Baltimore Man Conducted 'Naked' Short Selling Worth Billions SEC Charges Five in OptionsXpress Naked Short Sales UBS Fined $12 Million Over Short-Selling
Share

Whistleblowing: Naked Short Selling

<a data-cke-saved-href="https://secure.blueoctane.net/forms/2DUM40796GMQ" href="https://secure.blueoctane.net/forms/2DUM40796GMQ">Click Here To Load This Formexperts.com Form</a>

 

In screening whistleblower claims seeking awards from the SEC under the Dodd Frank Act, the firm has given special attention to complainants who have solid evidence of naked short selling. As discussed below, these cases appear to have a better chance of triggering an SEC Enforcement case and thus a substantial whistleblower award.

Until the fall of 2008, the SEC and the media had been skeptical of claims by public companies that naked short sales had caused sharp drops in their stock prices. The skepticism seemed reasonable, since public companies—other than prime brokerage firms—rarely had access to the trading records necessary to prove their claims.

The SEC’s skepticism quickly faded in the fall of 2008 when the CEOs of Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley complained to the SEC that naked short selling was causing the collapse of their stock prices and thus deepening the financial crisis. Unlike other public companies, these investment banks had access to trading records and were likely aware of the mechanisms used by sophisticated traders to conceal naked short sales.

The SEC’s response included the issuance of a rule (Rule 204T), which was supposed to close the regulatory gaps that concealed the naked short selling. Eleven months later, the SEC filed the first of nine cases alleging naked short selling and other violations of Regulation SHO against brokers, hedge funds, and their executives. Uncovering the naked short sales in most of these cases was not easy: they were cleverly concealed by complicated options strategies. 

Rule 204T has only been partially successful. Naked short sales continue to ravage stock prices. A recent settlement between FINRA and UBS tells how UBS continued to violate Regulation SHO for 27 months after Rule 204T went into effect. Trading records often demonstrate scenarios that imply naked short selling, but provide no clues of the identity of the perpetrators.

These circumstances create unique opportunities for a whistleblower who has hard evidence that any person or institution is engaged in naked short selling or is helping others conceal these trades from detection. The Dodd Frank Act provides that a whistleblower “who voluntarily provided original information to the [SEC] that led to the successful enforcement” case may be awarded between 10% and 30% of the amount recovered by the SEC.

The Dodd-Frank Act and SEC regulations are designed to protect whistleblowers in multiple ways. To begin with, SEC regulations prohibit an employer from taking “any action to impede an individual from communicating directly with the Commission staff about a possible securities law violation, including enforcing, or threatening to enforce, a confidentiality agreement.”  SEC regulations also allow a whistleblower’s identity to remain anonymous when the complaint is filed, if he or she is represented by counsel. However, the identity of the whistleblower must be disclosed before the monetary award is made. 

The size of the recoveries—which sets the range of possible whistleblower awards—seems to be on the upswing. The SEC imposed a fine against UBS in 2011 for $8 million for violations of Regulation SHO. In 2012, the SEC ordered two brothers and their company to pay $14.5 million in connection with naked short sales and violations of Regulation SHO. A potentially larger case is currently under submission, In re OptionsXpress, 2012 SEC LEXIS 1222 (SEC 2012), in which a subsidiary of Schwab allegedly participated in billions of dollars of naked short sales.

 


Mr. Aguirre primarily assists clients throughout California including San Diego, Santa Clara, San Francisco, Fresno, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Alameda, Kern and Orange Counties with investor and whistleblower claims involving banks, hedge funds, mutual funds, private equity funds, brokers, and other financial institutions. He focuses on claims arising out of market abuse (e.g., market manipulation, high frequency trading, insider trading, naked shorting), investment fraud, bribes to foreign officials under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) and the filing of false claims under federal or California law (qui tam statutes). Mr. Aguirre may represent individuals and institutions pro hac vice (in a particular case) in most states, but must first obtain the approval of the forum court, which has been routinely granted in the past. He will also assist individuals from any state or country who seek an award from the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) or the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) under their whistleblower incentive programs.



© 2017 Aguirre Law, APC | Disclaimer
501 W. Broadway, Suite 800, San Diego, CA 92101
| Phone: 619-400-4960

About the Firm | Aguirre Bio | Practice Areas | News & Events | Disclaimer | Locations

Law Firm Website Design
By Zola Creative