The allegations relate to Westpac’s role in executing a $12 billion interest rate swap transaction with a consortium of AustralianSuper and a group of IFM entities. The transaction occurred in 2016 and was associated with the privatization of a majority stake in AusGrid by the NSW Government.
ASIC alleges that Westpac knew or believed it would be selected by the consortium to execute the interest rate swap and that this was inside information.
“When the market opened at 8:30am, whilst in possession of the alleged inside information, Westpac’s traders acquired and disposed of interest rate derivative products in order to pre-position Westpac in anticipation of the execution of the swap transaction,” ASIC said.
“ASIC alleges that Westpac’s trading occurred while it was in possession of information that was not generally available to other market participants including those that traded with Westpac that morning. Prohibitions against insider trading are a fundamental tenet of market integrity.”
ASIC is seeking declarations and pecuniary penalties for Westpac’s alleged contraventions of the Corporations Act. Westpac acknowledged the proceedings and said that it was “considering its position”.
And will Westpac be banned for several years and not allowed to provide financial services? NO. Would an Adviser be banned for not providing a document to a client that causes no detriment whatsoever, or for having a different opinion as to what methodology to use when calculating recommended strategies for clients? YES.
Westpac cost Industry Super some money – so Industry Super sends it their dogs ie ASIC to seek revenge?
Apply the law of Dover!
Wonder if ASIC is investigating AustralianSuper and a group of IFM entities for any reverse insider trading activities? Betting they haven’t even attempted to see if they did, given they’re ASIC’s golden haired children…
Obviously it is only Financial Advisers and Stockbrokers who are unethical and need to pay to do the FASEA ethics course as all the wrongdoings uncovered in the “BANKING royal commission” were related to Financial Advisers and not banking executives/banking call centres. A small (tax deductible) contribution to a charity of the banks choice will be sufficient if a banker ever steps out of line. You wouldnt ever want to hold any bankers personally responsible for their crimes. Punishing a banker, that would be unethical
Also it makes total sense for Financial Advisers to have their ASIC fees double every year because its probably their fault that the banks keep acting unethically. Maybe we chould also make all Risk Advisers get a PHD in Medicine too as they are asking questions pertaining to a client’s medical history.
Another $1,000 / Adviser to next years ASIC Adviser Levy.
Cant wait for the fine to go to consolidated revenue whilst Advisers are used as ASIC’s personal legal funders, just with zero % returned on cases won. FFFFFFFFFAAAAAAAAAAA###########KKKKKKKKKKKKKK Off ASIC.
Guess our regulatory fees will be nearer to $10,000 a year now…