Who was sanctioned, and for what?

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 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

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

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

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

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

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 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

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

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

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

In connection with the change of control at the fashion group SMCP in 2021/22, the major shareholder European TopSoho (ETS) and Dynamic Treasure Group failed to make threshold notifications; ETS also disseminated a misleading press release. SMCP itself failed to maintain the confidentiality of inside information. Sanctions imposed by the Enforcement Committee of France's financial markets authority (Autorité des marchés financiers, AMF): ETS 400,000 EUR, DTG 300,000 EUR, SMCP 20,000 EUR. The decision is not final.

Authority / court

Autorité des marchés financiers (AMF), Commission des sanctions

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Market abuse and insider dealing

Legal basis

Art. L. 233-7 Code de commerce; Art. 223-14 RG AMF; Art. 12 Abs. 1 lit. c MAR; Art. 2 Abs. 1 DVO (EU) 2016/1055

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

under appeal

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not reported here.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Direct link

The CNMV (Comisión Nacional del Mercado de Valores, Spanish securities market regulator) found that the two companies had committed market manipulation when trading in shares of a listed Spanish photovoltaic company in the fourth quarter of 2022. On 5 March 2025 the CNMV Board imposed EUR 1,500,000 each on Liquidaciones Vizcaya SL and Albujón Solar 81 SL, EUR 3,000,000 in total. The decision is final as regards the two companies.

Authority / court

Comisión Nacional del Mercado de Valores (CNMV)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Market abuse and insider dealing

Legal basis

Art. 282.15 Ley del Mercado de Valores (Real Decreto Legislativo 4/2015) i. V. m. Art. 15 MAR

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Other

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not reported here.

Published

8 Aug 2025

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

Between March 2017 and June 2023 the investment firm on several occasions failed to report identified suspicious transactions to the Central Bank, did not consistently document its assessments and did not reliably escalate suspicions internally. For breaching Art. 16(2) MAR, the Central Bank imposed €452,790 after a 30% settlement discount (base amount €646,840); the breach was admitted.

Authority / court

Central Bank of Ireland

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Market abuse and insider dealing

Legal basis

Art. 16(2) Verordnung (EU) Nr. 596/2014 (MAR); European Union (Market Abuse) Regulations 2016 (S.I. No. 349 of 2016)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Mitigating circumstances

30% settlement discount; breach admitted.

Published

27 Feb 2025

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

Finanstilsynet (Norwegian Financial Supervisory Authority) fined Danske Bank A/S NOK 50,000,000 for market manipulation. In the syndication of a ten-year Norwegian government bond of NOK 22 billion in February 2023, whose yield was priced off the Norwegian swap rate, the bank, through its Norwegian branch, pushed the reference rate to an artificial level with interest rate swap trades concentrated around the pricing time, in a situation where it benefited from a higher yield. The fact that the bank had itself approached the supervisory authorities was taken into account as a mitigating factor.

Authority / court

Finanstilsynet

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. a MAR; § 3-1, §§ 21-1, 21-9 und 21-14 verdipapirhandelloven; § 46 forvaltningsloven

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Employees

10,000 or more

Mitigating circumstances

The bank had itself approached the supervisory authorities.

Published

22 Jan 2025

Original amount 50,000,000 NOK, converted at the ECB reference rate of 15 Jan 2025.

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

The Finanzmarktaufsicht (FMA, Liechtenstein Financial Market Authority) fined an unnamed legal person CHF 75,000 for breaching the obligations under Article 16(2) of the Market Abuse Regulation (EU) No 596/2014. The provision requires persons professionally arranging or executing transactions to maintain effective arrangements, systems and procedures to detect and report suspicious orders and transactions.

Authority / court

Finanzmarktaufsicht Liechtenstein (FMA)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Market abuse and insider dealing

Legal basis

Art. 16 Abs. 2 Verordnung (EU) Nr. 596/2014 (Marktmissbrauchsverordnung) i.V.m. Art. 10 Abs. 1 Bst. b EWR-Marktmissbrauchsverordnung-Durchführungsgesetz (EWR-MDG)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Original amount 75,000 CHF, converted at the ECB reference rate of 16 Dec 2024.

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