Who was sanctioned, and for what?

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

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 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

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

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

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

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

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