5 ms·
They screwed up, but did they deserve the "largest penalty ever?" Established brokerage houses have gotten away with worse and paid less. Sounds an awful lot li
by rdiddly 5y ago
They screwed up, but did they deserve the "largest penalty ever?" Established brokerage houses have gotten away with worse and paid less. Sounds an awful lot like another true real-life example of the very same r/WSB David/Goliath narrative the "established" part of the industry wishes it could discredit.
- Vaslo 5y agoI have to say that I agree. I think a punishment and/or fine should have been implemented. But $70M? Where does that money go anyway?
- smeyer 5y ago>Where does that money go anyway? I believe that FINRA keeps its fines and uses it for operating expenses, which are also partially funded by annual fees paid by its members and maybe other funding sources.
- elliekelly 5y agoEgregious conduct is (and has been) punished by license revocation or revocation of FINRA membership. It may be the largest monetary fine ever levied but it certainly isn’t the harshest punishment.
- elihu 5y ago12.6 million goes to customers, according to the article. > Robinhood's resolution with FINRA includes $12.6 million in restitution to thousands of customers and a $57 million penalty, the largest in the regulator's history, and covers a range of issues dating back to September 2016, FINRA said in a statement.
- mym1990 5y agoIts so difficult to say what is going on behind closed doors when established brokerage houses get caught(or any brokerage). In many ways it makes perfect sense that an established firm is able to negotiate for more lenient penalties, much like an established lawyer might be able to negotiate for more lenient sentences.
- cwkoss 5y agoThis is a better argument for more fees on established brokerages rather than reducing this fee.
- lavezzi 5y ago> They screwed up, but did they deserve the "largest penalty ever?" Yes, and hopefully that penalty record keeps rising dramatically.