Defendant Name: The Bank of New York Mellon

Defendant Type: Subsidiary of Public Company
Public Company Parent: Bank of New York Mellon Corporation
SIC Code: 6022
CUSIP: 06405810

Initial Case Details

Legal Case Name In the Matter of The Bank of New York Mellon
First Document Date 13-Jun-2016
Initial Filing Format Administrative Action
File Number 3-17286
Allegation Type Investment Advisers/Investment Companies

Violations Alleged

Section 34(b) Investment Company Act
Section 31(a), Rule 31a-1(b) Investment Company Act


First Resolution Date 13-Jun-2016
Headline Total Penalty and Disgorgement

See Related Documents

Related Documents:

ic-32151-s 13-Jun-2016 Administrative Summary
SEC Finalizes Settlement with The Bank of New York Mellon
On June 13, 2016, the SEC announced "a final settlement with The Bank of New York Mellon (BNYM) as part of an overall agreement announced on March 19, 2015 with federal and state regulators regarding BNYM's standing instruction foreign currency (FX) exchange program.
ic-32151 13-Jun-2016 Administrative Proceeding
Order Instituting Administrative and Cease-and-Desist Proceedings Pursuant to Sections 9(b) and 9(f) of the Investment Company Act of 1940, Making Findings, and Imposing Remedial Sanctions
On June 13, 2016, the SEC instituted settled administrative and cease-and-desist proceedings against The Bank of New York Mellon. According to the SEC: "From at least 2000 through at least August of 2011, The Bank of New York Mellon ('BNYM') and its predecessors, The Bank of New York ('BNY') and Mellon Bank (collectively, the 'Bank'), misled certain of its custodial clients with regard to its execution of their Standing Instruction foreign currency transactions. With regard to foreign currency trades executed through the Bank's Standing Instruction program, the Bank represented on the BNY and BNYM websites and in communications to certain registered investment company ('RIC') customers, among other things, that the Standing Instruction ('SI') program provided foreign exchange ('FX') execution according to 'best execution standards,' provided 'best rates,' priced the transactions at levels that 'generally reflected the interbank market at the time the trade was executed,' and was 'free of charge.' Contrary to these representations, the Bank priced its clients' Standing Instruction transactions near the end of the trading day or session at or near the worst interbank rates reported during that day or session. This resulted in substantial revenues to BNYM based on the difference between the rates that BNYM assigned to its clients and the rates that it obtained on its own behalf when buying and selling foreign currency in the interbank market. After the transactions were executed, the Bank prepared and provided its RIC clients with trade confirmations and monthly transaction reports that contained, among other things, the date of each transaction and the rate assigned by the Bank. However, the Bank did not specify the time the transaction was executed, nor did it provide information about how specific rates were assigned. Exchange rates generally fluctuated throughout the day, and the rate assigned by the Bank was within the range of interbank rates for that day. As a result, the omission of the time of the transaction or manner of pricing in FX confirmations and transaction reports was misleading because the documents omitted the information that would have revealed that the Bank's Standing Instruction service did not, in fact, provide FX execution in the manner represented by the Bank."