ARTICLE
29 April 2021

Trading Firm Settles NYSE Arca Charges For Net Capital Calculation Violations

CW
Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP

Contributor

Cadwalader, established in 1792, serves a diverse client base, including many of the world's leading financial institutions, funds and corporations. With offices in the United States and Europe, Cadwalader offers legal representation in antitrust, banking, corporate finance, corporate governance, executive compensation, financial restructuring, intellectual property, litigation, mergers and acquisitions, private equity, private wealth, real estate, regulation, securitization, structured finance, tax and white collar defense.
A trading firm settled NYSE Arca charges for incorrectly calculating net capital.
United States Finance and Banking

A trading firm settled NYSE Arca charges for incorrectly calculating its net capital.

In a Letter of Acceptance, Waiver, and Consent, NYSE Arca determined that the trading firm applied incorrect haircut and undue concentration deductions onto its positions at the firm's clearing firm, resulting in an overstatement of the firm's net capital. The firm also failed to notify the SEC and NYSE Arca of its net capital deficiencies. NYSE Arca determined that, among other things, the trading firm failed to create and maintain a supervisory system adequately designed to ensure compliance with the net capital and reporting requirements to which it is subject.

Primary Sources

  1. NYSE Arca AWC: Sea Otter Securities Group LLC

NYSE Arca determined that the trading firm violated Sections 15(c) ("Use of manipulative or deceptive devices; contravention of rules and regulations") and 17(a) ("Rules and regulations") of the Exchange Act, SEA Rules 15c3-1 ("Net capital requirements for brokers or dealers"), 17a-5 ("Reports to be made by certain brokers and dealers") and 17a-11 ("Notification provisions for brokers and dealers") and NYSE Arca Rules 4.1-E ("Minimum Net Capital") and 11.18 ("Supervision").

To settle the charges, the trading firm agreed to (i) a censure and (ii) a $150,000 fine.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More