Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Insider trading unethical
Effects of illegal insider trading
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Insider trading unethical
The term “insider trading” is defined by the Black’s Law Dictionary as -“The use of material non public information in trading the shares of the company by a corporate insider or any other person who owes a fiduciary duty to the company.”
Insider trading can be subjected to many definitions and connotations and it encompasses both legal and prohibited activity. Insider trading takes place legally every day, when corporate insiders – officers, directors or employees – buy or sell stock in their own companies within the confines of company policy and the regulations governing this trading.
Trading becomes illegal if any insider in a company having the price sensitive or any confidential information uses it to buy or sell its securities thus
…show more content…
The extent and severity of the abuse and penalties vary wildly from country to country. Trading of shares of a company by any person who is considered to be an insider, does not amount to disobedience of law just like that. Considering an illustration where an investigative reporter has interviewed any insider and by that he gets access to some inside information by his determination in revealing a corporate fraud and disclose the fraud. The future actions of any person can result in the creation of inside information like when a person has to bid in a tender offer coming in future, he knows by his actions that the price of the target company will …show more content…
Trading restrictions: This amounts to restricting the insiders from trading within a certain period of time i.e. prior to the corporate announcements, buybacks etc. The insiders are restricted to trade in securities for certain definite time periods whether directly or indirectly for the purpose of preventing them for making personal gains and benefit from the material information which they possess. Even after the information is made public, they could be restricted to trade in the securities for a certain period of time and the trading window is remained close for them for such span of time. By this measure it is ensured that the material information which could act as an advantage for the insiders is first effectively disclosed to public. Even a stricter measure would be to make it mandatory for the insiders to trade in the securities only through a particular trading window which is monitored and managed by the company or the stock
Jeffery Archer is accused of insider trading with the shares of Anglia TV. Jeffery bought shares for the “inside information” of the companies dealing account, the day after the last board meeting but before the bid was announced. He should have known that even if he found out insider information from his wife the law makes it clear that he cannot deal or trade with that stock. It would be considered unfair to the rest of the shareholders, because other shareholders would not have the same information like Jeffery. As we know the buying and selling of shares must be based on public information
Martha Stewart made a kind of securities fraud known as "insider trading" which means using insider information to make a stock transaction. It is trading in the stock market, making improper use of inside information. This information, most of the time, is held by directors of listed companies and those who provide investment services or counseling.
The seriousness of insider trading was not brought to light until some time after the stock market crash of 1929. This specific event can be summed up as a day where many investors traded around 16 million shares
In other words, its buying and selling of securities that has obtained non-public material information, and in Martha’s case she was guilty of it. “However in an interesting legal technicality, Martha Stewart did not necessarily breach a fiduciary duty to the other investors, since she had no real obligations to inform other investors, which would be the case if she were an officer with company (US SEC, 2009). This being said, if she confessed her actions were wrong, she would not have been convicted of insider trading. Insider trading can be either legal or illegal due to the nature and the timeframe. This was not the road that Martha Stewart decided to take. ‘She instead chose to collide with her broker in an attempt to barricade a story about how there was a standing order for Ms. Stewart to sell her shares” (US SEC, 2009). Martha Stewart had knowledge on the ethics surrounding trading of stock having already been a CEO, she should have known what she was doing, but one can argue that due to her crazy work life, she simply did no think about it. It shows that she is not engaging in illegal behavior. “Martha Stewart displayed her morality lies when lying to the US authorities even thought this was obviously illegal and unethical; her action can also be analyzed through egoism philosophy where right or acceptable behavior defined in terms of consequences to the individual, regarding maximizing self0interest” (Carr, 2002). Martha Stewart thought she did everything right, but still did not bother to warn the shareholders. If insider trading had not taken place, it would be less of a crime, but her actions indicated unethical behavior and define lack of integrity, and lying to Federal investigators only made it
Svoboda and Robles both broke the misappropriation and tripper (tippee) theory. In Bailey article, he mentions that the misappropriation theory requires courts to focus on whether a fiduciary relationship, or similar relationship with a "duty of trust or confidence," exists (2010, p.541), and tripper theory obtains an individual who received confidential information from the insider individual. Svoboda and Robles violated the fiduciary duties which are the duty of loyalty and care. When Svoboda brought in an outsider, Alena, to complete the task, he broke the duty of loyalty and care toward his company, but then was disloyal to Robles when Svoboda prepared his own trade security. Under Section 10b and rule 10b-5, if an individual using confidential information and then assist another individual, the individual is liable for the trading of the confidential information if they are aware of the fiduciary duties. As a tippee, Robles was liable for trade securities because he was aware of the policy of the Rogue Bank. Bailey (2010) provides an example regard to the SEC v. Texas Gulph Sulfur, when the Second Circuit held that an investor is prohibited from using non-public information to his advantage, regardless of how the investor received the information and the explanation for this situation was to ensure all investors were provided with equal
U.S. Securities and Exchange Comission (2000). Selective disclosure and insider trading. Accessed on February 15, 2009 at: http://www.sec.gov/rules/final/33-7881.htm.
Throughout the past several years major corporate scandals have rocked the economy and hurt investor confidence. The largest bankruptcies in history have resulted from greedy executives that “cook the books” to gain the numbers they want. These scandals typically involve complex methods for misusing or misdirecting funds, overstating revenues, understating expenses, overstating the value of assets or underreporting of liabilities, sometimes with the cooperation of officials in other corporations (Medura 1-3). In response to the increasing number of scandals the US government amended the Sarbanes Oxley act of 2002 to mitigate these problems. Sarbanes Oxley has extensive regulations that hold the CEO and top executives responsible for the numbers they report but problems still occur. To ensure proper accounting standards have been used Sarbanes Oxley also requires that public companies be audited by accounting firms (Livingstone). The problem is that the accounting firms are also public companies that also have to look after their bottom line while still remaining objective with the corporations they audit. When an accounting firm is hired the company that hired them has the power in the relationship. When the company has the power they can bully the firm into doing what they tell them to do. The accounting firm then loses its objectivity and independence making their job ineffective and not accomplishing their goal of honest accounting (Gerard). Their have been 379 convictions of fraud to date, and 3 to 6 new cases opening per month. The problem has clearly not been solved (Ulinski).
There are many instances of insider trading that have taken place in the U.S. stock exchange. The Federal Reserve and The Federal Government have clearly stated that insider trading undermines the law and is illegal, but individuals insider trade anyway.
This occurs when someone tells a coworker about an illegal or immoral practice, in hopes that this person will do something to change the company. This usually occurs when they are trying not to cause any bad publicity for the company. If a company discourages the internal reporting, they are likely to become worse off and the individual that initially started the internal report will have to go out of the company and notify a governmental agency or even the press. From an ethical standpoint, internal reporting is a big part of keeping companies clear from whistle blowing. Even when whistleblowers keep the problem inside the company, they are still often seen as traitors or not company
The Martha Stewart insider trading case was a high profile case filled with uncertainty. In order to say whether or not Stewart handled her indictment responsibly, it is necessary to start with an assumption regarding her guilt or innocence. For the purposes of this paper, based on the information I have read about the case, and based on the fact that she was found guilty of all counts (although not all specifications) in her stock conspiracy trial (with the exception of the security fraud charge which was thrown out), I will assume that she is guilty. (courttv.com) Based on that assumption, there are several reasons that Martha Stewart did not handle her indictment responsibly which can be summarized in a recap of the charges: she lied about receiving illegal information leading her to sell her stock, she lied about having a prearranged agreement to sell her stock when it fell below $60 per share, she tried to hamper the investigation by providing false information, and she worked with her broker to obstruct justice and make false statements regarding the scandal. (chicagotribune.com) As the CEO of Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia (MSLO) and as a successful businesswoman motivated to protect her own personal interests, it might be easy to understand the temptation behind her decisions, but the discussion here will be based on whether or not her decisions were responsible.
... the public and private sector. It uses both the weak form and semi strong from to make decisions. When an investor is given both public and private information the investor would not be able to profit about the average investor even if he was provided with new information at any given time. These investors are given name such as insiders, exchange specialist, analyst and money mangers. Insiders are senior managers that have access to inside information of that company. The security exchange commission prohibits that allow of inside information use to achieve abnormal returns on investments. An exchange specialist can achieve above average returns with specific order information on a specific equity. Analysts can analyze whether an analyst opinion can help an investor achieve above average returns. Institutional money mangers work handle mutual funds and pensions.
This case study is not about Ms. Stewart direct participation with illegal insider trading as the media had steered the public to believe. To begin, Ms. Stewart received a phone call from Ann Armstrong, her assistant, stating that Peter Bacanovic, her stockbroker, “thinks ImClone is going to start trading down.” (Arnold, Beauchamp, Bowie, 2013, p. 390) Although Ms. Stewart was not able to get a hold of Peter, she talked to his assistance, Douglas Faneuil,
First to be discussed is a concrete definition of “insider trading” as it is discussed in this essay. According to the “European Communities 1989 Insider Dealing Directive: insider trading is the dealing on the basis of materials unpublished, price-sensitive information possessed as a result of one’s employment.(Insider Trading)”
...n the stock broker is in full control they are trust worthy enough to make the right decisions to increase your profits from your investment. By giving the broker all your information with no type of legal limits, they can do whatever they feel like. The broker can give you improper investment advice, make unsuitable decisions, commission churning, hide prices, and not diversities your portfolio. At the end all these occurrences can affect your profit to increase the stock broker’s profit. When you are dealing with investors (stock brokers) you should do a great amount of research. The research will pay off at the end because you will know the surface of the stock market and its ways. You should always get a copy of an original copy. When signing documents you should always sign in black pen. The stock market can either make or break you; it is just how you play it.
While the stock market keeps the world turning and the economy steady, the stock market is also being used in manipulative ways that are not always legal. What is the stock market? Businesses share part of the company by selling stock, or shares of ownership. When investors own shares of a company, that company is considered public because the general public has an ownership stake in that company. At the highest ranks of the companies are the board of directors, whose job it is to make sure the business’s managers are working in the best interests of the multiple owners and shareholders.