CFTC Fines J.P. Morgan $900,000 for Overcharging CME Traders

J.P. Morgan Securities LLC (JPMS) has agreed to pay a fine of US $900,000 to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to resolve charges that it failed to supervise its staff's handling of Exchange Exchange An exchange is known as a marketplace that supports the trading of derivatives, commodities, securities, and other financial instruments.Generally, an exchange is accessible through a digital platform or sometimes at a tangible address where investors organize to perform trading. Among the chief responsibilities of an exchange would be to uphold honest and fair-trading practices. These are instrumental in making sure that the distribution of supported security rates on that exchange are effectiv An exchange is known as a marketplace that supports the trading of derivatives, commodities, securities, and other financial instruments.Generally, an exchange is accessible through a digital platform or sometimes at a tangible address where investors organize to perform trading. Among the chief responsibilities of an exchange would be to uphold honest and fair-trading practices. These are instrumental in making sure that the distribution of supported security rates on that exchange are effectiv Read this Term fees charged to customers from 2010 through 2014.

To unlock the Asian market, register now to the iFX EXPO in Hong Kong

According to the CFTC, while J.P. Morgan was trying to enhance its exchange fee reconciliation process in 2014, the registered futures commission merchant identified that it had failed to properly supervise the processing of exchange and clearing fees it charged customers for trading CME and other exchanges’ products.

In agreeing to JPMS’ offer of settlement, the CFTC acknowledged that the firm self-reported the problem to the regulator, and had provided refunds to almost all adversely affected customers.

The CFTC claimed that during the relevant time period, JPMS did not hire qualified nor enough personnel to conduct and oversee its fee reconciliations process which was largely manual and carried out by only one employee at the end of the month. In many cases, it turned out that the firm accrued for overcharges to its customers and this led to aggregate surcharges of approximately $7.8 million.

In a press release announcing the action, the US watchdog stated that this settlement is the CFTC’s third enforcement action grounded on a clearing firm’s supervisory failures over fee processing. In August 2016, the Commission ordered Barclays Capital, Inc. to pay an $800,000 penalty relating to the processing of exchange and Clearing House Clearing House A clearing house is defined as an intermediary between two parties, a buyer and seller, which helps facilitate the overall process from trade inception to settlement. Clearing houses streamline the exchange of payments, securities, or derivatives transactions.The clearing house is situated between two clearing firms who also helps reduce the risk of either member firm failing to honor their respective trade settlement obligations.Buyers and sellers enter into legally binding agreements for the e A clearing house is defined as an intermediary between two parties, a buyer and seller, which helps facilitate the overall process from trade inception to settlement. Clearing houses streamline the exchange of payments, securities, or derivatives transactions.The clearing house is situated between two clearing firms who also helps reduce the risk of either member firm failing to honor their respective trade settlement obligations.Buyers and sellers enter into legally binding agreements for the e Read this Term fees charged to the firm’s customers. It also imposed a $1.2 million fine against Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated for similar issues back in August 2014.