Banner

General

By Martin Kelly
 
UK Bank Standard Chartered has been forced to pay $340 million in an effort at keeping its US licence.
 
The penalty, which works out at £217m, follows allegations that the bank had behaved like a “rogue institution” after US regulators accused it of attempting to hide deals worth 250 billion dollars with the sanction hit regime in Iran.

New York State Department of Financial Services (NYSDFS) accused the London-based banking group of concealing 60,000 transactions with Iranian clients, including the Central Bank of Iran, from 2001 to 2010.

The department says there is also evidence of similar schemes to conduct business with other US-sanctioned countries such as Libya, Myanmar (Burma) and Sudan.

The penalty will also see officials from the NYSDFS monitor the UK bank to ensure its transactions comply with US regulations.

Benjamin Lawsky, New York Superintendent of Financial Services, issued a statement saying: "The New York State Department of Financial Services and Standard Chartered Bank have reached an agreement to settle the matters raised in the DFS Order dated August 6, 2012.

"The parties have agreed that the conduct at issue involved transactions of at least $250bn."

Last week Lawsky had described the bank as a “rogue institution” for breaking US sanction laws.

Had no deal been agreed then the bank faced losing its New York trading licence.  The announcement of a deal follows calls last week by Chancellor George Osborne to US treasury secretary Timothy Geithner.

The Standard Chartered fine brings to $1 billion the total fines paid by UK banks after investigations by US regulators.

In 2010, Barclays Plc paid $298 million after US regulators found it had broken rules in deals with Iran, Cuba, Libya, Myanmar and Sudan.  In 2009, Lloyds TSB agreed to pay a $350m fine to US regulators over transactions illegally conducted on behalf of customers from Iran and Sudan.

Comments  

 
# chicmac 2012-08-14 23:55
That's nothing. Barclays is about to be sued for billions and other British banks will be hit too.

money.cnn.com/.../index.htm

Such is the 'special' relationship.

The US did a sidestep 3 years ago leaving London as the World's 'No 1' financial centre.

Those who mindlessly mantra 'Special relationship' when speaking of US/UK relations should carefully consider what Americans really mean when they describe someone as 'Special'.

Mind you Barclays may have 'cut a deal' or 'turned queens evidence' to save their skins again.

dailymail.co.uk/.../...

They do seem to be the anointed untouchables of English banking.

Remember when they were allowed to clandestinely borrow billions from the Middle East during the bank cash flow crisis and were allowed to keep their heads below the parapets when the great RBS commercial piracy rip off took place?
 
 
# rapid 2012-08-15 09:24
I wonder if this has happened because Bob Diamond was to take Barclays to New York - now he's gone it is staying in the UK... i.e. they wouldn't dream of fining Barclays if it was about to move to the US
 
 
# J Wil 2012-08-15 01:03
Standard Chartered refuted the numbers of transactions claimed by the US authorities, saying it was much less. What happened to that? Who was right?
 
 
# cirsium 2012-08-15 23:02
jwil - that was Standard Chartered's negotiating position. The bank has now agreed with B Lawsky that the transactions covered at least 250 billion dollars see Standard Chartered bank admits Promontorys estimates of its Iran business were wrong.
nakedcapitalism.com/.../...
 
 
# Silverytay 2012-08-15 07:49
While I think that the u.s is playing double standards over the banks , I do think that the banking scandal could drive more people into the yes camp .
The more that people see that westminster is not prepared to tackle the corruption and greed of the banks ! the more the people will look for an alternative especially when they are suffering due to the cuts .
There is only one way to cut out the cancer that is at the heart of westminster and the city of london and that is by voting yes in 2014 .
 
 
# red kite 2012-08-15 07:55
Let's not forget that they're not accused of anything "illegal". The way I understand it, they operated within the laws that applied in the areas where they operated. The problem stems from the US demanding that foreigners in other countries operate under US laws, in this case US laws which were designed to attack Iranian interests.
 
 
# cynicalHighlander 2012-08-15 12:20
Comment: golemxiv.co.uk/.../...

Quote:
These are just snapshots from the past five years. Some big headlines have already been forgotten – did that minnow Northern Rock really cost us £24bn? – as the political appetite for reform has faded. We are still supposed to talk of customers “hoodwinked”, of products “mis-sold”, “mistakes” made and “failings” regretted. Yet in any other context banking’s record over the past five years would be described as a criminal conspiracy exposed.
 

You must be logged-in in order to post a comment.

Banner
Banner

Donate to Newsnet Scotland

Latest Comments