Financial Regulatory Forum

SEC’s boardroom bombshell: directors can be costly

By Guest Contributor
March 4, 2011

Traders work in the Goldman Sachs stall on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange July 16, 2010.  REUTERS/Brendan McDermidNEW YORK, March 4 (Westlaw Business) Being an insider with a fiduciary duty sure is risky, as heavyweight Rajat Gupta is now finding out amidst serious SEC charges. So is having board members, as Goldman Sachs and Procter and Gamble are now worrying. Of great concern to each are the reputational risks and attendant costs that this might impose on them. The potential risks could relate to a broad range of issues, ranging from inside information, to disclosure of SEC investigation and board member protection. Though this likelihood may seem remote, recent experiences from Bank of America to Goldman Sachs itself show them to be painfully possible.

Reputation risk may outweigh fines in UK financial regulator enforcements (Complinet)

By Guest Contributor
January 28, 2011

A man is seen behind the entrance door of the offices of the Financial Services Authority (FSA) in Canary Wharf, London, November 19, 2010By Joanne Wallen (Complinet)

Jan. 25 – British firms continue to be referred to enforcement despite the best intentions of the Financial Services Authority’s thematic reviews and credible deterrence strategies. On the one hand it looks as though the risks are considered to be worth taking. On the other, reputational damage and loss of trust for the whole industry are at stake.