FT Alphaville » Suspicious trades mar UK deals.
Suspicious trading took place before 30.6% of UK takeovers last year, the highest level in eight years, even as the UK’s markets regulator stepped up enforcement efforts, reports the FT.
And I bet if the could be uncovered 99% of those of any size would involve offshore.
That's why they involve offshore of course: so the parties can't be uncovered.
This is deliberate. Secrecy jurisdictions go out of their way to permit such abuse. Secrecy jurisdictions are places that intentionally create regulation for the primary benefit and use of those not resident in their geographical domain. That regulation is designed to undermine the legislation or regulation of another jurisdiction. To facilitate its use secrecy jurisdictions also create a deliberate, legally backed veil of secrecy that ensures that those from outside the jurisdiction making use of its regulation cannot be identified to be doing so.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
I doubt your allegations about offshore jurisdictions very much. The LSE would have the data available to establish who has been trading suspiciously and that should not stop them taking those issues further. In the last year the FSA has recently started to get insider convictions when in the previous fifteen years there were about ten (if my memory serves me right). Between 2002 and 2008 there were over fifteen hundred suspicious transactions reported to the FSA yet hardly any convictions. Sounds to me as if the FSA have limited resources or had little appetite to chase insider dealing.
Most decent jurisdictions have insider dealing laws. So it would be quite easy for the FSA or SFO or whoever, to obtain information outside of the UK to help them get convictions. As far as I am aware, there is no evidence to suggest that offshore jurisdictions are actively involved in insider trading. There is much evidence to suggest that those working in the City for example are involved.
@JohnBuckles
” Most decent jurisdictions have insider dealing laws. ”
But do they ever apply them?
Show me the cases
If they were presented with information from a recognised stock exchange that suggested that insider dealing had originated from their jurisdiction they would have to act.