in letters to customers.

Authority / court

Federal Court of Australia (auf Antrag der Australian Securities and Investments Commission, ASIC)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

s 912A(1)(a), (5A) Corporations Act 2001 (Cth); s 47(1)(a), (4) National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009 (Cth)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Repeat case

no

Mitigating circumstances

Admissions and jointly proposed penalty; remediation programme with payments of AUD 27,915,700.56 by 21 May 2026; no previous contraventions of a similar nature.

Liability of senior managers

According to the agreed facts, senior management was also aware before May 2023 of heightened fraud risks and gaps in the controls.

Published

18 Jun 2026

Original amount 35,000,000 AUD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 18 Jun 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Following VARA investigations, Peken Global Limited, trading as KuCoin, provided virtual asset broker-dealer and/or exchange services to customers in Dubai without a licence. VARA imposed fines of an undisclosed amount and ordered the immediate cessation of all unlicensed activities; other group entities were expressly not affected.

Authority / court

Virtual Assets Regulatory Authority (VARA), Dubai

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision

Legal basis

Federal Decree Law No. (10) of 2025 (AML/CFT/PF); Dubai Law No. (4) of 2022 Regulating Virtual Assets; Cabinet Resolution No. 111/2022; VARA Regulations und Rulebooks

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Mitigating circumstances

Full cooperation and full compliance with the measures; intention to go through the licensing process.

Published

24 Jun 2026

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The CONSOB (Italian securities regulator) fined Banco BPM S.p.A. 370,000 EUR, of which 170,000 EUR for late disclosure of inside information under Art. 17(1) MAR and 200,000 EUR for obstructing supervision under Art. 187-quinquiesdecies of the Consolidated Law on Finance (TUF), and fined its subsidiary Banco BPM Vita S.p.A. 200,000 EUR, 570,000 EUR in total. In connection with BPM Vita's tender offer for Anima Holding S.p.A., the bank disclosed an ECB letter of 21 March 2025 rejecting the application of the so-called Danish Compromise to CONSOB and the market only four days later, after two trading days of the acceptance period. Both companies had previously informed CONSOB only incompletely about their discussions with the ECB.

Authority / court

CONSOB (Commissione Nazionale per le Società e la Borsa)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Art. 17 Abs. 1 Verordnung (EU) 596/2014 (MAR); Art. 187-ter.1 und Art. 187-quinquiesdecies Abs. 1 und 1-ter D.Lgs. 58/1998 (TUF)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Culpability

negligent

Repeat case

yes

Published

23 Jun 2026

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link

ASIC issued an infringement notice because on 208 business days between October 2024 and August 2025 Deutsche Bank had not accurately reported the “direction” fields for 20,483 outstanding and 244,091 terminated or matured OTC derivative transactions, mostly foreign exchange trades, to trade repositories. The bank allegedly paid AUD 2 million under the infringement notice; payment is not an admission of guilt.

Authority / court

Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Rule 2.2.6 ASIC Derivative Transaction Rules (Reporting) 2024; reg 7.5A.104 Corporations Regulations 2001

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Employees

10,000 or more

Mitigating circumstances

Cooperation with ASIC and measures to prevent further reporting errors.

Published

13 Jul 2026

Original amount 2,000,000 AUD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 11 Jun 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The listed hotel group did not publish its 2024 annual financial report on time; the Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission (CySEC) imposed a total of 16,500 EUR. At the same meeting, eleven other issuers were fined between 1,500 and 17,000 EUR for the same reason; a fine of 13,500 EUR had already been imposed on the company under the same law in 2025.

Authority / court

Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission (CySEC)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Sec. 9(1), 37(2)(a) Transparency Requirements (Securities Admitted to Trading on a Regulated Market) Law 2007

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Other

Repeat case

yes

Published

7 Aug 2026

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Wendelspiess Partners AG invested almost all the money of its more than 400 clients in a barely diversified foreign fund it had set up and managed itself, which invested mainly in a Zug-based investment company and companies linked to it; it gave insufficient information about conflicts of interest and risks, carried out no suitability check and withheld relevant information from the Eidgenössische Finanzmarktaufsicht (FINMA, Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority). FINMA revoked the licence as an asset manager of the company, which is now bankrupt. Measures against individuals are not set out here. The decision is not final.

Authority / court

Eidgenössische Finanzmarktaufsicht (FINMA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Verhaltenspflichten nach dem Finanzdienstleistungsgesetz (FIDLEG): Interessenkonflikte, Information, Eignungsprüfung; Auskunftspflicht gegenüber der FINMA

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not set out here.

Published

3 Jun 2026

Checked against the official source on 5 Oct 2026 · Version 3 · Direct link

On 2 June 2026 the Autoriteit Financiële Markten (AFM, Dutch Authority for the Financial Markets) fined bunq B.V. 170,000 EUR because in seven cases the bank did not give a substantive reply within the statutory 15 working days to complaints from customers who had fallen victim to online fraud (November to December 2023 and April to at least August 2024). Because bunq fully or largely compensated those affected without being legally obliged to, the AFM lowered the base amount from 500,000 to 200,000 EUR; the simplified settlement brought a further 15% reduction.

Authority / court

Autoriteit Financiële Markten (AFM)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Art. 43a Abs. 1 i. V. m. Abs. 2 Besluit Gedragstoezicht financiële ondernemingen Wft (BGfo), Umsetzung von Art. 101 PSD2

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Mitigating circumstances

Voluntary full or largely full compensation of the customers concerned; simplified settlement (−15%).

Published

8 Jun 2026

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The KNF imposed four fines totalling PLN 14,900,000 on mBank: PLN 0.4m and 6m because staff negotiated client transactions with unauthorised third parties and passed client information to them, PLN 5m for not treating currency hedging transactions as financial instruments and PLN 3.5m for ineffective internal control and compliance functions. Following a request for reconsideration, the KNF upheld the decision on 28 August 2026; it is not final.

Authority / court

Komisja Nadzoru Finansowego (KNF)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

§ 8 Abs. 1 i. V. m. § 26 Nr. 1 Verordnung des Finanzministers vom 24.09.2012; Art. 83b Abs. 3 und 6, Art. 83c Abs. 1 ustawa o obrocie instrumentami finansowymi; Art. 9c Abs. 1 Nr. 4 Prawo bankowe; Art. 21 und 22 Delegierte Verordnung (EU) 2017/565

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Original amount 14,900,000 PLN, converted at the ECB reference rate of 29 May 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The manufacturer of solar tracking systems disseminated its results for 2023 by way of an "Otra Información Relevante" announcement containing inaccurate information. Spain's National Securities Market Commission (CNMV) imposed a fine of 190,000 EUR for a serious infringement; the company waived administrative appeals.

Authority / court

Comisión Nacional del Mercado de Valores (CNMV)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Art. 297.1.e i. V. m. 297.2.d Ley 6/2023; Art. 17 i. V. m. Art. 7 MAR

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Energy and utilities

Published

3 Aug 2026

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The Finanzmarktaufsicht Liechtenstein (FMA, Financial Market Authority) ordered by decree of 26 May 2026 that TGI AG in Vaduz immediately stop distributing and publicly offering its products “Customer Basic 2 %”, “Sales Premium” and “Sofortrabatt”, because it was thereby conducting deposit-taking business without a licence, and that it no longer hold the customer funds received in this way within four months. In a partial decision of 12 August 2026 the FMA's appeals commission granted suspensive effect only for the order concerning the holding of the funds; the other measures remain in force and the proceedings are not final.

Authority / court

Finanzmarktaufsicht Liechtenstein (FMA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

under appeal

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Published

28 May 2026

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link

For the period June 2023 to June 2024, the Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission (CySEC) examined the investment firm’s organisational requirements, client information, appropriateness assessment and compliance with the restrictions on marketing CFDs to retail investors. The proceedings were concluded with a settlement of 100,000 EUR, which the company has already paid.

Authority / court

Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission (CySEC)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Art. 22(1), 25(1), 26(3) Gesetz über Wertpapierdienstleistungen 2017; Art. 42 VO (EU) 600/2014; CySEC-Richtlinie DI87-09; Art. 37(4) CySEC-Gesetz

Action

Other

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Published

24 Aug 2026

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The fund manager Havenport Investments Pte Ltd lacked an adequate framework for managing the risks of the assets under its management, breached its base capital requirement without reporting this to the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS, Singapore's central bank and financial regulator), and violated conditions of its Capital Markets Services Licence requiring prior approval for a new product and personalised advice from independent financial advisers for retail investors before onboarding. MAS allegedly imposed a composition fine of SGD 40,000; the company has ceased its retail fund management business and has not been allowed to manage retail investors' money since 18 July 2024. The amount and the facts have not been confirmed against the primary source.

Authority / court

Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Securities and Futures Act (SFA) und zugehörige Regulations; Auflagen der Capital Markets Services Licence

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not set out here.

Published

18 May 2026

Original amount 40,000 SGD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 18 May 2026.

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The bank failed to draw up insider lists in good time for two pieces of inside information (termination of the core banking project with Cognizant in 2021, merger talks with Liedon Säästöpankki in 2022), did not update them and omitted mandatory information. The Finanssivalvonta (Finnish Financial Supervisory Authority, FIN-FSA) imposed a total fine of 400,000 EUR; the decision was not appealed and is final.

Authority / court

Finanssivalvonta (FIN-FSA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Market abuse and insider dealing

Legal basis

Verordnung (EU) Nr. 596/2014 (MAR) Art. 18 Abs. 1, 3 und 4; Durchführungsverordnung (EU) 2016/347

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Mitigating circumstances

Measures to prevent recurrence and partial admission/cooperation had a mitigating effect.

Published

15 May 2026

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The Finanssivalvonta (FIN-FSA, Finnish Financial Supervisory Authority) imposed a penalty payment of 115,000 EUR on Pareto Securities Ab. The firm had submitted no transaction reports at all on 71 days in 2024 and 20 days in 2025, and between June 2023 and May 2025 it reported 13 transactions an unusually high number of times, most of them more than 300 times. The admission of the failings reduced the amount.

Authority / court

Finanssivalvonta (FIN-FSA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Art. 26 Abs. 1 UAbs. 1 MiFIR (VO (EU) Nr. 600/2014); Sijoituspalvelulaki 15 luku 2 § 7 mom. 5 kohta; FivaL 40 §, 41 §

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Mitigating circumstances

Admission of the failings and cooperation with the supervisor.

Published

13 May 2026

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link

One of the insurer’s intermediaries was removed from the FSMA register in December 2023; owing to a human data entry error in the monitoring tool, P&V only noticed this after more than a month and concluded 34 contracts through him during that time. The Autorité des services et marchés financiers (Belgian Financial Services and Markets Authority, FSMA) accepted a settlement of 150,000 EUR; there had already been a settlement for the same amount in 2020.

Authority / court

Autorité des services et marchés financiers (FSMA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Loi du 4 avril 2014 relative aux assurances, Art. 259

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Repeat case

yes

Mitigating circumstances

IT adjustments to prevent recurrence.

Published

5 May 2026

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Swiss Fund Management AG in liquidation and BZ Berater Zentrum AG, which held around 2,000 asset management mandates, channelled investor money of around CHF 200 million, directly or via funds, into illiquid bonds of interlinked issuers that financed real estate projects of related companies, without adequately informing investors about the conflicts of interest and without adequate suitability and appropriateness checks under FIDLEG (Swiss Financial Services Act). By ruling of 1 May 2026 the Eidgenössische Finanzmarktaufsicht (FINMA, Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority) revoked SFM's licence as a manager of collective assets, rejected BZ's application for a licence as an asset manager and confiscated placement commissions of more than CHF 3 million from BZ. The ruling is final.

Authority / court

Eidgenössische Finanzmarktaufsicht (FINMA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Verhaltensregeln nach dem Finanzdienstleistungsgesetz (FIDLEG): Interessenkonflikte, Eignungs- und Angemessenheitsprüfung

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Published

29 Jun 2026

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Four Australian companies of the Canva group did not lodge their financial reports for the 2024 financial year with ASIC by the due date of 30 April 2025; the consolidated report followed only on 27 March 2026. ASIC issued an infringement notice of allegedly AUD 198,000 to each company (AUD 792,000 in total); the notices were paid, which is not an admission of guilt.

Authority / court

Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

s 319(1) Corporations Act 2001 (Cth); Bußgeldbescheide nach s 1317DAM

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Telecoms, IT and software

Published

6 May 2026

Original amount 792,000 AUD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 28 Apr 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The KNF fined the insurer Compensa PLN 8,500,000 because, in motor third-party liability insurance (class 10) in 2022 to 2024, it set premiums that were insufficient to cover all obligations under the contracts and the costs of its insurance business. The decision is not final.

Authority / court

Komisja Nadzoru Finansowego (KNF)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Art. 33 Abs. 2 ustawa z dnia 11 września 2015 r. o działalności ubezpieczeniowej i reasekuracyjnej

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Original amount 8,500,000 PLN, converted at the ECB reference rate of 27 Apr 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Under an agreement with the Securities and Futures Commission (SFC, Hong Kong's securities regulator), PricewaterhouseCoopers Hong Kong has undertaken to set aside 1,000,000,000 HKD to compensate independent minority shareholders of China Evergrande Group; in return the regulator will take no further action, without any admission of liability. China Evergrande's audited revenue was allegedly overstated by 44.79% for 2019 and 69.03% for 2020, and PwC Hong Kong, as auditor, was allegedly concerned in the dissemination of false information, allegedly did not maintain its independence and allegedly acquiesced in management's manipulation of audit samples and site inspections.

Authority / court

Securities and Futures Commission (SFC)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Market abuse and insider dealing

Legal basis

s. 277 SFO (Cap. 571) (Auffassung der SFC, von PwC HK nicht anerkannt)

Action

Other

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Other

Published

23 Apr 2026

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Because of an IT problem, Keytrade Bank displayed the same warning for every order from 27 December 2023 to 13 March 2024, regardless of the complexity of the instrument and the client's known level of knowledge. In the view of the FSMA (Belgian Financial Services and Markets Authority), the bank thereby breached the rules on clear client information and on the appropriateness assessment, including for 81,416 transactions in non-complex instruments, 1,081 transactions in complex instruments without asking for knowledge and experience and 4,542 transactions where the required warning of inappropriateness was missing. The bank refunded losses of affected clients and pays 250,000 EUR under the settlement.

Authority / court

Autorité des services et marchés financiers / Autoriteit voor Financiële Diensten en Markten (FSMA) – Comité de direction (règlement transactionnel)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Art. 27bis § 1 und Art. 27ter §§ 3 und 5 Gesetz vom 2. August 2002; Art. 71 § 3 Gesetz vom 2. August 2002

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Mitigating circumstances

The bank sold affected complex positions, refunded losses and informed the clients.

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Direct link

On 20 April 2026 BaFin (German Federal Financial Supervisory Authority) imposed a fine of 1,000,000 EUR on flatexDEGIRO SE. At the end of 2022, the company had not published the results of a special audit under § 44 KWG (German Banking Act) at flatexDEGIRO Bank AG, in which BaFin had identified deficiencies in business organisation, without delay as an ad hoc announcement, but only later as a press release. The fine is final.

Authority / court

Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht (BaFin)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Art. 17 Abs. 1 UAbs. 1 MAR (Verordnung (EU) Nr. 596/2014)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Published

30 Apr 2026

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Direct link

On 20 April 2026 the Autoriteit Financiële Markten (AFM, Dutch Authority for the Financial Markets) fined the US asset manager Arrowstreet Capital, Limited Partnership 297,000 EUR because, between July 2020 and November 2024, an error in its calculation method led it to report its net short positions in Just Eat Takeaway.com and Galapagos to the AFM too low on 101 occasions, 85 of which also breached the public disclosure obligation. Because the firm reported the error itself, corrected it quickly, cooperated fully and took measures against recurrence, the AFM reduced the base amount by 30%; the simplified settlement brought a further 15% reduction, and the matter is closed.

Authority / court

Autoriteit Financiële Markten (AFM)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Art. 5 Abs. 1 und Art. 6 Abs. 1 Verordnung (EU) Nr. 236/2012 (Leerverkaufsverordnung, SSR)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Mitigating circumstances

Self-reporting, prompt correction, full cooperation and measures against recurrence (−30% on the base amount); simplified settlement (−15%).

Published

22 Apr 2026

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The FCA publicly censured Sapia Partners LLP. Sapia was responsible for client money accounts operated in connection with its appointed representative, a wealth manager, but the FCA found that from 2014 to 2020 it did not ensure effective segregation between those making payments and those reconciling the accounts. About £150 million was deposited into the accounts in that period, exposing clients to a risk of loss. Sapia agreed to a voluntary payment of £19,637,950 to that representative's clients; for this reason the FCA did not impose a fine, which it said would otherwise have been £7,412,000 (after discount).

Authority / court

Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

FCA Principle 10; CASS 7.12.2R bzw. CASS 7.3.2R; section 205 FSMA 2000

Action

Reprimand or warning

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link

The operator of alternative trading systems passed on confidential order and trading information from its fixed income and equity platforms to unauthorised employees, lacked adequate safeguards and was initially not forthcoming with the regulator. Sanctions: administrative penalty of 600,000 CAD, 75,000 CAD in costs, a reprimand and an external review.

Authority / court

Capital Markets Tribunal (Ontario) auf Antrag der Ontario Securities Commission

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

National Instrument 21-101, s. 5.10(1)-(3); Securities Act (Ontario) ss. 127(1), 127.1

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Mitigating circumstances

Cooperation, self-report, no prior record

Original amount 600,000 CAD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 15 Apr 2026.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The Federal Court of Australia, on application by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC, Australia's corporate, markets and financial services regulator), imposed an allegedly agreed penalty of 4 million AUD on the listed manufacturer of defence, space and communications technology. By 25 July 2022 the company knew that its 2022 revenue was likely to fall materially short of its published guidance of at least 212.3 million AUD, but did not correct the guidance until 31 October 2022; the court found a continuing breach of the continuous disclosure obligation.

Authority / court

Federal Court of Australia (auf Antrag der Australian Securities and Investments Commission, ASIC)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 674A(2) i. V. m. s 1317QA

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Defence and security

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not set out here.

Published

9 Apr 2026

Original amount 4,000,000 AUD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 9 Apr 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

IVASS (Italian insurance supervisor) imposed a fine of 900,000 EUR on Ara 1857 S.p.A. under Art. 310(1) of the Private Insurance Code (CAP). The company had not adequately implemented the preventive and corrective measures required by the supervisor, so serious shortcomings persisted in corporate governance, remuneration systems, risk management and control, and in the current and forward-looking solvency assessment. According to IVASS sanctions statistics, the company had already received a fine of 380,000 EUR in 2023.

Authority / court

IVASS (Istituto per la Vigilanza sulle Assicurazioni)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Art. 188 Abs. 3-bis lit. d, Art. 30, 30-bis, 30-ter, 30-quater, 30-septies und 310 Abs. 1 D.Lgs. 209/2005 (CAP); IVASS-Verordnung 38/2018

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Repeat case

yes

Published

29 May 2026

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Finansinspektionen (FI, Swedish Financial Supervisory Authority) imposed an administrative fine of 1,500,000 SEK on The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. because six crossings of the 5% threshold for shares and voting rights in Lundin Mining Corporation, Samhällsbyggnadsbolaget i Norden AB and Scandic Hotels Group AB were notified between 1 and 104 trading days late; a further transaction (Lundin Mining, 27 March 2025) was closed without sanction. FI took into account that a professional market participant had committed breaches in several issuers and saw no grounds for waiving the fine.

Authority / court

Finansinspektionen (FI)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

6 kap. 3 a § första stycket 4 lagen (1991:980) om handel med finansiella instrument (Flaggningspflicht)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Employees

10,000 or more

Published

10 Apr 2026

Original amount 1,500,000 SEK, converted at the ECB reference rate of 8 Apr 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The KNF imposed a fine of PLN 15,000,000 on the listed issuer LPP for breaches of disclosure obligations in its consolidated financial statements for 2021/2022 and 2022/2023. LPP had wrongly recognised impairments of PLN 608m on fixed assets and inventories resulting from the Russian attack on Ukraine of 24 February 2022 as an adjusting event in the 2021/2022 statements and did not correct the comparative figures in the following year, although the authority had repeatedly recommended this and the auditor had issued qualifications. The decision is not final.

Authority / court

Komisja Nadzoru Finansowego (KNF)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Art. 56 Abs. 1 Nr. 2 lit. a ustawa o ofercie publicznej i. V. m. § 3 Abs. 1 und 3 sowie § 71 Abs. 1 Nr. 3 lit. b Verordnung des Finanzministers über laufende und periodische Informationen; IAS 2, 8, 10 und 36

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Original amount 15,000,000 PLN, converted at the ECB reference rate of 2 Apr 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The KNF fined the brokerage XTB PLN 20,000,000 because, between January 2022 and September 2023, it did not properly assess clients' knowledge and experience, did not adequately define the target market for complex instruments such as CFDs, failed to identify possible conflicts of interest arising from the „lista HOT“ distributed to clients and gave clients unreliable information on CFD risks. At XTB's request the KNF reconsidered the case and upheld the decision on 28 August 2026.

Authority / court

Komisja Nadzoru Finansowego (KNF)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Art. 34 Abs. 2 lit. a, Art. 48 und Art. 56 Abs. 1 Delegierte Verordnung (EU) 2017/565; § 37 Abs. 5 Nr. 6 i. V. m. § 31 Abs. 7 Verordnung des Finanzministers vom 30.05.2018; Art. 83c Abs. 2 und Abs. 4 Nr. 2 ustawa o obrocie instrumentami finansowymi

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Original amount 20,000,000 PLN, converted at the ECB reference rate of 30 Mar 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link

On a complaint by the CFTC, the federal court in New York entered a consent order against the operator of the KuCoin crypto exchange, which is registered in the Turks and Caicos Islands. Peken Global had given US participants direct access to its trading system without being registered with the CFTC as a foreign board of trade; the court permanently prohibited this and imposed a fine of 500,000 USD. Disgorgement was waived because of the cooperation and the forfeiture in the parallel criminal case, in which Peken Global had pleaded guilty to operating an unlicensed money transmitting business. The authority allegedly made the findings set out here; this account is not based on a final judgment.

Authority / court

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (auf Klage der CFTC)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

CFTC Regulation 48.3 (17 C.F.R. § 48.3); Section 6c Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. § 13a-1)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Mitigating circumstances

Cooperation with the CFTC and in the criminal proceedings; because of the forfeiture ordered there, the CFTC did not seek disgorgement.

Published

30 Mar 2026

Original amount 500,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 30 Mar 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The Federal Court of Australia, on application by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC, Australia's corporate, markets and financial services regulator), imposed a penalty of 10 million AUD because, between July 2022 and April 2023, the provider of crypto derivatives wrongly classified 524 retail clients – more than 85% of its Australian client base – as wholesale clients, depriving them of, among other things, a Product Disclosure Statement, a target market determination and a compliant internal dispute resolution system. The causes were deficient onboarding processes – such as a multiple-choice test that could be retaken without limit – and inadequate training and review; the affected clients suffered 8.66 million AUD in trading losses and paid 3.89 million AUD in fees.

Authority / court

Federal Court of Australia (auf Antrag der Australian Securities and Investments Commission, ASIC)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) ss 1012B(3)(a)(i) und (iii), 994B(1) und (2)(a), 912A(1)(a), (b), (f) und (g); Geldbuße nach s 1317G

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Repeat case

no

Mitigating circumstances

Full compensation of affected clients (around 13.1 million AUD) overseen by ASIC, cooperation in the investigation and the proceedings, admission of all contraventions; no previous court findings.

Published

27 Mar 2026

Original amount 10,000,000 AUD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 27 Mar 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

After a new order management system was introduced in June 2024, CFD transactions with an underlying value of around 3.05 billion USD were not captured by automated trade surveillance. The bank identified the error in October 2024 but only remedied it in May 2025; the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) imposed 338,000 GBP after a 30% cooperation discount.

Authority / court

Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Art. 16 Abs. 2 UK MAR; SYSC 6.1.1R; FCA Principle 3

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Mitigating circumstances

Full cooperation (30% discount); CFD business discontinued in May 2025.

Original amount 338,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 27 Mar 2026.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The ČNB (Czech National Bank) fined NN Penzijní společnost 10,000,000 CZK under the supplementary pension savings act. In 2023 the pension company booked interest income totalling 8,060,467.26 CZK earned on savers' money held in collection and payout accounts as its own income instead of allocating it to the participants. In addition, until at least February 2024 it lacked independent ongoing monitoring of investment limits, effective oversight of outsourced activities and adequate procedures for conflicts of interest within the corporate group.

Authority / court

Česká národní banka (ČNB)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

§ 49 lit. a und b, § 50, § 51, § 54 Abs. 1, § 160 Abs. 1 lit. q und u, § 160 Abs. 10 Zákon č. 427/2011 Sb. (ZDPS, Fassung bis 31. 12. 2024)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Original amount 10,000,000 CZK, converted at the ECB reference rate of 26 Mar 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Between September 2021 and August 2023, the asset manager failed to report a total of 2,867 transactions to the supervisory authority on time and in 2024 also submitted quarterly reports (FINREP) late. The Finanssivalvonta (Finnish Financial Supervisory Authority, FIN-FSA) imposed a total fine of 70,000 EUR; the admission had a mitigating effect.

Authority / court

Finanssivalvonta (FIN-FSA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

MiFIR (VO (EU) 600/2014) Art. 26 Abs. 1; IFR (VO (EU) 2019/2033) Art. 54 Abs. 1; FIN-FSA-Vorschriften 20/2013 (FINREP)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Mitigating circumstances

Admission of the failures / cooperation.

Published

25 Mar 2026

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The PRA fined The Bank of London Group Limited and its financial holding company Oplyse Holdings Limited 2,000,000 GBP. Between October 2021 and May 2024 they failed to meet their capital requirements for an extended period, repeatedly misled the PRA about their actual capital position – including with fabricated documents – and did not properly manage or report a large exposure arising from a loan by the bank to its parent. It was the PRA's first fine for a lack of integrity and its first action against a financial holding company; a penalty of 12 million GBP would have been appropriate.

Authority / court

Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA), Bank of England

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

PRA Fundamental Rules 1, 3, 4 und 7; PRA Rulebook: Reporting (CRR) Part Kap. 3 Art. 5 und Art. 7, Large Exposures (CRR) Part Art. 393–395, Notifications 2.3, Related Party Transaction Risk 2.1 und 2.3, Definition of Capital 7A; ss. 206 und 192Y FSMA 2000

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Culpability

intentional

Mitigating circumstances

Because serious financial hardship was demonstrated, the PRA reduced the penalty from 12 million GBP to 2 million GBP; the firms settled with the PRA.

Published

24 Mar 2026

Original amount 2,000,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 23 Mar 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Finansinspektionen (FI, Swedish Financial Supervisory Authority) issued the occupational pension provider Alecta a warning and the statutory maximum administrative fine of 50,000,000 SEK. For investments of around 26.5 billion SEK in Heimstaden Bostad AB between October 2019 and August 2023, Alecta had – with the exception of one investment occasion – not sufficiently identified the risk of loss arising from the articles of association and shareholder agreements, nor ensured that it could manage that risk; the assets were therefore not invested in the way that best served the beneficiaries' interests. FI classified the breaches as serious but refrained from revoking the licence in view of the measures taken.

Authority / court

Finansinspektionen (FI)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

6 kap. 20 § försäkringsrörelselagen (2010:2043) in der Fassung vor dem 1.1.2016; 6 kap. 1–3 §§ lagen (2019:742) om tjänstepensionsföretag; 15 kap. 1, 2 och 16 §§ LTF

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Repeat case

no

Mitigating circumstances

Alecta replaced several senior executives, made staffing changes in asset management and strengthened its board; FI therefore considered a warning rather than licence revocation sufficient.

Published

18 Mar 2026

Original amount 50,000,000 SEK, converted at the ECB reference rate of 17 Mar 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The Supreme Court of New South Wales, on application by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC, Australia's corporate, markets and financial services regulator), imposed a penalty of 35 million AUD on the securities dealer because, between December 2009 and February 2024, inadequate systems, processes and controls led it to misreport at least 73 million short sales to the market operator and to omit required regulatory data from orders. The court also found inadequate risk management and misleading conduct, and ordered a compliance programme involving an independent expert.

Authority / court

Supreme Court of New South Wales (auf Antrag der Australian Securities and Investments Commission, ASIC)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) ss 798H(1)(b), 912A(1)(h), 1041H(1); ASIC Market Integrity Rules (Securities Markets) 2017; Geldbuße nach s 1317G(1)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Employees

50 to 249

Mitigating circumstances

Early acceptance of the contraventions, sustained cooperation with ASIC and contrition; the errors were reported to ASIC once identified and promptly remediated; no previous court findings of similar conduct.

Liability of senior managers

According to the decision, the errors arose at an operational level; ASIC did not allege any involvement of senior management.

Published

16 Mar 2026

Original amount 35,000,000 AUD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 13 Mar 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The PRA fined U K Insurance Limited, the principal insurance company of the Direct Line Group (part of Aviva since July 2025), 10,625,000 GBP. Because of ineffective controls and staffing and capability issues in its finance and actuarial functions, its Solvency II balance sheet was miscalculated in 2023 and 2024, so that the firm overstated its solvency to the PRA and the market; the error went undetected for a considerable time. It was the first case under the PRA's Early Account Scheme.

Authority / court

Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA), Bank of England

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

PRA Fundamental Rule 6; Notifications 6.1; Reporting 2.4 und 3.2 (PRA Rulebook); s. 206 FSMA 2000

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Culpability

negligent

Mitigating circumstances

Participation in the Early Account Scheme with early admissions: 50% discount (otherwise 21.25 million GBP); after discovery management notified the PRA without delay, corrected the published figures and remedied the causes; in the PRA's view the breaches were neither deliberate nor reckless.

Published

11 Mar 2026

Original amount 10,625,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 10 Mar 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

On 10 March 2026 BaFin (German Federal Financial Supervisory Authority) imposed a fine of 1,650,000 EUR on Barclays PLC. Between June 2022 and March 2023 the company had failed in 26 cases to submit voting rights notifications concerning the same issuer on time; the fine punished a breach of the duty of supervision because adequate organisational measures were lacking. The fine is final.

Authority / court

Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht (BaFin)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

§ 130 Abs. 1 OWiG i. V. m. § 33 Abs. 1 S. 1, § 34 Abs. 1 S. 1, § 38 Abs. 1 S. 1 und § 39 Abs. 1 WpHG

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Employees

10,000 or more

Liability of senior managers

The fine punished a breach of the duty of supervision under § 130 OWiG (German Administrative Offences Act): the company had not taken adequate organisational measures to prevent the breaches or make them significantly more difficult.

Published

27 Mar 2026

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The KNF imposed eight fines totalling PLN 21,100,000, among other things for cooperating with unauthorised third parties in client transactions (PLN 2m and 4m), transactions with clients outside the target market (PLN 2.5m), missing cost information on currency hedging transactions (PLN 1m), a non-compliant remuneration system (PLN 0.5m), the execution of orders relating to „Oprocentowanie Nie Wyższe Niż“ (PLN 7m), ineffective internal control and compliance functions (PLN 4m) and failure to archive client correspondence (PLN 0.1m). Following a request for reconsideration, the KNF upheld the fines on 28 August 2026; an action before the administrative court is possible.

Authority / court

Komisja Nadzoru Finansowego (KNF)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Art. 83b Abs. 3, Art. 83c Abs. 1 und 4, Art. 83e Abs. 1 ustawa o obrocie instrumentami finansowymi; § 8 Abs. 1 i. V. m. § 26 Nr. 1 Verordnung des Finanzministers vom 24.09.2012; Art. 9c Abs. 1 Nr. 4 und Art. 88k Abs. 6a Prawo bankowe

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Original amount 21,100,000 PLN, converted at the ECB reference rate of 4 Mar 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The automotive supplier's business figures for the first quarter of 2024 deviated significantly from market expectations; this inside information was not disclosed without delay by means of an ad hoc announcement. BaFin imposed a fine.

Authority / court

Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht (BaFin)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Art. 17 Abs. 1 UAbs. 1 MAR

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Automotive

Published

26 Mar 2026

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The energy services company published incorrect results for the 2022 and 2023 financial years and for the first half of 2024; accounting judgements were influenced by the desire to maintain previously reported figures, and systems and controls were inadequate. The UK Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) imposed a fine of 12,993,700 GBP (18,562,500 GBP without the 30 % discount).

Authority / court

Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Listing Rule 1.3.3R; Listing Principle 1

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Energy and utilities

Employees

10,000 or more

Mitigating circumstances

30 % discount for early settlement and acceptance of the findings

Published

4 Mar 2026

Original amount 12,993,700 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 3 Mar 2026.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

According to the ECB decision, BofA Securities Europe SA reported risk-weighted assets for market risk that were too low, and hence incorrect capital ratios, for six quarters (31 December 2022 to 31 March 2024), because it used its internal model for sovereign bond options although its permission did not cover them. The ECB classified the breach as intentional and severe and took remedial action into account as mitigating.

Authority / court

Europäische Zentralbank (EZB), Bankenaufsicht

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Art. 430 Abs. 1 Buchst. a VO (EU) Nr. 575/2013 (CRR); Art. 18 Abs. 1 VO (EU) Nr. 1024/2013

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Culpability

intentional

Mitigating circumstances

Remedial action to prevent future breaches.

Published

27 Mar 2026

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The Luxembourg trade repository lacked adequate compliance procedures and an appropriate organisational structure, failed to identify operational risks and did not adequately protect the confidentiality and integrity of the reported data. ESMA imposed fines totalling 1,374,000 EUR for negligent infringements under EMIR and SFTR; the case is under appeal.

Authority / court

Europäische Wertpapier- und Marktaufsichtsbehörde (ESMA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Verordnung (EU) Nr. 648/2012 (EMIR), Art. 65, 73, Anhang I; Verordnung (EU) 2015/2365 (SFTR), Art. 9

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

under appeal

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Culpability

negligent

Repeat case

yes

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The FCA publicly censured the former construction and services group Carillion plc. The regulator found that between July 2016 and July 2017 the company published misleading information, breaching the prohibition of market manipulation and listing requirements; in July 2017 Carillion had to announce a provision of £845 million. Because the company has been in liquidation since January 2018, no fine was imposed; the FCA stated it would otherwise have been £37.91 million.

Authority / court

Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Market abuse and insider dealing

Legal basis

Art. 15 MAR; Listing Rule 1.3.3R; Listing Principle 1; Premium Listing Principle 2; sections 91 und 123 FSMA 2000

Action

Reprimand or warning

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Construction and real estate

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link

The ECB imposed two penalties on J.P. Morgan SE: 10,150,000 EUR because the bank misclassified corporate exposures in 15 quarterly reports (end-2019 to mid-2023) and reported risk-weighted assets for credit risk that were too low, and 2,030,000 EUR because it wrongly excluded transactions from the calculation of credit valuation adjustment (CVA) risk in 21 reporting periods (2019 to 2024). The ECB regarded both as seriously negligent, caused by evident deficiencies in internal processes; as a result, the reported capital ratios were too high.

Authority / court

Europäische Zentralbank (EZB), Bankenaufsicht

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Art. 430 Abs. 1 Buchst. a VO (EU) Nr. 575/2013 (CRR); Art. 18 Abs. 1 VO (EU) Nr. 1024/2013

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Culpability

negligent

Mitigating circumstances

The bank identified and reported the breaches itself, cooperated and took remedial action.

Published

19 Feb 2026

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The SFC publicly reprimanded Kylin International (HK) and fined it HKD 9 million for failures as investment manager or consultant of six sub-funds of a Cayman Islands fund from August 2018. The SFC found that conflicts of interest arising from six loans by the firm or a director to four sub-funds were neither managed nor disclosed, reconciliations, valuations and audits were missing, investors were wrongly told that the suitability requirement did not apply, KYC and suitability controls were inadequate and anti-money laundering records were missing. The firm ceased its regulated activities at the end of 2023; its licence was revoked at its request in January 2025.

Authority / court

Securities and Futures Commission (SFC), Hongkong

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Section 194 Securities and Futures Ordinance (Cap. 571)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Repeat case

no

Mitigating circumstances

Remedial measures after an SFC review in late 2020, cessation of regulated activities and an otherwise clean disciplinary record.

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not set out here.

Published

9 Feb 2026

Original amount 9,000,000 HKD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 9 Feb 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

In 2017 staff at the London branch of the Luxembourg private bank Banque Havilland SA (now Rangecourt SA) prepared a paper setting out manipulative trading strategies intended to put pressure on the Qatari riyal and its peg to the US dollar; it was meant for a UAE sovereign wealth fund. On 3 February 2026 the Upper Tribunal upheld the breach of Principle 1 (integrity) but reduced the penalty of 10,000,000 GBP set by the FCA in its Decision Notice of 17 January 2023 to 4,000,000 GBP.

Authority / court

Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) (Verfahren der Financial Conduct Authority (FCA))

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Market abuse and insider dealing

Legal basis

Principle 1 der FCA Principles for Businesses; s. 206 FSMA 2000; Entscheidung nach s. 133 FSMA 2000

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

reduced

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Culpability

intentional

Mitigating circumstances

According to the findings the paper was not passed on and the strategy was never implemented; the bank itself reported the matter to the Luxembourg supervisor CSSF and to the FCA, cooperated, had it investigated at its own cost of around £2.5m, and the employees involved had left the bank.

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not set out here.

Published

3 Feb 2026

Original amount 4,000,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 3 Feb 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The investment firm did not review alerts from its surveillance system adequately or promptly, so at least ten suspicious trading instances were not reported or reported late; it also failed to notify an agreed, potentially staged change in control. After a 30% settlement discount the DFSA allegedly imposed USD 504,000 (otherwise USD 720,000).

Authority / court

Dubai Financial Services Authority (DFSA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Market abuse and insider dealing

Legal basis

Art. 90(2) Regulatory Law 2004 (DIFC); GEN Rules 11.10.12A, 5.3.20(a), 11.8.11(2), 4.2.3, 4.2.10 DFSA Rulebook

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Mitigating circumstances

Settlement (30% discount); USD 720,000 without settlement.

Published

6 Feb 2026

Original amount 504,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 2 Feb 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The reinsurance broker gave cedent insurers and reinsurers different premiums for the same placement, misled reinsurers about deductions and brokerage, and misled a client about the brokerage earned on 121 placements, partly using altered documents. In a settlement the DFSA allegedly imposed USD 455,176: USD 175,343 disgorgement (including interest) and a USD 279,833 penalty (USD 575,104 without settlement). The amount and the facts have not been confirmed against the primary source.

Authority / court

Dubai Financial Services Authority (DFSA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Mitigating circumstances

Self-report to the DFSA, internal investigation and restitution to clients; settlement (reduction from USD 575,104).

Published

2 Feb 2026

Original amount 455,176 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 2 Feb 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

ADM had artificially inflated the results of the Nutrition segment through retroactive intra-group rebates and price adjustments in order to show growth targets of 15 to 20 %. ADM is paying a civil penalty of 40 million USD.

Authority / court

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Antifraud-, Reporting-, Buchführungs- und interne Kontrollvorschriften der US-Bundeswertpapiergesetze (Settled Order der SEC)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Food and agriculture

Mitigating circumstances

ADM's cooperation and remedial measures were taken into account

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not reported here.

Original amount 40,000,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 27 Jan 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 3 · Direct link

The FSRA (Financial Services Regulatory Authority, the financial regulator of Abu Dhabi Global Market, ADGM) accepted an enforceable undertaking from the wealth manager and robo-adviser after its investigation found that between January 2023 and March 2025 the firm held insufficient liquid assets for most of the period and insufficient capital resources at the end of 2023 and 2024, calculated its capital requirement for three quarters of 2024 on an understated expenditure figure, did not prepare its 2023 financial statements under IFRS and filed them late, had no office in ADGM since the end of 2023 and paid supervision fees late. The firm admitted the alleged contraventions and undertook, among other things, to appoint an independent director within 60 days, to close any capital shortfall, to re-establish its head office and registered office in ADGM and to report monthly on its capital and liquid assets for one year. The undertaking contains no financial penalty.

Authority / court

Financial Services Regulatory Authority (ADGM)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Section 235 FSMR 2015; PRU Rules 3.2.4(a), 3.7.2, 3.7.4(1); GEN Rules 4.5.1(1), 6.2.2, 6.6.2; FEES Rule 1.2.2

Action

Other

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Mitigating circumstances

Cooperation with the investigation; some of the contraventions (capital calculation and resources, IFRS accounts, office in ADGM) were already being remediated.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Saxo Capital Markets HK was publicly reprimanded and fined 4,000,000 HKD because between November 2018 and November 2022 retail clients, too, could trade on its online trading platform 32 complex virtual asset-related products which under the regulators' circulars were reserved for professional investors (1,446 transactions by 130 retail clients and six professional investors). The firm neither assessed clients' knowledge nor provided sufficient information and warnings; the detection rules adopted from its parent group had not identified the products as crypto-related.

Authority / court

Securities and Futures Commission (SFC)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

s. 194 SFO (Cap. 571); Code of Conduct; Guidelines on Online Distribution and Advisory Platforms; SFC-Rundschreiben vom 01.11.2018 und HKMA/SFC-Rundschreiben vom 28.01.2022

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Repeat case

no

Mitigating circumstances

Self-report, voluntary compensation of clients, cessation of regulated activities, cooperation and acceptance of the findings, otherwise clean disciplinary record.

Published

6 Jan 2026

Original amount 4,000,000 HKD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 6 Jan 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

In April 2023, as a bank managing a AUD 14 billion government bond issue for the Australian Office of Financial Management (AOFM), ANZ sold large volumes of bond futures around the time of pricing without informing the AOFM of its outstanding sales, and from 2021 to 2023 reported inflated secondary market turnover in government bonds to it. The Court imposed AUD 135 million: AUD 85 million for the bond issue (including AUD 80 million for unconscionable conduct) and AUD 50 million for the inaccurate turnover reporting, together with a compliance programme at its own cost. In three retail matters a further AUD 115 million was imposed on the same day in a separate judgment.

Authority / court

Federal Court of Australia (auf Antrag der Australian Securities and Investments Commission, ASIC)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Market abuse and insider dealing

Legal basis

ss 12CB(1), 12DB(1)(a) ASIC Act 2001 (Cth); ss 912A(1)(a), (ca), (f), (5A), 912DAA, 1041H(1) Corporations Act 2001 (Cth)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Employees

10,000 or more

Mitigating circumstances

Constructive engagement with ASIC and admissions at the earliest available opportunity.

Published

19 Dec 2025

Original amount 135,000,000 AUD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 19 Dec 2025.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

As depositary of the H2O funds, CACEIS Bank, a subsidiary of the Crédit Agricole group, had, according to the AMF (Autorité des marchés financiers, French financial markets authority) Enforcement Committee, not sufficiently verified the manager's procedures for monitoring investment ratios and valuing unlisted securities, and had not effectively checked compliance with investment limits (including for debt securities, currency swaps and the issuer limit for bonds). The Committee imposed 3,500,000 EUR and a warning; the allegation concerning total return swaps was rejected. The bank has appealed to the Conseil d'État.

Authority / court

Autorité des marchés financiers (AMF), Commission des sanctions

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Art. 3, 6 Delegierte Verordnung (EU) 2016/438; Art. L. 214-10-5 Code monétaire et financier; Art. 323-19 Règlement général de l'AMF

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

under appeal

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Published

18 Dec 2025

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The CONSOB (Italian securities regulator) imposed a fine of EUR 190,000 on Juventus Football Club S.p.A. under Art. 187-quinquies of the Consolidated Law on Finance (TUF) because market manipulation within the meaning of Art. 187-ter TUF and Art. 15 MAR committed in its interest was attributed to it. According to the findings, the financial statements for 30 June 2020 and 30 June 2021 and the related announcements contained false or misleading information, including on gains from reciprocal player transfers, on deferred salary payments and on buy-back agreements. The decision is not final.

Authority / court

CONSOB (Commissione Nazionale per le Società e la Borsa)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Market abuse and insider dealing

Legal basis

Art. 187-ter und 187-quinquies Abs. 1 lit. a D.Lgs. 58/1998 (TUF); Art. 15 Verordnung (EU) 596/2014 (MAR); Art. 6 Abs. 3 Gesetz 689/1981

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

under appeal

Sector

Other

Culpability

intentional

Mitigating circumstances

The CONSOB noted that the company had strengthened its internal control system after the breaches.

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not reported here.

Published

2 Jan 2026

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Bank Dierickx Leys, which focuses on asset management and investment advice, did not submit a single suspicious transaction and order report (STOR) between 3 July 2016 and 25 March 2025. In the view of the FSMA (Belgian Financial Services and Markets Authority), its systems did not monitor all relevant orders, relied on undocumented assessments by traders and were insufficiently documented and reviewed, its training did not fully cover the MAR obligations, and the bank could not rely on an external service provider's system without a delegation agreement. Under the settlement the bank pays 350,000 EUR.

Authority / court

Autoriteit voor Financiële Diensten en Markten / Autorité des services et marchés financiers (FSMA) – Directiecomité (minnelijke schikking)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Market abuse and insider dealing

Legal basis

Art. 16 Abs. 2 Verordnung (EU) Nr. 596/2014 (MAR); Delegierte Verordnung (EU) 2016/957; Art. 71 § 3 Gesetz vom 2. August 2002

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Mitigating circumstances

Remedial measures in 2024: new MAR policy, new monitoring system and specific market abuse training.

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The SFC publicly reprimanded EFG Bank AG and fined it HKD 10,850,000 because, between January 2015 and December 2020, the bank failed to take special product features into account in its due diligence on 322 bonds, updated its policies late after the complex product regime took effect and in some cases served customers without the required information and warning statements. In addition, due diligence records were missing for 141 bonds, and the bank did not report the failures to the SFC immediately. The bank will apply an enhanced complaint handling procedure for customers who acquired one of 351 potentially affected products.

Authority / court

Securities and Futures Commission (SFC), Hongkong

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Section 196 Securities and Futures Ordinance (Cap. 571); Code of Conduct for Persons Licensed by or Registered with the SFC; Management, Supervision and Internal Control Guidelines

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Mitigating circumstances

Remedial measures on product due diligence, cooperation with the HKMA and the SFC, and commitment to an enhanced complaint handling procedure for affected customers.

Published

11 Dec 2025

Original amount 10,850,000 HKD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 11 Dec 2025.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The NBS (National Bank of Slovakia) fined the life insurer NN Životná poisťovňa 100,000 EUR. From 2016 to November 2021 the insurer had not drawn up a fund statute forming part of the contract for six of its own unit-linked funds, and when it replaced 13 existing funds with three new funds on 5 November 2021 it did not act towards its customers with the required professional care.

Authority / court

Národná banka Slovenska (NBS)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

§ 64 Abs. 6, § 70 Abs. 1 lit. a, § 139 Abs. 1 lit. e und Abs. 11 Zákon č. 39/2015 Z. z. (Versicherungsgesetz)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The lender did not submit its 2024 annual report, together with the audit report, the resolution on the appropriation of profits and the minutes of the shareholders’ meeting, to the financial supervisory authority on time. In misdemeanour proceedings, the Finantsinspektsioon (Estonian Financial Supervision Authority) imposed a fine of 16,000 EUR; the maximum is 1 million EUR or 10% of annual turnover. Date = publication.

Authority / court

Finantsinspektsioon (Estnische Finanzaufsicht)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

§ 56 Abs. 3, § 96 Abs. 2 KAVS (Gesetz über Kreditgeber und -vermittler)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Published

10 Dec 2025

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The investigation found that the financial services provider had, among other things, misused client funds, supplied false or misleading information to clients and the regulator, promised unrealistic returns and not acted in the interests of clients. The amount and the facts have not been confirmed against the primary source.

Authority / court

Financial Sector Conduct Authority (FSCA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision

Legal basis

Financial Sector Regulation Act 9 of 2017; Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act 37 of 2002; General Code of Conduct for Authorised Financial Services Providers and Representatives (2003); Financial Institutions (Protection of Funds) Act 28 of 2001; Determination of Fit and Proper Requirements for FSPs (2017); Financial Markets Act Regulations (2018)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not set out here.

Published

9 Dec 2025

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Following client complaints, the FSCA found that the company and its predecessor South African Relocations had issued marine (transit) insurance policies to the public without authorisation, thereby acting as unlicensed insurers. The amount and the facts have not been confirmed against the primary source.

Authority / court

Financial Sector Conduct Authority (FSCA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Short-term Insurance Act, s. 7(1); Insurance Act, s. 5(1); Financial Sector Regulation Act 9 of 2017, s. 139

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not set out here.

Published

9 Dec 2025

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The Commissariat aux Assurances (CAA, Luxembourg insurance supervisor) imposed administrative fines of EUR 32,000, EUR 14,000 and EUR 3,000 (EUR 49,000 in total) on three insurers authorised in Luxembourg. They had distributed their products in the EEA through a company that, although run by authorised insurance agents, was itself neither authorised nor entered in a distributor register.

Authority / court

Commissariat aux Assurances (CAA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Art. 303(1) Loi modifiée du 7 décembre 2015 sur le secteur des assurances (LSA), Buchst. a), j) und k); verletzt Art. 286(4) LSA

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Published

13 Feb 2026

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Tung Tai Securities was reprimanded and fined 900,000 HKD because between September 2019 and February 2020, acting on instructions from a bogus email address resembling the genuine one, it sold an overseas client's shares and transferred the proceeds of 3,301,740 USD to three overseas bank accounts not designated by the client. Red flags such as transfers rejected by several banks were ignored, and effective controls to protect client assets from theft and fraud were lacking.

Authority / court

Securities and Futures Commission (SFC)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

s. 194 SFO (Cap. 571); Code of Conduct GP 2, GP 3, GP 8, paras. 4.3, 11.1(a); Management, Supervision and Internal Control Guidelines Part VII

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Repeat case

no

Mitigating circumstances

Compensation of the client, improved order-handling and execution procedures, independent review of controls, cooperation, otherwise clean disciplinary record.

Published

13 Nov 2025

Original amount 900,000 HKD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 13 Nov 2025.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

On 12 November 2025 the Autoriteit Financiële Markten (AFM, Dutch Authority for the Financial Markets) issued a direction (aanwijzing) to Euronext Amsterdam N.V. as operator of the regulated markets because, in the AFM’s view, three conditions of its announced new settlement model for market participants wishing to use a central securities depository (CSD) other than Euronext Securities Milan restricted such CSDs’ access to the transaction feeds. Euronext thereby breached the obligation to provide non-discriminatory and transparent access under Art. 53(1) CSDR. Euronext withdrew the conditions and confirmed access for the CSDs concerned; the direction is final.

Authority / court

Autoriteit Financiële Markten (AFM)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Art. 53 Abs. 1 Verordnung (EU) Nr. 909/2014 (CSDR); Anweisung nach Art. 1:75 Abs. 1 i. V. m. Art. 1:3a Abs. 1 Wet op het financieel toezicht (Wft)

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Published

13 May 2026

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Among other things, between 2004 and 2011 the credit cooperative had channelled loans taken out in the names of uninvolved people without their knowledge, and via shell companies, to a distressed large borrower group, thereby circumventing large-exposure limits; it had paid large cash sums to anti-social forces (hanshakai-teki seiryoku), carried out no suspicious-transaction assessments and given false reports and false statements to the supervisor. Besides a comprehensive business improvement order, lending to new clients was suspended from 17 November to 16 December 2025, combined with training of all staff away from day-to-day business and the immediate severing of ties with anti-social forces; it was the second order against the cooperative in 2025.

Authority / court

Financial Services Agency (FSA, 金融庁)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Act on Financial Businesses by Cooperatives (協同組合による金融事業に関する法律) Art. 6 Abs. 1 i. V. m. Banking Act (銀行法) Art. 26 Abs. 1; Art. 10 Nr. 2 und 3 (falsche Berichte und Aussagen); Act on Prevention of Transfer of Criminal Proceeds (犯罪収益移転防止法)

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Repeat case

yes

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not set out here.

Published

31 Oct 2025

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The Comisión Nacional del Mercado de Valores (CNMV, Spanish securities market supervisor) fined Twitter International Unlimited Company 5,000,000 EUR for a continuing very serious breach of its duties to assist the supervisor. For the advertisements listed in a CNMV request of 8 November 2023, the company did not check whether the advertiser Quantum AI was authorised to provide investment services in Spain or appeared on warning lists of the CNMV or foreign supervisors; it waived administrative appeals.

Authority / court

Comisión Nacional del Mercado de Valores (CNMV)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision

Legal basis

Art. 290.1.n) i. V. m. Art. 290.2.f) Ley 6/2023 de los Mercados de Valores y de los Servicios de Inversión

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Media and online platforms

Published

13 Nov 2025

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link

On 29 October 2025 the Autoriteit Financiële Markten (AFM, Dutch Authority for the Financial Markets) fined the audit firm Forvis Mazars Accountants N.V. 446,000 EUR because its quality control system and business operations did not prevent almost 100 professionals at all levels from cheating in tests forming part of technical training between 2020 and 2023, for example by sharing answers or completing tests together. There were no specific rules or controls on the integrity of such tests, and no internal report about it was received. The fine was reduced because of the limited role of the internal tests in the quality system, good cooperation and measures taken, and was accepted in the simplified procedure.

Authority / court

Autoriteit Financiële Markten (AFM)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Art. 18 Abs. 1 und Art. 21 Abs. 1 Wet toezicht accountantsorganisaties (Wta)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Other

Mitigating circumstances

Limited role of the internal tests in the quality system, good cooperation, recognition of the importance of culture and behaviour, measures against recurrence; simplified settlement.

Published

31 Oct 2025

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The Commissariat aux Assurances (CAA, Luxembourg insurance supervisor) imposed an administrative fine of EUR 35,000 on a Luxembourg brokerage company. It had repeatedly given the supervisor incomplete or false information on premiums, shareholders and board, failed to notify changes in its shareholding, used an unregistered intermediary, disregarded reporting instructions and did not keep accounting records properly; the confidentiality of client data in its accounting was also not fully ensured.

Authority / court

Commissariat aux Assurances (CAA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Art. 303(1) Buchst. a), f), h), j) und k) Loi modifiée du 7 décembre 2015 sur le secteur des assurances (LSA)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Mitigating circumstances

Significant internal changes, including in management, and measures to restore compliance.

Published

16 Dec 2025

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The FCA removed all regulated activities from the permission of the financial intermediary Verus Financial Services Limited with immediate effect and imposed an asset restriction. By its own admission the firm had repeatedly and deliberately breached a restriction it had voluntarily accepted in September 2023, which prohibited payments above 5,000 GBP without the FCA's consent, had failed to comply with a Financial Ombudsman Service decision of 30 June 2024 in favour of a customer and, in the FCA's view, had not been open and cooperative.

Authority / court

Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

ss. 55J(2)(a)(ii) und 55L(3)(a) FSMA 2000; Threshold Condition para. 2E Schedule 6 FSMA; DISP 3.7.12R; Principles 6 und 11 der FCA Principles for Businesses

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Culpability

intentional

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

After the tax authority had refused the tax shelter certificates for a financed show and the insurer left cover open, the provider failed to inform investors of this material risk in good time by means of a prospectus supplement. The Autorité des services et marchés financiers (Belgian Financial Services and Markets Authority, FSMA) accepted a settlement of 75,000 EUR with publication by name.

Authority / court

Autorité des services et marchés financiers (FSMA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Verordnung (EU) 2017/1129 Art. 23; Loi du 11 juillet 2018 (Loi Prospectus)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Published

21 Oct 2025

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

UBS AG was publicly reprimanded and fined 8,000,000 HKD in Hong Kong because, from 2009 to July 2022, its automated process for classifying professional investors rested on a misinterpretation of the minimum portfolio requirement for certain joint accounts. From July 2018 to July 2022 alone, 560 joint accounts were misclassified; securities of 23 of these accounts were lent in 9,190 lending transactions without valid authority, and 94 accounts carried out 500 transactions in products reserved for professional investors. In August 2021 the regulator had already fined UBS 9.8 million HKD, among other things for similar failings.

Authority / court

Securities and Futures Commission (SFC)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

s. 196 SFO (Cap. 571); s. 4 Securities and Futures (Client Securities) Rules; s. 11(3A) Securities and Futures (Contract Notes, Statements of Account and Receipts) Rules; Securities and Futures (Professional Investor) Rules; Code of Conduct

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Employees

10,000 or more

Repeat case

yes

Mitigating circumstances

Look-back review and remediation after self-reporting, cooperation, commitment to an enhanced complaint handling procedure for potentially misclassified clients.

Published

20 Oct 2025

Original amount 8,000,000 HKD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 20 Oct 2025.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

For 2022 to 2024, the Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission (CySEC) found that the investment firm had no adequate compliance procedures, did not define target markets for its financial instruments, did not act in the best interests of clients and did not inform clients in a fair, clear and not misleading manner. It imposed fines of 50,000, 30,000 and 20,000 EUR; a judicial review of the decision has been recorded.

Authority / court

Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission (CySEC)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Sec. 17(2), 17(3)(c), 22(1), 25(1), 25(3)(a) Gesetz über Wertpapierdienstleistungen 2017; Art. 22, 44 Delegierte VO (EU) 2017/565

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

under appeal

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Published

17 Dec 2025

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The FCA publicly censured BlueCrest Capital Management (UK) LLP. Between October 2011 and December 2015 BlueCrest managed external funds for investors as well as an internal fund open only to partners and staff. The FCA found that portfolio managers were moved from the external to the internal fund without the resulting conflict of interest being managed adequately, leaving external investors with an inferior service. Instead of a fine, the FCA took into account BlueCrest's agreement to pay USD 101 million in redress to non-US investors.

Authority / court

Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

FCA Principle 8 (Interessenkonflikte); section 205 FSMA 2000; section 55L(5) FSMA 2000 (Entschädigungsauflage)

Action

Reprimand or warning

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link

The Commissariat aux Assurances (Luxembourg insurance supervisory authority, CAA) withdrew the broking firm’s licence (effective from 1 December 2025), among other things for using unregistered intermediaries, lacking internal expertise, insufficiently protected confidential data, economically unexplained payment flows with affiliated companies, incomplete or false information provided to the supervisory authority and deficient customer information.

Authority / court

Commissariat aux Assurances (CAA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Loi modifiée du 7 décembre 2015 sur le secteur des assurances, Art. 303 Abs. 3 lit. c

Action

Other

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Published

29 May 2026

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

On 30 September 2025 BaFin (German Federal Financial Supervisory Authority) imposed fines of 910,000 EUR on Oldenburgische Landesbank AG. In 2020 and 2021 the bank lacked adequate IT controls to protect its clients' ownership rights where buy and sell orders were placed on the same day, did not in every case transparently show the costs of the individual components of bundled products, and did not ensure that tied agents properly disclosed inducements. The fine is final.

Authority / court

Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht (BaFin)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

§ 130 Abs. 1 OWiG i. V. m. § 84 Abs. 4 S. 1 WpHG i. V. m. § 10 Abs. 4 Nr. 5 WpDVerOV; § 63 Abs. 9 S. 1 WpHG; § 70 Abs. 1 S. 1 Nr. 2 WpHG i. V. m. Art. 50 Abs. 2 Delegierte Verordnung (EU) 2017/565

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Published

13 Oct 2025

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The Sanctions Committee of the FSMA (Belgian Financial Services and Markets Authority) found that Nyrstar NV had given false or misleading signals about its share through information on its liquidity position (market manipulation) and had not informed the FSMA immediately after delaying the disclosure of inside information. For both infringements it imposed a fine of 80,000 EUR on the company; it considered further allegations not proven.

Authority / court

Autoriteit voor Financiële Diensten en Markten / Autorité des services et marchés financiers (FSMA) – Sanctiecommissie

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Market abuse and insider dealing

Legal basis

Art. 15 i. V. m. Art. 12 Abs. 1 lit. c und Art. 17 Abs. 4 Unterabs. 3 Verordnung (EU) Nr. 596/2014 (MAR); Art. 4 Abs. 2 Durchführungsverordnung (EU) 2016/1055; Art. 36 § 2 und 72 § 3 Gesetz vom 2. August 2002

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Steel and metals

Mitigating circumstances

The limited financial capacity, the absence of previous infringements and cooperation with the FSMA were taken into account.

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Between March 2023 and February 2024 a trader at the Korean financial services firm placed near-simultaneous opposing orders for accounts with the same beneficial owner, so that 127 trades in 440 crude oil futures (around 33.5 million USD) offset each other, some of them against orders from traders on other desks of the firm. The CFTC (U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission) treated this as prohibited wash sales and non-competitive trades and, in a settlement, imposed a civil monetary penalty of 212,500 USD and a cease-and-desist order; it granted a 20% reduction for excellent cooperation. The authority allegedly made the findings set out here; this account is not based on a final judgment.

Authority / court

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Market abuse and insider dealing

Legal basis

Section 4c(a)(1) und (2)(A) Commodity Exchange Act; CFTC Regulation 1.38(a)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Culpability

intentional

Mitigating circumstances

Excellent cooperation with the Division of Enforcement (20% reduction of the penalty); the CFTC also acknowledged the company's representations regarding its remedial measures.

Published

17 Sep 2025

Original amount 212,500 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 17 Sep 2025.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

From June 2021 to October 2024, the company, which raises tax shelter funds through public offerings, kept a public offering on its website with an information note from 2020 without publishing an updated note and filing it with the Autorité des services et marchés financiers (Belgian Financial Services and Markets Authority, FSMA); several dozen investors with an investment volume of under 5 million EUR were affected. The FSMA accepted a settlement of 10,000 EUR.

Authority / court

Autorité des services et marchés financiers (FSMA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Loi du 11 juillet 2018 (Loi Prospectus), Art. 10, 11

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Published

16 Sep 2025

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The CFTC imposed a fine of 200,000 USD on the Illinois trading firm. Measures against individuals are not set out here. From May to December 2022, orders were placed for Flatiron in E-mini S&P 500 and E-mini Nasdaq 100 futures on the CME that were intended to be cancelled before execution, so that the genuine orders on the opposite side were filled faster, in larger quantities or at better prices. The spoof orders exceeded the genuine orders in contract volume by a ratio of five to one. The authority allegedly made the findings set out here; this account is not based on a final judgment.

Authority / court

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Market abuse and insider dealing

Legal basis

Section 4c(a)(5)(C) Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. § 6c(a)(5)(C))

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Culpability

intentional

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not set out here.

Published

9 Sep 2025

Original amount 200,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 9 Sep 2025.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The SFC publicly reprimanded Instinet Pacific and fined it HKD 8 million because, between December 2012 and March 2018, the broker failed to report 8,817 pairs of cross trades between clients and an affiliated company, worth around HKD 25.9 billion, to the Stock Exchange of Hong Kong as required by Rule 526 of the Exchange Rules. There were neither internal rules on reporting such trades nor any review of the reporting process.

Authority / court

Securities and Futures Commission (SFC), Hongkong

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Section 194 Securities and Futures Ordinance (Cap. 571); Rule 526 Rules of the Exchange (SEHK); General Principles 2 und 7 sowie Paragraph 12.1 Code of Conduct

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Mitigating circumstances

The firm ceased the relevant trade flows on its own initiative and cooperated with the SFC.

Published

8 Sep 2025

Original amount 8,000,000 HKD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 8 Sep 2025.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Paysera acquired 100% of the shares in UAB ‘Finansinės paslaugos „Contis“’ before the assessment period had expired and without a non-objection from the supervisory authority; in April 2025, the Lietuvos bankas (Bank of Lithuania, financial supervisor) objected to the acquisition owing to a lack of documents on reputation, financial soundness and money laundering risks. In addition, the annual financial statements and other reports were not approved and submitted on time. Fine of 400,000 EUR and obligation to remedy by 30 September 2025. Source: archived copy of the press release.

Authority / court

Lietuvos bankas (Litauische Zentralbank, Finanzaufsicht)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Elektroninių pinigų ir elektroninių pinigų įstaigų įstatymas (Inhaberkontrolle, Berichtspflichten)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Published

5 Sep 2025

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

In misdemeanour proceedings, Banka Slovenije (Bank of Slovenia) issued a reprimand (opomin) to NOVA KREDITNA BANKA MARIBOR d. d. (now OTP banka d. d.) because its remuneration policy exempted staff with variable pay of up to 100,000 EUR gross from statutory requirements of the Banking Act. As a result, in 2022 the bank paid nine identified staff variable remuneration of more than 50,000 up to 86,000 EUR gross without deferring any part of it. The bank has remedied the breach but has applied for judicial review; the decision is not final.

Authority / court

Banka Slovenije

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Art. 396 Abs. 1 Nr. 19 i. V. m. Art. 190 Zakon o bančništvu (ZBan-3)

Action

Reprimand or warning

Status of proceedings

under appeal

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not reported here.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link

For the period November 2020 to May 2025, the Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission (CySEC) investigated the investment firm’s handling of conflicts of interest and its general conduct of business and information obligations towards clients. The proceedings ended with a settlement of 70,000 EUR, which the company has paid.

Authority / court

Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission (CySEC)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Art. 24(1), 25(1) Gesetz über Wertpapierdienstleistungen 2017; Art. 37(4) CySEC-Gesetz

Action

Other

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Published

17 Nov 2025

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Deutsche Bank AG was publicly reprimanded and fined 23,800,000 HKD in Hong Kong. Clients were overcharged fees of about 5 million USD in management fees on 39 accounts, 10,988 EUR at 92 customers and 493 USD at 32 customers, because agreed discounts were not applied, floating rate debt instruments were wrongly valued and fund prices were not updated. 261 single stock and 1,590 industry research reports lacked disclosure of investment banking relationships. 40 ETFs were given too low a product risk rating. The proceedings stemmed from the bank's self-reports.

Authority / court

Securities and Futures Commission (SFC)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

s. 196 SFO (Cap. 571); Code of Conduct GP 2, GP 7, paras. 2.1, 12.1, 16.5(d)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Employees

10,000 or more

Culpability

negligent

Mitigating circumstances

Self-reports, root-cause analysis, remediation and stronger controls, refund of overcharged fees, breaches found by the regulator to be inadvertent and without intent, cooperation and acceptance of the findings.

Published

28 Aug 2025

Original amount 23,800,000 HKD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 28 Aug 2025.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The SFC publicly reprimanded The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation (HSBC) and fined it HKD 4.2 million because, between 2013 and 2021, the bank failed to disclose, or disclosed incorrectly, its investment banking relationships with the companies covered in research reports on Hong Kong-listed securities. The cause was deficiencies in recording and mapping data across systems; an estimated more than 4,200 reports were affected. Following a self-report, the HKMA investigated jointly with the SFC.

Authority / court

Securities and Futures Commission (SFC), Hongkong

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Section 196 Securities and Futures Ordinance (Cap. 571); Paragraph 16.5(d), General Principles 2, 3 und 7 sowie Paragraph 12.1 Code of Conduct

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Employees

10,000 or more

Mitigating circumstances

No evidence of client losses, root-cause review, enhancement of systems and controls, and cooperation with the HKMA and the SFC.

Published

26 Aug 2025

Original amount 4,200,000 HKD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 26 Aug 2025.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

On 22 February 2018 the then start-up airline told the Canada Transportation Agency that, after a letter of intent for two leased aircraft had been terminated, the start of flight operations would slip to the end of 2018, but it did not publish this material change until 13 March 2018. In its settlement with the BCSC the company admitted breaching the duty of immediate disclosure and pays CAD 100,000 as a joint payment. Measures against individuals are not set out here.

Authority / court

British Columbia Securities Commission (BCSC), Executive Director (Vergleich)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Securities Act (British Columbia), RSBC 1996, c. 418, s. 85 (unverzügliche Offenlegung wesentlicher Änderungen) und s. 168.2(1)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not set out here.

Published

22 Aug 2025

Original amount 100,000 CAD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 22 Aug 2025.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Between 25 and 31 March 2025 the listed operator of online marketplaces held one-to-one calls with 19 analysts ahead of its quiet period ("pre-close calls") and, in a recorded call, said that consensus for the first quarter and the full year 2025 was too high, adding expectations for individual business areas; the analyst then cut their EBITDA estimate and the share price fell by 10% on 26 March. The Finanstilsynet (Norwegian Financial Supervisory Authority) treated this as unlawful disclosure of inside information and imposed 10,000,000 NOK; as an aggravating factor it took into account that Vend had not initially handed over its prepared list of talking points. Vend announced that it would accept the fine and has decided to stop holding analyst calls before quiet periods.

Authority / court

Finanstilsynet (Norwegen)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Market abuse and insider dealing

Legal basis

Art. 14 lit. c i. V. m. Art. 10 MAR; verdipapirhandelloven § 3-1 und § 21-1

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Media and online platforms

Culpability

negligent

Published

20 Aug 2025

Original amount 10,000,000 NOK, converted at the ECB reference rate of 12 Aug 2025.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The Markets Disciplinary Panel (MDP) of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC, Australia's corporate, markets and financial services regulator) allegedly issued an infringement notice for 3,880,100 AUD to the second-largest participant on the ASX 24 futures market because, between May 2023 and February 2024, it allowed 33 orders from two clients in electricity and wheat futures, placed shortly before market close, which it should have suspected were intended to create a false or misleading appearance in the market ('marking the close', Rule 3.1.2(1)(b)(iii) of the Market Integrity Rules). The MDP considered the conduct reckless after repeated contact from ASIC and treated the firm's compliance culture as an aggravating factor; payment is not an admission of liability.

Authority / court

Markets Disciplinary Panel (MDP) der Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Market abuse and insider dealing

Legal basis

ASIC Market Integrity Rules (Futures Markets) 2017, Rule 3.1.2(1)(b)(iii); Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 798H(1); Infringement Notice nach reg 7.2A.04 Corporations Regulations 2001

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Published

2 Sep 2025

Original amount 3,880,100 AUD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 30 Jul 2025.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The FCA fined Sigma Broking Limited £1,087,300. The FCA found that between December 2018 and December 2023 almost all of the firm's transaction reports were incomplete or inaccurate, affecting 924,584 transactions. The cause was a reporting system set up incorrectly from the start, whose errors were not fixed for years. The fine includes a 30% discount.

Authority / court

Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Art. 26 UK MiFIR; FCA Principle 3; section 206 FSMA 2000

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Original amount 1,087,300 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 29 Jul 2025.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link

The PRA fined the London branch of the Luxembourg reinsurer Barents Reinsurance S.A. 1,785,000 GBP – its first fine on a firm operating purely as a reinsurer. Between July 2021 and October 2023 the branch had not prepared adequately for the UK rules applying after Brexit, implemented internal audit recommendations late, lacked proportionate governance and a business continuity plan tailored to its UK business, and submitted regulatory reports late.

Authority / court

Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA), Bank of England

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

PRA Fundamental Rule 6; Conditions Governing Business 2.3 und 2.6; Reporting 2.1 und 2.5 (PRA Rulebook); s. 206 FSMA 2000

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Culpability

negligent

Mitigating circumstances

Early admissions and cooperation (15% reduction) and settlement (30% discount; 2,550,000 GBP without it); substantial remediation costs; in the PRA's view the breaches were neither deliberate nor reckless.

Published

28 Jul 2025

Original amount 1,785,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 24 Jul 2025.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

According to VARA's enforcement list, The Open Network Foundation breached the VARA Marketing Regulations. The list records a cease-and-desist order, a fine of an undisclosed amount and a public statement as the measures taken.

Authority / court

Virtual Assets Regulatory Authority (VARA), Dubai

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision

Legal basis

VARA Marketing Regulations

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Telecoms, IT and software

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Following an on-site inspection in 2024, the Commissariat aux Assurances (Luxembourg insurance supervisory authority, CAA) withdrew the broker’s licence (effective 15 September 2025): there was no effective management by approved managers, unlicensed ‘introducers’ were de facto selling insurance, and the broker’s licence, together with its sub-intermediary network, was improperly made available to third parties.

Authority / court

Commissariat aux Assurances (CAA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Loi modifiée du 7 décembre 2015 sur le secteur des assurances, Art. 273, 274, 283, 286, 303

Action

Other

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Published

16 Sep 2025

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The Bank of England fined Vocalink Limited, a service provider to systemically important payment systems, 11,900,000 GBP – its first fine on a financial market infrastructure firm. Vocalink had not fully implemented a direction of June 2021 to remedy identified weaknesses in its systems and controls by the extended deadline of 28 February 2022, yet confirmed compliance to the Bank. According to the Bank, the causes were an insufficiently integrated risk management framework for the remediation programme and critical assurance reports that were not passed on to the risk function, internal audit and the board.

Authority / court

Bank of England

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

ss. 191 und 196 Banking Act 2009

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Mitigating circumstances

Cooperation with early admission (15% reduction) and settlement (a further 30%); 20,000,000 GBP without the reductions; significant investment in remediating the weaknesses.

Published

9 Jul 2025

Original amount 11,900,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 9 Jul 2025.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

On Saturday, 17 December 2022, the management board of a listed real estate company (anonymised in the judgment) approved by email a new share buyback programme including its volume, period and price, but only published it after a formal resolution on Monday, 19 December 2022. Austria's Financial Market Authority (FMA) imposed a penalty of 375,000 EUR; the Federal Administrative Court (Bundesverwaltungsgericht, BVwG) upheld the breach of the ad hoc disclosure obligation but reduced the penalty to 300,000 EUR.

Authority / court

Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Beschwerde gegen Straferkenntnis der Finanzmarktaufsicht FMA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Art. 17 Abs. 1 MAR i. V. m. § 156 Abs. 3 Z 2, Abs. 4 BörseG 2018

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

reduced

Sector

Construction and real estate

Culpability

negligent

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

An ASC panel had previously found that RTAX illegally distributed securities and, between 2016 and 2019, defrauded investors of at least CAD 462,421: the money was supposed to go into investments in or loans to third parties but was largely used for personal purposes, unrelated debts and payments to other investors. In its sanctions decision the panel ordered an administrative penalty of CAD 175,000; disgorgement of the CAD 462,421 obtained and costs of CAD 81,755 are separate and are not included in the amount shown. RTAX must permanently cease trading in securities. Measures against individuals are not set out here.

Authority / court

Alberta Securities Commission (ASC), Hearing Panel

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Market abuse and insider dealing

Legal basis

Securities Act (Alberta), RSA 2000, c. S-4, s. 110(1) (Vertrieb ohne Prospekt) und s. 93(1)(b) (Betrug); Sanktionen nach s. 198 (u. a. s. 198(1)(i) Herausgabe), s. 199 (Verwaltungsstrafe) und s. 202 (Kosten)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not set out here.

Published

14 Jul 2025

Original amount 175,000 CAD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 9 Jul 2025.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The reinsurer breached the principle of specialisation in reinsurance business, its approved manager was not effectively present on site and had insufficient powers, the governance system including oversight of outsourced functions was inadequate, and orders from a 2019 inspection had not been implemented or only partially. The Commissariat aux Assurances (Luxembourg insurance supervisory authority, CAA) imposed the statutory maximum of 250,000 EUR; the company cooperated.

Authority / court

Commissariat aux Assurances (CAA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Organisational requirements

Legal basis

Loi modifiée du 7 décembre 2015 sur le secteur des assurances, Art. 49, 71, 81, 274, 303

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Mitigating circumstances

Cooperation with the CAA during and after the inspection.

Published

8 Aug 2025