Free Essay

Insider Trading

In: Business and Management

Submitted By anusom
Words 5514
Pages 23
Insider trading is the trading of a corporation's stock or other securities (e.g. bonds or stock options) by individuals with potential access to non-public information about the company. Such a trade is motivated by the possibility of generating extraordinary gain with the help of nonpublic information (information not yet made public). It gives the trader an unfair advantage over other traders in the same security. insiders are defined as a company's officers, directors and any beneficial owners of more than ten percent of a class of the company's equity securities
------------------------------------------------------------2---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is important to distinguish between a STAKEHOLDER and a SHAREHOLDER. They sound the same – but the difference is crucial!
Shareholders hold shares in the company – that is they own part of it.
Stakeholders have an interest in the company but do not own it (unless they are shareholders).
Often the aims and objectives of the stakeholders are not the same as shareholders and they come into conflict.
The conflict often arises because while shareholders want short-term profits, the other stakeholders’ desires tend to cost money and reduce profits. The owners often have to balance their own wishes against those of the other stakeholders or risk losing their ability to generate future profits (e.g. the workers may go on strike or the customers refuse to buy the company’s products).
---------------------------------------------------------------3--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Campaign finance refers to the fundraising and spending that political campaigns do in their election campaigns. As campaigns have many expenditures, ranging from the cost of travel for the candidate and others might include the purchasing of air time for TV advertisements, however in some countries, such as Britain TV advertising is free. Candidates often devote substantial time and effort raising money to finance campaigns.
Although the political science literature indicates that most contributors give to support candidates with whom they are already in agreement,[1] there is wide public perception that donors expect illegitimate government favors in return[2] (such as specific legislation being enacted or defeated), so some have come to equate campaign finance with political corruption and bribery[citation needed]. These views have led some governments to reform fundraising sources and techniques in the hope of eliminating perceived undue influence being given to monied interests. Another tactic is for the government, rather than private individuals and organizations, to provide funding for campaigns.
Democratic countries have differing regulations on what types of donations to political parties and campaigns are acceptable.
--------------------------------------------------------end-------------------------------------------------------

Time for tighter norms to protect stakeholders’ interest
Amit Mitra
Debate over prevailing standards of corporate governance in India gained stridency in the last couple of months in the wake of the un-spooling of the sordid Satyam fiasco.
Apart from temporarily staining the image of corporate India, Satyamgate, described as a home-grown replica of the infamous Enron saga, did pick holes in the prevailing standards of corporate governance in India.
More importantly, it brought into sharper focus the need and scope for tightening corporate governance norms to benefit the growing population of Indian investors in the share bazaar.
It was on the chilly evening of September 22, 2008 in London, when Satyam Computer Services was awarded the coveted Golden Peacock Global Award for Excellence in Corporate Governance for 2008 by the World Council for Corporate Governance, with Dr Ola Ullsten, the former Prime Minister of Sweden, serving as the lead judge.
And weeks later, the same Satyam got enmeshed in the squalid trappings of deliberate fraud, misleading of shareholders and poor corporate governance.
Under pressure from mutual funds and minority stakeholders, Satyam did finally call off the decision to purchase 51 per cent stake in Maytas Infrastructure and 100 per cent in Maytas Properties.
But this left in its wake several issues related to corporate governance.
Firstly, the decision was not announced taking into confidence all the stakeholders of the company. That the twin Maytas companies are run by the family members of the scam-tainted founder of Satyam, Mr Ramalinga Raju, is clearly a case of blatant jettisoning of healthy corporate governance practices.
Nasscom, the premier trade body and the voice of the Indian IT/BPO industry, quickly reacted by announcing that it will be forming a Corporate Governance and Ethics Committee, chaired by Mr N.R. Narayana Murthy, Chief Mentor of Infosys. Stock market regulator SEBI also announced that it would examine if there was a need to tweak existing regulations to enhance, compliance, transparency and efficiency in the corporate system.
Improving standards
There is no gainsaying of the importance of corporate governance at a time when stock market interests have clambered up on to a much higher perch as compared to some years ago. In fact, the turmoil in global financial markets can be partly traced to poor corporate governance, with many reputed global financial institutions keeping shareholders in the dark regarding their precise financial standing.
Back home, there is no denying that the Government, share market regulator, SEBI, and corporate India have been pushing themselves hard to raise the bar for corporate governance. But the question is has corporate governance standards have improved to the desired levels.
What is corporate governance? Broadly, it refers to the set of systems, principles and processes by which a company is governed. It can be defined as the relationship of a company to its shareholders, going beyond just legal compliance.
In other words, corporate governance encompasses a broad spectrum of elements, ranging from the role and powers of the Board, legislation, Board independence, code of conduct to financial and operational reporting, audit committees and risk management.
Comprehensive laws
India, indeed, has an elaborate system of laws governing corporate governance. To start with, the Companies Act, 1956 covers corporate governance widely through a string of provisions such as constitution of audit committee, fixing of a ceiling on remuneration for directors and directors’ responsibility statement.
It was the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) that came out with the first comprehensive code on corporate governance in 1998, which was followed by the recommendations of the Kumar Mangalam Birla Committee on Corporate Governance, appointed by SEBI.
The recommendations were embedded into the Clause 49 of the Listing Agreement on Indian stock exchanges.
At that time, the issue of corporate guidelines had come into focus in the wake of huge foreign investments flowing into the country — these investors wanted assurance that the companies they were investing in will be managed well.
And to further enhance their confidence and to safeguard retail investors, SEBI had revised Clause 49 of its “listing agreement”, which stipulated that at least one-third of the directors on the boards of the companies should be independent professionals.
These directors should in no way be connected to the interests of promoters. The revised Clause 49 was made effective from January 1, 2006.
Major changes were also made to the definition of ‘independent directors’, strengthening of the responsibilities of audit committee and improving the quality of financial disclosure.
The board, as a whole, was assigned the task of adoption of a formal code of conduct for senior management and the certification of financial statements issued by the CEO/CFO.
It is, however, no secret that many companies are yet to fully comply with the Clause 49 norms. It is thus time for SEBI to get stricter with such companies to protect shareholders interests.
Pledging of shares
More recently, SEBI, in an attempt to further enhance transparency in corporate corridors, had made it mandatory for promoters to announce their pledged shares for the public.
Pledging of promoters shares has been commonplace in the history of corporate India and, as it was not earlier mandatory on them to disclose the amount of shares pledged, shareholders were left guessing.
Now that this disclosure has been made mandatory, shareholders will have a better idea of the financial stability and ownership status of the companies they invested in.
Weak links
However, despite these measures, there still exists some weak links in the system.
For example, experts say, the Satyam episode did bring to the fore once again the role of independent directors, who are supposed to protect shareholder interests.
“Independent directors should also be held accountable for board decisions and audit-related compliance practices,” said an analyst on corporate governance.
Auditors’ role
Apart from independent directors, the role of auditors also came into focus.
The question that began to do the rounds in investors’ circles in the immediate aftermath of the Satyam scandal was whether shareholders and other stakeholders could take any action against the auditors.
Ms Namrata Mehta, Corporate Lawyer, Economic Laws Practice (ELP), a law firm that advises and litigates in areas of Direct and Indirect Tax, says “how an Indian Court will view the liability of the auditors of Satyam will depend upon the extent to which the Court is convinced about a claim for negligence.”
She further points out that regardless of the final outcome, auditors must be “reading their professional indemnity insurance contracts with a microscope and wishing that the Limited Liability Partnership Act was passed a few months earlier.”
Institutional investors
Experts feel that institutional investors can play a greater role in ensuring effective corporate governance standards, as they have a clout to extract information and play an activist role. This was best exemplified in the Satyam scam.
As for retail investors, it is important that they take all possible precautions before making investments.
Whatever may be the denouement of the Satyam fiasco, it is pertinent that corporate houses take this black chapter of India’s corporate history as a lesson in poor corporate governance practices and collectively map out a stricter structure that will protect the interests of all stakeholders.

nsider trading is a term subject 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. In simple terms ‘insider trading’ buying or selling a security, in breach of a fiduciary duty or other relationship of trust , and confidence , while in possession of material , nonpublic information about the securityThus , in nutshell , insider trading is the buying , selling or dealing in securities of a listed company by a director , member of management , employee of the company , or by any other person such as internal auditor , advisor , consultant , analyst etc, who has knowledge of material inside information which is not available to general publicExamples of Insider Trading-
Corporate officers -, directors and employees who , traded the company’s securities after learning of significant, confidentiality corporate developments;
Employees of law, banking , brokerage and printing firms- who were given such information to provide services to corporation whose securities they traded;
Government employees – who learned of such information because of their employment by the government;Therefore, preventing such transactions is an important obligation for any capital market regulatory system,because insider trading undermines investor confidence in the fairness and integrity of the securities markets.For instance, prior knowledge of a bonus issue would result in the insider acquiring a significant exposure in particular scrip, knowing that his holding would increase significantly after the bonus is announced.The first country to tackle insider trading effectively however was the United States[1].In the USA, the Securities and Exchange Commission is empowered under the Insider Trading Sanctions Act, 1984 to impose civil penalties in addition to criminal proceedings. Most countries have in place suitable legislation to curb the menace of insider trading.
In India, SEBI (Insider Trading) Regulations 1992, framed under Section 11 of the SEBI Act, 1992, are intended to prevent and curb the menace of insider trading in Securities. Now SEBI has with effect from 20th February 2002 amended these Regulations and rechristened them as SEBI 9 Prohibition of Insider Trading Regulation , 1992 . These Regulation have been further amended in November 2002Rational Behind Prohibition of Insider Trading
The smooth operation of the securities market and its healthy growth and development depends on a large extend on the quality and integrity of the market .Such a market can alone inspire confidence in investorsInsider trading leads to loose of confidence of investors in securities market as they feel that market is rigged and only the few, who have inside information get benefit and make profits from their investments . Thus, process of insider trading corrupts the ‘level playing field’Hence the practice of insider trading is intended to be prohibited in order to sustain the investor’s confidence in the integrity of the security market.
In Samir C Arora Vs SEBI [2]It was observed that activities like insider trading fraudulent trade practices and professional misconduct are absolutely detrimental to the interests of ordinary investors and are strongly deprecated under the SEBI Act,1992 and the Regulations made there under. No punishment is too severe for those indulging such activities.MEANING OF Insider & Insider Trading Defined
Securities and Exchange Board of India (Prohibition of Insider Trading) Regulations, 1992, does not directly define the term "insider trading".
But it defines the terms-. insider" or who is an "insider;[3]
. who is a "connected person[4]
. What are "price sensitive information".[5]Insider
According to the Regulations "insider" means any person who, is or was connected with the company or is deemed to have been connected with the company, and who is reasonably expected to have access, connection, to unpublished price sensitive information in respect of securities of a company, or who has received or has had access to such unpublished price sensitive information;
The above definition in turn introduces a new term "connected person".Connected person
The Regulation defines that a "connected person" means any person who-
(i) is a director, as defined in clause (13) of section 2 of the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956) of a company, or is deemed to be a director of that company by virtue of sub-clause (10) of section 307 of that Act or(ii) occupies the position as an officer or an employee of the company or holds a position involving a professional or business relationship between himself and the company whether temporary or permanent and who may reasonably be expected to have an access to unpublished price sensitive information in relation to that company;Price Sensitive Information means any information, which relates directly or indirectly to a company and which if published, is likely to materially affect the price of securities of company.American insider trading law
The United States has been the leading country in prohibiting insider trading and the first country to tackle insider trading effectively.
Thus it is important to discuss insider trading in American perspective. While Congress gave us the mandate to protect investors and keep our markets free from fraud, it has been our jurists, albeit at the urging of the Commission and the United States Department of Justice, who have played the largest role in defining the law of insider trading.The market crash in 1929 due to prolonged lack of investors confidence in the securities market followed by Great Depression of US Economy , led to the enactment of Securities Act of 1933 in which Section 17 of the contained prohibitions of fraud in the sale of securities which were greatly strengthened by the Securities Exchange Act of 1934The 1934 Act addressed insider trading directly through Section 16(b) and indirectly through Section 10(b).Section 16(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 prohibits short-swing profits (from any purchases and sales within any six month period) made by corporate directors, officers, or stockholders owning more than 10% of a firm’s shares. Under Section 10(b) of the 1934 Act, SEC Rule 10b-5, prohibits fraud related to securities trading. Further the Insider Trading Sanctions Act of 1984 and the Insider Trading and Securities Fraud Enforcement Act of 1988 provide for penalties for illegal insider trading to be as high as three times the profit gained or the loss avoided from the illegal trading..[ Much of the development of insider trading law has resulted from court decisions. In SEC v. Texas Gulf Sulphur Co.[6], a federal circuit court stated that anyone in possession of inside information must either disclose the information or refrain from trading. (1966)In 1984, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in the case of Dirks v. SEC that tippees (receivers of second-hand information) are liable if they had reason to believe that the tipper had breached a fiduciary duty in disclosing confidential information and the tipper received any personal benefit from the disclosure. (Since Dirks disclosed the information in order to expose a fraud, rather than for personal gain, nobody was liable for insider trading violations in his case.)
The Dirks case also defined the concept of "constructive insiders," who are lawyers, investment bankers and others who receive confidential information from a corporation while providing services to the corporation. Constructive insiders are also liable for insider trading violations if the corporation expects the information to remain confidential, since they acquire the fiduciary duties of the true insider.In United States v. Carpenter (1986) the U.S. Supreme Court cited an earlier ruling while unanimously upholding mail and wire fraud convictions for a defendant who received his information from a journalist rather than from the company itself. The journalist R. Foster Winans was also convicted. [7]"It is well established, as a general proposition, that a person who acquires special knowledge or information by virtue of a confidential or fiduciary relationship with another is not free to exploit that knowledge or information for his own personal benefit but must account to his principle for any profits derived therefrom."
However, in upholding the securities fraud (insider trading) convictions, the justices were evenly split.In 1997 the U.S. Supreme Court adopted the misappropriation theory of insider trading in United States v. O'Hagan, 521 U.S. 642, 655 (1997),. O'Hagan was a partner in a law firm representing Grand Met, while it was considering a tender offer for Pillsbury Co. O'Hagan used this inside information by buying call options on Pillsbury stock, resulting in profits of over $4 million. O'Hagan claimed that neither he nor his firm owed a fiduciary duty to Pillsbury, so that he did not commit fraud by purchasing Pillsbury options.The Court rejected O'Hagan's arguments and upheld his conviction.
The "misappropriation theory" holds that a person commits fraud "in connection with" a securities transaction, and thereby violates 10(b) and Rule 10b-5, when he misappropriates confidential information for securities trading purposes, in breach of a duty owed to the source of the information. Under this theory, a fiduciary's undisclosed, self-serving use of a principal's information to purchase or sell securities, in breach of a duty of loyalty and confidentiality, defrauds the principal of the exclusive use of the information. In lieu of premising liability on a fiduciary relationship between company insider and purchaser or seller of the company's stock, the misappropriation theory premises liability on a fiduciary-turned-trader's deception of those who entrusted him with access to confidential information.The Court specifically recognized that a corporation’s information is its property: "A company's confidential information...qualifies as property to which the company has a right of exclusive use. The undisclosed misappropriation of such information in violation of a fiduciary duty...constitutes fraud akin to embezzlement – the fraudulent appropriation to one's own use of the money or goods entrusted to one's care by another."In 2000, the SEC enacted Rule 10b5-1, which defined trading "on the basis of" inside information as any time a person trades while aware of material nonpublic information — so that it is no defense for one to say that she would have made the trade anyway. This rule also created an affirmative defense for pre-planned trades.In May of 2007, representatives Brian Baird and Louise Slaughter introduced a bill entitled the "Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge Act, or STOCK Act." that would hold congressional and federal employees liable for stock trades they made using information they gained through their jobs. The bill would also seek to regulate so called "Political Intelligence" firms that research government activities and sell the information to financial managers.

Insider trading in India
In India Regulation 3 of the SEBI Regulations seeks to prohibit dealing, communication and counseling on matters relating to, insider trading. Regulation 3 provides that no insider shall either on his own behalf of any other person deal in securities of a company when in possession of any unpublished price sensitive information on communicate, counsel or procure , directly or indirectly any unpublished price sensitive information to any person , who while in possession of such unpublished price sensitive information shall not deal in securities. However, these restrictions are not applicable to any communication required ordinary, course of business or profession or employment or any law.Further 3 A prohibits any company from dealing in the securities of another company or associate of that other company while in possession of any unpublished price sensitive information.Insider Trading Regulations have been tightened by SEBI during February 2002. New rules cover 'temporary insiders' like lawyers, accountants, investment bankers etc.[8]Directors and substantial shareholders have to disclose their holding to the company periodically. The New Regulations have added relatives of connected persons, as well as, the companies, firms, trust, etc.in which relatives of connected persons, bankers of the company and of persons deemed to be connected persons hold more than 10% .The definition of relative[9]under the New regulations is in line with that of the Companies Act, 1956, which ranges from parents and siblings to spouses of siblings and grandchildren. The term “connected person” is defined to mean either i) a director or deemed to be a director, ii) occupies the position as an officer or an employee or having professional or business relationship whether temporary or permanent, with the company. Thus, there are two categories of insiders:Primary insiders, who are directly connected with the company and secondary insiders who are deemed to be connected with the company since they are expected to have access to unpublished price sensitive information.[10] The jurisprudential basis for the 'person-connected' approach seems to be founded in the equitable notions of fiduciary duty.The secondary insider, who would have traded with an unfair informational advantage, may escape from being caught simply because there can be no trace of how he derived this information in the first place. insider by reason of his connection with the company. In reality, much of the flow of the price-sensitive information often does not operate by way of such established networks of relational links between individuals. Very often, such price-sensitive information is communicated and spread out through very loosely connected and informal networks of brokers, clients and even between friends and through electronic networks etc. or an elaborate nexus of company official, brokers, traders. These individuals are very often privy to strategic policy decisions or developments that may influence the valuation of a company’s scrip on the bourses.Duties/ Obligations Of the company
Every listed company has the following obligations under the SEBI(Prohibition of Insider Trading)Regulations , 1992
To appoint a senior level employee generally the Company Scecretary , as the Compliance Officers;
To set up an appropriate mechanism and to frame and enforce a code of conduct for internal procedures,
To abide by the Code of Corporate Disclosure practices as specified in Schedule ii to the SEBI (Prohibition of Insider Trading)Regulations , 1992
To initiate the information received under the initial and continual disclosures to the Stock Exchange within 5 days of their receipts;
To specify the close period;
To identify the Price Sensitive Information
To ensure adequate data security of confidential information stored on the computer;
To prescribe the procedure for the pre- clearance of trade and entrusted the Compliance Officers with the responsibility of strict adherence of the samePenalties
Following penalties /punishments can be imposed in case of violation of SEBI (Prohibition of Insider Trading)Regulations , 1992
SEBI may impose a penalty of not Rs 25 Crores or three times the amount of profit made out of insider trading; whichever is higher
SEBI may initiate criminal prosecution
SEBI may issue orders declaring transactions in securities based on unpublished price sensitive information
SEBI may issue orders prohibiting an insider or refraining an insider from dealing in the securities of the companyConclusion
The new 2002 regulations in India have further fortified the 1992 regulations and have increased the list of persons that are deemed to be connected to Insiders. Listed companies and other entities are now required to frame internal policies and guidelines to preclude insider trading by directors, employees, partners, etc. In the past, it has been observed that insider trading legislation is ineffective and difficult to enforce and has little impact on securities markets. Low enforcement rates and few convictions against insiders have been cited as evidence of this ineffectiveness. Irrespective of whether or not the SEBI was bestowed with wide ranging powers, it has been a clear failure when it came to the task of administering the law.The importance of policing insider trading has also assumed international significance as overseas regulators attempt to boost the confidence of domestic investors and attract the international investment community. So, SEBI now should take the role of a regulator only. Special Courts could be set up for faster and efficacious disposal of cases.References
1. Where an insider discloses the inside information to another person, otherwise than in the proper performance of the functions of his employment, office or profession. (Section 52(2) (b)).
2. 83 /2004
3. SEBI (Insider Trading) Regulations 1992[Reg2(e)]
4. [Reg 2(c)]
5. Reg 2(ha)]
6. (1966)
7. Christopher Cox, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Speech by SEC Chairman:Remarks at the Annual Meeting of the Society of American Business Editors and Writers
8. www.academyofcg.org/marchissue.htm
9. On September 15, 2002 the SEBI Board decided to relax the meaning of the term `relative' in the Insider Trading Regulations. Only direct relatives of those who are deemed to have price-sensitive insider information on securities will now come under the ambit of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Insider Trading) Regulations. SEBI officials pointed out that the decision to exclude the third category of relatives from the ambit of the insider trading regulations comes in the wake of a host of representations saying that the existing definition of the term relative was too restrictive
10. Regulation 2(h) identifies seven broad categories of secondary insiders within which these are a few sub-categories, such as (a) Companies under the same management;(b) Members and employees of Stock exchanges;(c) Market Intermediaries, Mutual Funds etc.;(d) Directors and employees of financial institutions;(e) Officers and employees of self-regulatory bodies;(f) Relatives;(g) Bankers
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1]Where an insider discloses the inside information to another person, otherwise than in the proper performance of the functions of his employment, office or profession. (Section 52(2) (b)).
[2] 83 /2004
[3]SEBI (Insider Trading) Regulations 1992[Reg2(e)]
[4] [Reg 2(c)]
[5] Reg 2(ha)]
[6](1966),
[7]Christopher Cox, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Speech by SEC Chairman:Remarks at the Annual Meeting of the Society of American Business Editors and Writers
[8]www.academyofcg.org/marchissue.htm
[9]On September 15, 2002 the SEBI Board decided to relax the meaning of the term `relative' in the Insider Trading Regulations. Only direct relatives of those who are deemed to have price-sensitive insider information on securities will now come under the ambit of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Insider Trading) Regulations. SEBI officials pointed out that the decision to exclude the third category of relatives from the ambit of the insider trading regulations comes in the wake of a host of representations saying that the existing definition of the term relative was too restrictive | Added Date: | 15 Jan 2008 | Lenght: | 3022 words | Views: | 2479 |

The misappropriation theory: a valid application of section 10(B) to protect property rights in information

by Keith Adam Simon
United States v. O'Hagan, 117 S. Ct. 2199 (1997)
I. INTRODUCTION
In United States v. Hagan,(1) the United States Supreme Court held that the misappropriation theory is a valid basis upon which to impose [sections] 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 liability for securities fraud.(2) The Court found that the misappropriation theory satisfies the statutory requirement of [sections] 10(b) that a deceptive device be used "in connection with" a securities transaction.(3) The Court reasoned that the misappropriation theory, by proscribing trading based on misappropriated confidential information, promotes market integrity and investor confidence.(4) This, in turn, advances the underlying purposes of [sections] 10(b) and Rule 10b-5.(5)
In addition, the Supreme Court held that Rule 14e-3(a), which prohibits trading while in possession of material nonpublic information regarding a tender offer, is a valid exercise of the Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) rulemaking authority under [sections] 14(e).(6) The majority did not rule on the authority of the SEC to define fraud.: Rather, the Court found Rule 14e-3(a), "as applied to cases of this genre,(7) to be a means reasonably designed to prevent fraud in tender offers under [sections] 14(e).(8)
This Note agrees with the Court's assessment that the misappropriation theory is a valid basis upon which to impose [sections] 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 liability.(9) First, this Note asserts that the misappropriation theory is consistent with Supreme Court precedent(10) interpreting the statutory language of [sections] 10(b).(11) Second, this Note argues that the misappropriation theory protects property rights in information and promotes investor confidence in the securities market, thereby increasing market efficiency and integrity.(12) Finally, this Note advances a solution to the "in connection with" dissent(13) of Justice Thomas.(14) This Note argues that the correct approach is to consider the gathering of information itself as part of the gatheror's securities transaction.(15)
II. BACKGROUND
A. INTRODUCTION
It is axiomatic that the operations of and the information used by the securities market is an area in "special need of regulation for the protection of investors."(16) Without such regulation, investors may worry that they are being deprived of the fair market value of their investments if others illegally use confidential information.(17) As a result, those same investors might choose alternatives to the stock market, thereby making it more difficult for corporate issuers to raise capital.(18) This, in turn, would adversely affect this nation's economic growth and stability.(19) As part of the inquiry regarding this potentially disastrous situation, courts have dealt with the following issue: When must a person who knows material nonpublic information(20) disclose such information before trading on it?(21) The answer to that g question has changed significantly over the years.(22) Consequently, to gain an adequate understanding of the issue, this Note examines three distinct time periods: (1) the years prior to the passage of [sections] 10(b)(23) and Rule 1013;(24) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;(25) (2) the years after the passage of [sections] 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 but before Chiarella v. United States(26) and Dirks v. SEC;(27) and (3) the years since the Chiarella and Dirks decisions.
B. BEFORE [sections] 10(B) AND RULE 10B-5: THE COMMON LAW ERA
Under the common law, a failure to disclose material information is fraudulent only when there is a duty to speak.(28) This duty to speak is created "when one party has information that the other [party] is entitled to know because of a fiduciary or other similar relation of trust and confidence between them."(29)
In most jurisdictions, an insider(30) of a corporation has no duty to disclose material information before trading.(31) For example, in Goodwin v. Agassiz(32) the court ruled that the defendants,(33) both insiders of Cliff Mining Company (Cliff), did not defraud Goodwin, a shareholder of Cliff, when they bought his shares on the Boston Stock Exchange without disclosing their possession of material inside information.(34) The court held that insiders of a corporation have a fiduciary duty only to the corporation itself, not to individual shareholders.(35) Since there is no trust relationship between the insiders and the individual shareholders, insiders are neither under a duty to speak nor are they guilty of fraud if they trade securities based on material nonpublic information.(36) From a policy perspective, the court found it significant that the securities were traded on an impersonal stock exchange.(37) According to the majority, the plaintiff's theory of liability puts:
[a]n honest director ... in a difficult situation... [since] he could neither buy nor sell on the stock exchange .

Similar Documents

Free Essay

Insider Trading

...INSIDER transactions are one of the most controversial and sensitive disclosures for companies to communicate to investors. How your company handles these disclosures can make a strong statement to investors about your company’s transparency. The history of insider transaction disclosure on the Web illustrates companies’ sensitivity and reluctance to provide this information to investors. For years, regulators such as the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) tried to improve transparency around insider trading only to be blocked by heavy corporate lobbying. Eventually, it took massive corporate scandals and collapses in 2001 for the tide to turn against the business lobby. Finally, the SEC introduced rules forcing all U.S. companies to provide access to their insider transaction filings on their corporate websites starting in June 2003. The SEC also dramatically shortened the deadline for insiders to make their filings and made significant improvements to the EDGAR database to accommodate electronic insider reporting. Under the old rules executives had up to 41 days to file reports with the SEC. With the new rules, however, insiders have to file reports by the end of the second business day following the day on which the transaction is executed. Significant geographic differences in insider disclosure Regulators in several countries have followed the SEC’s lead, but with varying levels of effectiveness because most lack a central electronic repository like EDGAR.......

Words: 2937 - Pages: 12

Premium Essay

Insider Trading

...2012 Insider Trading In a securities market there are winners and losers, people who get good prices and people who get bad prices. Other things equal, the person with the best information about what is being bought or sold stands in the best position to find bargains and get the best price. Competing against corporate insiders, who possess superior information thus increases the risk that one loses. As a society, we have good moral reason to protect ourselves against this kind of fraud. Definition of “Insider Trading” Insider trading is the trading of a corporation's stock or other securities (e.g. bonds or stock options) by individuals with access to non-public information about the company. In most countries, trading by corporate insiders such as officers, key employees, directors, and large shareholders may be legal, if this trading is done in a way that does not take advantage of non-public information. However, the term is frequently used to refer to a practice in which an insider or a related party trades based on material non-public information obtained during the performance of the insider's duties at the corporation, or otherwise in breach of a fiduciary or other relationship of trust and confidence or where the non-public information was misappropriated from the company.[1] Unfairness The first and most obvious argument that one may find to describe insider trading as immoral is the one of unfairness. Under their definition insider trading......

Words: 972 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Insiders Trading

...Insiders Trading: Is it unethical? Table of Content Introduction 3 Body 3-4 Appendix A 5 Conclusion 5 Work Cited 6 Introduction Insider trading occurs when a trade has been influenced by the privileged possession of corporate information that has not yet been made public. Because the information is not available to other investors, a person using such knowledge is trying to gain an unfair advantage over the rest of the market. You're acting on information not known to other investors. Using nonpublic information for making a trade disturbs transparency, which is the basis of a capital market. Information in a transparent market is disseminated in a manner by which all market participants receive it at more or less the same time. Under these conditions, one investor can gain an advantage over another only through acquiring skill in analyzing and interpreting available information. This skill is based on individual merit and awareness. If one person trades with nonpublic information, he or she gains an advantage that is impossible for the rest of the public. This is not only unfair but disruptive to a properly functioning market if insiders trading were allowed, then investors would lose confidence in their disadvantaged position and would no longer invest. Body The practice of insider trading is considered to be unethical by many people around the world. The United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)......

Words: 855 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Insider Trading

...Abstract Insider trading is a serious crime. The general public is held accountable, and yet, it is legal for members of Congress. There are several cases involving members of society being prosecuted for their illegal activity of insider trading; while Congress has exempted their members from acting on the same type of information. This type of conduct has serious legal, ethical and moral considerations. This paper will address the definition of insider trading. The legal, ethical and moral considerations of insider trading will be outlined, through a snap shot of the legal precedence recently in the press involving congressional behavior. It will further look at cases that have made headlines in past years, to show the distinction of what can happen to the general public who participate in insider trading. During a recent article by Parloff (2011), he stated, “The problem arises with respect to market-moving information a congressman learns in the course of doing his legislative work.” This comment is at the heart of the issue involving insider trading and Congress. The people elect members to Congress to act in their best interest. When the people of society feel members of Congress have violated that trust under legal, ethical, or moral wrongdoing, the members of society make decisions based upon those standards set by Congress. Thus members of society participate in insider trading knowing it is legally wrong. Insider Trading Insider trading can be a severe......

Words: 3327 - Pages: 14

Premium Essay

Insider Trading

...Singapore law states that price sensitive information belongs to the company. However, the arguments made in “Property rights” push for the case that if this information does belong to the organization, then it is the organization’s right to allow its employees to use it for insider trading. Let us examine these arguments. Who does price-sensitive information belong to? The employees who create this price sensitive information are empowered by the finances and reputation of the firm. Without this, they can’t make decisions that create this information. For example, the CEO of a company can’t go on a joint venture with another company to create a new product if he doesn’t have the resources of the firm at his disposal. The employees may disagree and would otherwise disagree may argue that it was their skills and ability that allowed this price sensitive information to be created. Yet, an employment contract means that an employee allows and employer to is already a contract between the employer and the employee to allow the use theof an employee’s skills and abilities for the benefit of the company in exchange for remuneration. The employee is going to be already being rewarded for his work and claiming ownership of the information would otherwise thus be a breach of a contract. Thus, let us take the position that price sensitive information is created by and belongs to the company. The company has the right to do what it wills wants with the information. So it is firm......

Words: 1391 - Pages: 6

Free Essay

Insider Trading

...of India (Prohibition of Insider Trading) Regulations, 1992 (Insider Trading Regulations). 1. Legal version is when corporate insiders—officers, directors, employees and large shareholders, buy and sell stock in their own companies. When corporate insiders trade in their own securities, they must report their trades to the SEC 2. Any “dealing in securities” while in the possession of “unpublished price sensitive information” is prohibited under the Insider Trading Regulations and the term “dealing in securities” covers the act of subscribing, buying, selling or even agreeing to subscribe, buy or sell securities.  3.Therefore, if the financial investor has been provided or gained access to unpublished price sensitive information during the due diligence process or at the negotiations stage and subsequently decides to invest in the listed company, then such financial investor can be held liable for the offence of insider trading under Indian law. 4. Indian Regulation 3 of SEBI seeks to prohibit communication, counseling and dealing relating to Insider Trading. According to the regulation, no insider on his behalf of any other person deal in securities of a company when in possession of any unpublished price sensitive information or communicate, procure or counsel, indirectly or directly any unpublished price sensitive information to any person, who does not deal in securities in possession of such unpublished price sensitive information. 5. Any insider who deals in securities......

Words: 527 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Insider Trading

...Insider trading is experiencing major cases, which include Marvericks’ Owner trials with the Securities and Exchange Commission, criminal trial of Expert Network James Fleishman and the trial of a former Goldman director. Goldman Sachs Group Inc.’s board and other boards controlling the companies affiliated to Insider Trading have failed to control business issues in the companies. In some cases, the boards have interfered with the functioning of the Insider Trading through the manner in which they make decisions. Boards have been involved in making decisions and approving some deals in the company, which resulted into the cases. A good example is the Goldman case where the board approved the deal at a time of financial crisis. Some directors helped each other in acquiring deals within a few minutes which led to illegal business deals. Different nations have enacted laws concerning insider trading in control of the roles played by boards of directors. In Canada and USA, there have been considerable changes in the laws concerning securities in the business (Foster, 1996). The federal legislation regulates the securities trading and contribution of boards and CEOs in different sections. The subsequent judicial decisions introduced in the business outline the main roles of the insider trading regulations. In the regulations, boards monitor operations in the business, as well as operations of CEOs. The Securities Exchange Act enacted in 1934 regulates secondary trading and......

Words: 1145 - Pages: 5

Free Essay

Insider Trading

...Insider Trading - An Analysis in Corporate Regime 1.      Introduction Man amongst all species has proved himself to be the greediest creature since times immemorial. His greed has made him stop as low as possible in utter disregard for all principles of fair play, honesty, morality, etc. In the past and particularly in the last two decades we have witnessed many instances not only at National level but even across the globe where some genius brains have been able to use the vulnerable platform of stock market to their own advantage by enriching themselves enormously at the cost of unprecedented financial losses to thousands of others. A common tool used by these manipulative brains is what in common parlance is known as Insider trading.   With the vast developments in trade and commerce all over, every person has become very materialistic. That is the reason why people in general and particularly those in business have developed profit motives. And it is quite often that to fulfill their own monetary expectations, such people employ illegal or immoral means. One such illegal method used by some vested interests in area of corporate business is insider trading.[1]   Thus, when an insider of a company uses its price sensitive confidential information to buy or sell its securities thereby making a personal profit, he commits acts to the detriment of the interests of bona fide investors of the company. However, in reality, insider trading can be both legal and illegal.   Legal......

Words: 2105 - Pages: 9

Free Essay

Insider Trading

...ANÁLISE EMPÍRICA DA PRÁTICA DE INSIDER TRADING EM PROCESSOS DE FUSÕES E AQUISIÇÕES RECENTES NA ECONOMIA BRASILEIRA ARTIGO – FINANÇAS Marcos Antônio de Camargos Doutorando em Administração no CEPEAD-UFMG Professor e Pesquisador do curso de Administração do Centro Universitário de Belo Horizonte (UNI-BH) e da Faculdade Novos Horizontes E-mail: mcamargos@cepead.face.ufmg.br Recebido em: 30/05/2007 Aprovado em: 02/10/2008 Julio Alfredo Racchumi Romero Doutorando em Demografia no CEDEPLAR-UFMG E-mail: julio@cedeplar.ufmg.br Francisco Vidal Barbosa Pós-Doutor pela Universidade de Harvard e Professor Adjunto do CAD/CEPEAD/FACE/UFMG E-mail: fbarbosa@face.ufmg.br RESUMO As negociações com uso de informações privilegiadas (insider trading) criam oportunidades para que alguns agentes do mercado lucrem em detrimento de outros, levando a uma transferência de riqueza entre os acionistas. O anúncio de uma fusão ou aquisição é um momento oportuno para essa prática, visto que quase sempre causa impactos significativos nas expectativas dos agentes do mercado e nos preços dos títulos. Este artigo analisou se essa prática esteve presente em processos de fusões e aquisições recentes, realizados por grandes empresas brasileiras, utilizando-se de um estudo de evento para o qual, além da análise do retorno acionário anormal, fez-se a comparação de médias de variáveis sinalizadoras do comportamento dos títulos no mercado (liquidez). Para a análise foram utilizadas ações preferenciais,......

Words: 6352 - Pages: 26

Premium Essay

Lca Insider Trading

...Insider Trading – Breach of Corporate Fiduciary During Mergers and Acquisition Scenario - A Leadership and Corporate Accountability Study EPGPKC/02/047 EPGPKC/02/063 EPGPKC/02/064 EPGPKC/02/068 EPGPKC/02/070 EPGPKC/02/076 Bijith P. B. Madhu Chandran Mahashook Ebrahim Nikhil Hari Kesavan Paul Cherusseril Mohan Rakesh Krishnan Sudheer Insider:  Corporate insider has privy to information of the company (sales and profit figures, future growth indicators, management strategies and initiatives) that is yet to be released to the public. Insider Trading :  Trading of public company's stock or other securities (such as bonds or stock options) by individuals with access to nonpublic information about the company, ahead of the public release of the information.  Tips to outsiders(friends, relatives etc.) to buy/sell stocks of his company and help them make profits or to avoid loss is also considered as insider trading Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insider_trading How Insider Trading Works?  Insider in a company collates key insights of the company position in market  Shares price-sensitive insights with group of people who buy the stocks; in some cases insider himself gets involved in stock purchase/selling  Artificial demand is created for the particular stock resulting in higher prices; shareholders are miss leaded with outcomes  Stock price grows and when 'satisfactory limit' reached, insider or...

Words: 2517 - Pages: 11

Free Essay

Insider Trading

...Insider Trading at the Galleon Group The Galleon Group was one of the largest hedge fund management firms in the world, managing over $7 billion, before closing in October 2009. From greed to more greedy, and finally to destruction, this time the protagonist is Rajaratnam, he was accused of 14 securities fraud. Rajaratnam had a glorious history. He is 52 years old Sri Lanka-American, graduated from the Wharton School, he began his career in the field focusing on technology investment bank Needham & Co., An analyst from the start, 34-year-old became the president of this bank. In 1997, he started a technology stocks investment company, which was called Galleon Group in New York. In 2009, Rajaratnam's net worth to $ 1.3 billion by Forbes global rich list among the first 559. When Galleon was established in NY, Rajaratnam said: "This is Raj Rajaratnam, only the paranoid survived." Unfortunately, this time his "paranoid" gets too far. Rajaratnam's case is the largest in the history of Wall Street hedge fund insider trading case at that time, but also the first use of the Federal Investigation Agency monitor means to obtain evidence relating to insider trading. Rajaratnam's arrest on behalf of the US government efforts to combat financial crime has entered a new phase. In this case, there are two ethic issues that can be discussed. The first is a white-collar crime; insider trading is one of them. The second is the wiretap recording, whether it is legitimate, if it is,......

Words: 1451 - Pages: 6

Free Essay

Insider Trading

...Why Is Insider Trading Considered Wrong? Insider trading is defined as “the trading of a public company's stock or other securities (such as bonds or stock options) by individuals with access to nonpublic information about the company. The stock market is supposed to be “fair,” and having insider information gives an illegal edge to possible investors. Insiders include those such as officers or directors of a certain company. They can also include investors that own more than a 10% share in a company because those individuals usually get to sit on the board. These individuals have a fiduciary duty to the owners of the company’s stock, meaning that they put their interests before their own. Furthermore, in the United States, insider trading does not have to be committed by an aforementioned “insider.” It can be committed by any shareholder who buys based off of nonpublic knowledge. When one person buys a stock because of nonpublic information, there is also a seller of that same stock that may have not made that sell decision if they knew the same nonpublic information, and vice versa. In addition, future buyers of that particular stock are going to pay inflated prices compared to the investor with insider information because he had access to that information first. Transparency is a big part of keeping the markets balanced, which means that all investors have the same information available to them. For example, it would not be fair if one student had the test bank for a......

Words: 2976 - Pages: 12

Premium Essay

Insider Trading

...Insider Trading More Americans are involved in the stock market than ever before, investing for their retirement and hoping to achieve financial security. But, the stock market has been anything but secure over the years. In fact, after the Stock Market Crash of 1929, so many Americans lost money and confidence in the stock market that Congress passed specific securities laws to help protect investors and to prevent the abuses believed to have contributed to the collapse. The Securities Act of 1933 and Securities Exchange Act of 1934 were enacted by congress with the intent of protecting investors engaged in securities transactions and assuring public confidence in the integrity of the securities markets.1 The government also created the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to protect the financial markets by enforcing the Securities Exchange Act.2 One of the most important issues covered by the Securities Exchange Act concerns illegal insider trading in which individuals sell or purchase investments based on privileged inside information. Illegal insider trading activities significantly harm the integrity and stability of the securities markets. Thus, it is critical for people to understand and adhere to the requirements set forth by the Securities Exchange Act to prevent illegal insider trading, and it is equally important for those individuals who break the law and engage in these prohibited activities to be prosecuted and punished accordingly. There are two......

Words: 3005 - Pages: 13

Premium Essay

Insider Trading

...created the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to protect the financial markets by enforcing the Securities Exchange Act.2 One of the most important issues covered by the Securities Exchange Act concerns illegal insider trading in which individuals sell or purchase investments based on privileged inside information. Illegal insider trading activities significantly harm the integrity and stability of the securities markets. Thus, it is critical for people to understand and adhere to the requirements set forth by the Securities Exchange Act to prevent illegal insider trading, and it is equally important for those individuals who break the law and engage in these prohibited activities to be prosecuted and punished accordingly. There are two forms of insider trading, one that is considered legal and the other that is clearly illegal. The legal form of insider trading involves corporate officers and directors who buy and sell stock within their own companies on the basis on publically available information. So, once the company releases confidential information to the public, then the insiders are allowed to legally make their trades based on that information.3 The illegal form of insider trading is a common type of security fraud. This type of insider trading involves anyone buying or selling investment vehicles, such as stocks, bonds, and other securities, based on valuable information that is not available to the general public. When an individual has privileged......

Words: 3700 - Pages: 15

Free Essay

Insider Trading

...| Insider Trading? | | BA265 Business Law II | | Insider Trading? | | BA265 Business Law II | grantham university June 11, 2012 Authored by: Felix E Rivera grantham university June 11, 2012 Authored by: Felix E Rivera Manny works for Medivac. Medivac is a manufacturer of spinal surgical equipment. Medivac is in preliminary talks with Medtronic to merge with Medtronic. Medtronic is the leader in spinal surgical equipment. Manny calls his brother Mitchell on Monday. Manny tells Mitchell to purchase shares in Medivac as the proposed merger will be announced on Wednesday. Manny purchases $5 million dollars in Medivac shares. The merger is announced and Medivac stock soars from $5 dollars to $50 dollars. Did Manny violate federal securities laws? If so, what law and why? I researched the Federal Securities Laws through the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) website and the term “insider trading” itself is not defined in the federal securities laws. What I did gather is that it is a term generally used to refer to the use of non-public information to trade in securities (in some cases the person who leaks the information isn't really an “insider”), or the communication of non-public information to others. So what is an insider to me? Although I could not find a specific definition, I understood that the law prohibits: * Trading by an insider, while in possession of material non-public information * Trading by a......

Words: 434 - Pages: 2