Examkin

Question

Difficulty: Very hardProhibited Market Manipulation and Fraudulent Practices

An institutional trader colludes with two external accounts to simultaneously execute offsetting buy and sell limit orders for identical quantities of a thinly traded corporate bond at progressively higher prices. The transactions involve no change in market risk exposure for the combined group, but create the artificial impression of heightened trading volume and liquidity to attract public buyers. During an internal compliance review, a junior analyst asserts that FINRA can directly bring criminal charges and imprison the participants for this conduct. Which of the following statements correctly identifies the prohibited trading practice and the legal boundaries of FINRA's enforcement authority?

  1. The conduct constitutes matched orders intended to manipulate market price and volume; FINRA cannot bring criminal charges or impose imprisonment, as criminal prosecutions must be referred to federal or state authorities such as the Department of Justice.Answer
  2. B
    The conduct constitutes spoofing because non-bona fide orders were entered into the public order book, and FINRA possesses statutory federal authority to independently prosecute criminal securities fraud in federal district court.
  3. C
    The conduct constitutes wash trading because multiple distinct legal entities were utilized, and FINRA exercises dealer authority to issue criminal penalties whenever market integrity is compromised.
  4. D
    The conduct constitutes authorized market-making price discovery, and FINRA holds exclusive federal jurisdiction to bring both civil injunctions and criminal indictments against registered representatives.

Answer

The conduct constitutes matched orders intended to manipulate market price and volume; FINRA cannot bring criminal charges or impose imprisonment, as criminal prosecutions must be referred to federal or state authorities such as the Department of Justice.
The correct response accurately identifies the collusive prearranged transactions as matched orders (a prohibited market manipulation tactic) and correctly specifies that FINRA, as a Self-Regulatory Organization (SRO), lacks criminal jurisdiction to prosecute individuals or impose criminal penalties like imprisonment. Criminal violations must be referred to governmental authorities such as the Department of Justice.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the trading behavior depicted in the scenario.
The trader and external accounts coordinate to simultaneously enter prearranged buy and sell limit orders of equal size and price to generate artificial volume and push prices up.
This specific form of collusive manipulation is defined as matched orders (or 'painting the tape'), distinct from wash sales (single beneficial owner) or spoofing (entering non-bona fide orders intended for cancellation prior to execution).
2
Evaluate the regulatory authority and jurisdiction of FINRA.
FINRA is a Self-Regulatory Organization (SRO) overseen by the SEC. It has administrative authority to discipline member firms and associated persons through fines, censures, suspensions, and bars.
SROs do not have criminal law enforcement powers. Criminal charges, indictments, and prison sentences can only be sought by governmental bodies such as the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) or state prosecutors.
3
Synthesize the correct identification of the practice and jurisdiction.
The activity is matched orders, and FINRA lacks criminal prosecution powers.
Combining accurate definition of the prohibited manipulative scheme with correct understanding of SRO jurisdictional limits yields the single correct evaluation.

Key Concept

Matched Orders and SRO Regulatory Authority Limits
Rate this question

Topics

Prohibited Market Manipulation and Fraudulent Practices