An irreverent Wall Street Blog
by Bill Singer
Join BrokeAndBroker blog on Facebook  Follow the BrokeAndBroker blog on Twitter  Connect with BrokeAndBroker on LinkedIn  Join Bill Singer on Google+  Subscribe to RSS Feed

The Antitrust Division's Dangerous Bluff with LIBOR
Written: April 25, 2011

The London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) is the rate that banks in the London wholesale money-market reference when lending unsecured money to other banks. Essentially the mathematical mean of interbank deposit rates (for overnight to one-year maturities) offered by designated contributor banks, LIBOR is calculated daily by Thomson Reuters on behalf of the British Bankers Association (“BBA”).

LIBOR is calculated for 10 currencies and each currency has a panel that comprises 8 to 16 participating contributor banks. Far beyond some esoteric computation, LIBOR has emerged into a powerful force in international commerce because it permits some standardization of lending activities among international banks.

Gilani’s Warnings

In 2008, Shah Gilani (author of the popular Forbes financial column What Moves Markets) published his prescient commentary: Fears of Mortgage Rate Re-Sets May Fuel Libor Manipulation and Mask Deeper Banking Problems (“Money Morning” October 23, 2008). In that article, Gilani was among the earliest proponents of the theory that the contributing banks may have rigged the calculation of LIBOR. Gilani warned that such activities were likely antitrust violations and were exposing major international banks to legal liability.

The cursed Trojan prophet Laocoon’s warnings about the Trojan Horse were ignored with calamitous consequence. With the LIBOR antitrust story looming on the horizon, we would do well to re-consider the alarms that Gilani raised some three years ago:

That brings us to the current problem in the LIBOR market: As Money Morning has previously reported, there’s substantial evidence that LIBOR is being “managed.” This has been happening and the BBA is actively looking into it. In fact, several months ago, when the BBA announced it was speeding up its probe, LIBOR jumped.

The dollar LIBOR rate, or “fixing,” as it is known, is calculated based on the submission of quotes from 16 major world banks. The banks send in data as to what they paid, or could pay, to borrow from other banks at each maturity level. Reuters throws out the four highest and four lowest quotes, and calculates the average of the eight that remain to come up with the dollar LIBOR fixing.

[S]ince the submitting banks providing data to Reuters are on the “honor system,” maybe this institution has an incentive to not submit its actual borrowing costs? Maybe this bank submits rates at which it could borrow – which it is permitted to do, by definition, under the submitting rules – if those rates are lower by virtue of only being a quote it received?

Maybe this bank – and the rest of its brethren – would like to keep LIBOR lower than the interbank rate should actually be, realizing that if rates rise, bad-loan exposure increases. And if bad-loan exposure increases, derivative exposure will escalate, too. What if U.S. ARM re-sets (based on LIBOR) bump up the interest-rate charges that already-strapped homeowners have to pay? What will more foreclosures do to already-battered bank balance sheets?

Told You So!

On April 20, 2011, Gilani’s What Moves Markets column began with these ominous words concerning the potential impact of a LIBOR antitrust investigation:

This might be the beginning of the end for some too-big-to-fail banks.

In a recent Forbes column: Antitrust Criminal Charges Threaten Survival of Big Banks, Gilani informed us that the Department of Justice’s (“DOJ”) Antitrust Division is investigating whether as many as 16 major banks colluded from 2006 through 2008 as part of a scheme to manipulate LIBOR. Gilani adds further fuel to the fire with his ruminations about follow-on civil suits — particularly class actions. All of which begs the question:

If the Antitrust Division fires the first salvo against alleged rate fixing and anti-competitive activities, how serious a threat would such a warning shot pose to the banking community?

Past as Prologue

In 1996, the Antitrust Division had the chance to prosecute a major criminal case against the leading NASDAQ market makers. At the time, the Division had a strong case replete with tape recordings showing markets makers colluding to artificially maintain the spread and threaten other participants who sought to break that so-called pricing convention.

Despite a strong case, the Division inexplicably opted for a civil lawsuit and then chose the dubious convenience of a settlement. I would say “inexplicably opted” because given the impressive nature of the evidence that had been amassed, there seemed little reason for not taking the market makers out to the woodshed and sending an historic message to Wall Street about where it needed to draw the line in terms of double-dealing with the investing public.

However, I am too old and far too veteran a regulatory lawyer to pretend that I don’t comprehend why the case went “civil.” Big Business. Politics. Those words say it all. I decried the Antitrust Division’s disgraceful retreat some 15 years ago and continue to point to that decision as a watershed moment that was squandered with horrendous consequences.

SIDE BAR: One can only wonder whether the filing of criminal charges in 1996 against some or all of the 24 NASDAQ firms named in the Antitrust Division’s civil suit would have prevented the excesses in the subsequent decade that ultimately led us to the brink of catastrophe and the Great Recession. For those of you who forgot the names of those antitrust defendants, let this serve as a refresher:

Alex. Brown & Sons Inc.
Bear, Stearns & Co. Inc.
CS First Boston Corp.
Dean Witter Reynolds Inc.
Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette Securities Corp.
Furman Selz LLC
Goldman, Sachs & Co.
Hambrecht & Quist LLC
Herzog, Heine, Geduld Inc.
J.P. Morgan Securities Inc.
Lehman Brothers Inc.
Mayer & Schweitzer Inc.
Merrill, Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc.
Morgan Stanley & Co. Inc.
Nash, Weiss & Co.
OLDE Discount Corp.
PaineWebber Inc.
Piper Jaffray Inc.
Prudential Securities Inc.
Saloman Brothers Inc.
Sherwood Securities Corp.
Smith Barney Inc.
Spear, Leeds & Kellogg LP (Troster Singer)
UBS Securities LLC

The Obama Antitrust Initiative

Shortly after the last presidential election, the Obama Administration announced its much ballyhooed effort to enhance the enforcement efforts of the DOJ’s Antitrust Division, which had become moribund under the Bush Administration. The 2009 appointment by Obama of lobbyist, fundraiser, and high-profile corporate lawyer Christine Varney was meant to underscore the administration’s purported commitment to revitalizing the nation’s antitrust laws.

Varney, whose credentials included heading up the law firm of Hogan & Hartson’s Internet practice, a stint as a commissioner on the Federal Trade Commission, and a role in the Clinton administration, promised to follow through on her mandate. As always, there was a lot of tough talk and the attendant appointment of new Antitrust Division management and staff. Whether motivated by the desire to foster competition in our hobbled economy or by personal desires for headlines, the initial flurry of activity from the Antitrust Division was impressive. However, the political landscape is littered with the carcasses of overly ambitious appointees whose reach exceeded their grasp.

Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes

In 2011, the Antitrust Division appears overwhelmed by its Municipal Bond cases, the Google investigation, health care initiatives, the mega-mergers of the private sector, and the contentious status of the New York Stock Exchange’s possible acquisition. Moreover, the historic internecine combat among the Antitrust Division, local U.S. Attorneys’ offices, and the Federal Trade Commission has exacerbated antitrust enforcement amidst overlapping laws and jurisdictions. In the end, such infighting over turf and headlines is enervating to the respective staffs and does a disservice to taxpayers who lose the economies of scale that prudent mergers of jurisdiction and staffs would otherwise accomplish.

The Antitrust Division’s financial and manpower resources are straining under the weight of many, perhaps too many, investigations and cases. Within the last year, there have been numerous retirements and resignations (if not demotions) of veteran staff, in part fueled by a mixture of early buyouts, new managerial policies, and workplace disputes. The rumored closure of the Division’s Philadelphia and Cleveland field offices have sent shudders through those staffs and further fueled uncertainty in the ranks. Similarly, the Municipal Bond cases appear to have monopolized much of the Division’s time and energy. Frankly, from a morale standpoint, this may be an historic nadir for the Antitrust Division and there seems little prospect of improvement.

As such, while it’s interesting to read of the Antitrust Division’s newly found focus on LIBOR, the reality of things suggests that the Division’s rank-and-file is demoralized by bureaucratic micro-management. Additionally, the present political environment is demanding pay freezes, staffing reductions, and a smaller government footprint — all of which raise questions about how the Division intends to accomplish is ambitious agenda. Taking on yet another high-profile case may be the equivalent of opening the Antitrust Division’s doors to a destructive Trojan Horse.

Assistant Attorney General Varney has shown a penchant for starting many wars, but it’s doubtful that she retains the troop strength and morale necessary to effectively wage all the necessary battles. Of course, with a new presidential election season underway, who knows whether Varney’s eye is already on greener pastures — be that a return to her former political/fund raising role on behalf of the Democratic re-election effort, or a return to the more comfortable quarters of private practice.

Notwithstanding the legitimate concerns raised by Shah Gilani and other Wall Street commentators, there are serious questions as to whether the Antitrust Division is spread too thin to take on yet another high-profile case — and there are also equally valid concerns as to the political will in the White House and Congress to support and sustain a battle with the banks. Much like the state of the US military that is unwilling to open yet another front in Libya or elsewhere, it’s questionable as to whether the Antitrust Division can shift its remaining troops and weapons from one theater of operations to another without negative consequences.


Previous Entries
May 22, 2015
One, and only one, Securities and Exchange Commissioner got it right. To her ever-lasting credit and to the shame of her colleagues, Commissioner Kara... Read On
May 21, 2015
Yesterday, I tried to predict the future. A few hours before the United States Department of Justice announced its settlement with JPMorgan Chase, Cit... Read On
May 20, 2015
It is now 8:30 a.m. EDT on May 20, 2015 and I am posting this Blog without much enthusiasm – I think the fancy French word for ho... Read On
May 19, 2015
Stockbroker, Compliance, Legal, and Regulatory JobsEmployment Jobs#wallstreetjobs@brokeandbrokerNOTICE TO EMPLOYERS: BrokeAndBr... Read On
May 18, 2015
The United State Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ("9Cir") affirmed the Central District of California's ("CDCA's") judgment in a clas... Read On
May 18, 2015
There comes a point in a registered representative's career when it may simply be time to move on. For many reps who decide to relocate, the questions... Read On
May 16, 2015
Polygraph Expert Says It Ain't Lying, It's NervousnessDouglas Williams, the owner of and a former Oklahoma City law enfor... Read On
May 15, 2015
Permit me to introduce you to Douglas Williams, the owner of Instead of writing a lengthy introduction about Mr. Williams, how about ... Read On
May 15, 2015
Today is a sad day for all guitar players, particularly those of us who started playing in the '60s. The legendary BB King has died. Eric Clapton perf... Read On Job Search

Related Topics
Tag Cloud
Internet FINRA Bear Stearns Bloomberg SEC NASD NYSE Money Laundering Due Diligence Waiver Forbes China Broy Woody Allen Madoff NAC NPR Marketplace Stanford UBS Ketchum Antitrust NASDAQ RRBDLAW Schapiro Bill Singer BrokerAndBroker USERRA Morgan Keegan Arbitration Counterclaim Khuzami BrokeAndBroker Aleynikov Goldman Sachs brokeandbroker Promissory Note U4 Bill SInger EFL CFTC Huffington Post Flash Crash arbitration RBC Ponzi Affinity Fraud Wachovia Criminal Raymond James Expungement Fraud Securities Fraud Outside Business Activity Registered Rep Magazine FOREX FBI Banc of America Pro Se PCAOB Supreme Court Morgan Stanley Smith Barney E*Trade Margin email Galleon Penson U5 Defamation Protocol Wells Fargo Punitive Damages Citigroup Merrill Lynch ARS Employee Forgivable Loan Street Legal Morgan Stanley AWC Fidelity Bankruptcy Broke And Broker HFT David Sobel Day Trading Ameriprise Commissions Spouse Schwab Commission CRD Kenneth Starr IRS CNBC Complaint ATM Skimming Hacking Phishing Malware Naskovets Poteroba Koval Lincoln Financial Selling Away Outside Business Activities Rakoff 2nd Circuit Second Circuit IRA 401k Forgery Tax Email Netschi Moore Whistleblower Street Sweeper Countrywide Tran Bharara Facebook Online Severance Bonus Eligibility Rule TD Ameritrade Hedge Fund SAC 1099 Smith Barney Lehman Brothers SIPC IC3 Scottrade Lehman JPMorgan Chase Hertz Insider Trading Bank of America Department of Justice Elles Bribe Auction Rate Securities Raiding Spam Edward Jones Medicare Diabetes Dow Schumer Thain Walter Bid Rigging Real Estate Discrimination Wall Street Statutory Disqualification Form U4 Form U5 Indictment Boyland DOJ Corruption bill singer FTC Do Not Call FINRA Arbitration Costa Rica Settlement LIBOR Varney Plea Rule 8210 Eligibility RRBDlaw 8210 Appeal Fowler LPL Johnson Cellphone US Airways JPM BrokeandBroker Reg D MSSB Vault Loan SunTrust Discovery Employment Rosenthal Recruiting Lawyer Trading Platform JP Morgan Employment Tuesday Wrongful Termination Bank Guarantee WaMu Solicitation REIT Martin Credit Cards Rule 3050 Away Account Credit Repair PN Advisor Placement Group Fifth Amendment Forex Mortgage Private Placement Moon CGMI Failure to Supervise Merrill Anderson Exam Lee Borrowing Tax Lien Conversion Oppenheimer Wedbush Felony Misdemeanor Expenses ING Lien OTR Estate Jobs Florida Credit Card Elderly Flash Drive Annuity Expense Reimbursement FNMA BrokeAndBroke TIC DWI Promissory Notes Suitability Will POA Power of Attorney Casino NSF MF Global Counterfeit Preet Bharara Corzine Hacker Deferred Compensation RIA Prison Disclosure NASAA Aguilar FCPA Subway Testimony Identity Theft Gold Dell Bar Injunction Bank Deutsche Bank Hospital Due Process God HSBC Private Placements Eric Stein Wire Fraud FINOP CCO Compliance Audit Joshua Brown Backstage Wall Street Obstruction of Justice Reuters Retaliation Variable Annuity Arbitraiton Outside Account Options Telephone Wine Series 7 Social Media ADA Pacifico Non-Prosecution Agreement Confirm Tax Fraud Retirement OBA Equity Indexed Annuities EIA Disability MetLife Continuing Education Cheating OIP Tax Liens Willful CE Unregistered Impersonation Annuities BBVA Business Expenses ETF JOBS Act Mail Fraud Parking Variable Annuities Signatures BitTorrent Impersonator Wire Transfer Wire Crowdfunding Nasdaq Away Accounts WSP Laptop Dodd Frank Checks RMBS AML PST Solicited Unsolicited Congress SRO Password Wife Discretion Non-Solicitation Restaurant Commodities Private Securities Transaction Offer of Settlement Money Market employment jobs Great Recession Chase Investment Services Arrest Barclays Liens Failure To Supervise Apple Time And Price T&P Willfully Husband Letter of Authorization LOA Sexism Debit Card Knight Test Practice Sale Unfair Competition Signature Judgments Undisclosed Settlement Trainee Fee Trust Laser Side Bar Mattera Female Sales Assistant Kennedy Charge Sexist NML Argentina Embezzlement Silver Investor Alert Evidence Judgment Bank Fraud Deceased Bill Singer BrokeAndBroker TSSB OHO Leveraged ETF Mary Jo White Trustee Motion To Dismiss Frumento Conspiracy 6th Circuit Proctor Commissioner Stein Rule 3040 Customer Files Class Action Beneficiary NYAG Schneiderman 11th Circuit Insurance Gallagher White Self Regulation Short Sale Compromise Website Rule 2010 Check TRO Supervision Vacatur Remand SDNY Rule 12206 BrokeAndBroker Bill Singer Piwowar Stifel Rule 1122 Article V signature Confidential Inside Information Reg SP VA Regulation SP Fees Cease And Desist Customer Rule 3270 Rule 3240 Annual Compliance Questionnaire OWB 2Cir Red Flags Payroll Stockbrokers ALJ Cybercrime Loans BrokerCheck Altered Records
Email Bill Singer Connect with Bill Singer on Facebook Follow Bill Singer on Twitter Link up with Bill Singer on LinkedIn Join Bill Singer on Google+