金融市场操纵法的执行:国际制裁比较

Lev Bromberg, G. Gilligan, I. Ramsay
{"title":"金融市场操纵法的执行:国际制裁比较","authors":"Lev Bromberg, G. Gilligan, I. Ramsay","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2852142","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Market manipulation has been a significant focus of regulators, the media and others in many countries, with widespread allegations of market manipulation, not just relating to securities, but in relation to interest rates, foreign exchange and commodities. This working paper presents the results of a detailed comparative empirical study of sanctions imposed for trade-based market manipulation in Australia, Canada (Ontario), Hong Kong, Singapore and the United Kingdom (UK). The comparative study is based on a dataset of around 250 sanctions imposed on individuals and companies found or alleged to have contravened market manipulation provisions across the jurisdictions. The study compares the type, magnitude and frequency of sanctions (custodial sentences, banning orders and various pecuniary sanctions) imposed by statutory bodies and the courts for market manipulation in the selected jurisdictions in the ten year period from 1 January 2006 to 31 December 2015. The study also examines pecuniary sanctions imposed relative to illegal profits obtained by the defendants. Key findings include substantial differences between the jurisdictions in the use of sanctions, with much higher use of custodial sentences in Hong Kong, Singapore and Australia, much higher use of banning orders in Ontario and the UK imposing the highest median pecuniary sanctions.","PeriodicalId":114900,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Corporate Governance International (Topic)","volume":"64 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Enforcement of Financial Market Manipulation Laws: An International Comparison of Sanctions\",\"authors\":\"Lev Bromberg, G. Gilligan, I. Ramsay\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.2852142\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Market manipulation has been a significant focus of regulators, the media and others in many countries, with widespread allegations of market manipulation, not just relating to securities, but in relation to interest rates, foreign exchange and commodities. This working paper presents the results of a detailed comparative empirical study of sanctions imposed for trade-based market manipulation in Australia, Canada (Ontario), Hong Kong, Singapore and the United Kingdom (UK). The comparative study is based on a dataset of around 250 sanctions imposed on individuals and companies found or alleged to have contravened market manipulation provisions across the jurisdictions. The study compares the type, magnitude and frequency of sanctions (custodial sentences, banning orders and various pecuniary sanctions) imposed by statutory bodies and the courts for market manipulation in the selected jurisdictions in the ten year period from 1 January 2006 to 31 December 2015. The study also examines pecuniary sanctions imposed relative to illegal profits obtained by the defendants. Key findings include substantial differences between the jurisdictions in the use of sanctions, with much higher use of custodial sentences in Hong Kong, Singapore and Australia, much higher use of banning orders in Ontario and the UK imposing the highest median pecuniary sanctions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":114900,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"LSN: Corporate Governance International (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"64 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-08-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"LSN: Corporate Governance International (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2852142\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSN: Corporate Governance International (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2852142","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

市场操纵一直是许多国家监管机构、媒体和其他方面关注的焦点,对市场操纵的指控广泛存在,不仅涉及证券,还涉及利率、外汇和大宗商品。本工作文件介绍了对澳大利亚、加拿大(安大略省)、香港、新加坡和英国(联合王国)对基于贸易的市场操纵实施制裁的详细比较实证研究的结果。这项比较研究基于一个数据集,该数据集包含了各国对被发现或涉嫌违反市场操纵规定的个人和公司实施的约250项制裁。该研究比较了在2006年1月1日至2015年12月31日的十年间,在选定的司法管辖区,法定机构和法院对市场操纵行为实施的制裁(监禁判决、禁制令和各种金钱制裁)的类型、规模和频率。该研究还审查了对被告获得的非法利润实施的经济制裁。主要发现包括,不同司法管辖区在使用制裁方面存在巨大差异,香港、新加坡和澳大利亚使用监禁判决的比例要高得多,安大略省使用禁令的比例要高得多,而英国实施的经济制裁中位数最高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Enforcement of Financial Market Manipulation Laws: An International Comparison of Sanctions
Market manipulation has been a significant focus of regulators, the media and others in many countries, with widespread allegations of market manipulation, not just relating to securities, but in relation to interest rates, foreign exchange and commodities. This working paper presents the results of a detailed comparative empirical study of sanctions imposed for trade-based market manipulation in Australia, Canada (Ontario), Hong Kong, Singapore and the United Kingdom (UK). The comparative study is based on a dataset of around 250 sanctions imposed on individuals and companies found or alleged to have contravened market manipulation provisions across the jurisdictions. The study compares the type, magnitude and frequency of sanctions (custodial sentences, banning orders and various pecuniary sanctions) imposed by statutory bodies and the courts for market manipulation in the selected jurisdictions in the ten year period from 1 January 2006 to 31 December 2015. The study also examines pecuniary sanctions imposed relative to illegal profits obtained by the defendants. Key findings include substantial differences between the jurisdictions in the use of sanctions, with much higher use of custodial sentences in Hong Kong, Singapore and Australia, much higher use of banning orders in Ontario and the UK imposing the highest median pecuniary sanctions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信