简体中文
繁體中文
English
Pусский
日本語
ภาษาไทย
Tiếng Việt
Bahasa Indonesia
Español
हिन्दी
Filippiiniläinen
Français
Deutsch
Português
Türkçe
한국어
العربية
Interactive Brokers Australia Faces Hefty $832,500 Penalty Over Suspicious Trading Concerns
Abstract:Interactive Brokers Australia faces a $832,500 penalty following concerns over suspicious trading activities. The Market Disciplinary Panel (MDP) highlighted the firm's negligence in identifying dubious trades, even after warnings from the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC).

Interactive Brokers Australia Pty Ltd, a major player in electronic trading, has shelled out a substantial penalty of $832,500, following an infringement notice issued by the Market Disciplinary Panel (MDP).
The crux of the issue lies in Interactive Brokers' oversight in spotting suspicious trading activities of a specific client. The MDP emphasized Interactive Brokers' negligence in not identifying these dubious trades, compounded by the company's reckless approach. Despite receiving warnings from the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC), the firm continued to enable more questionable trades.
It's paramount for market participants to actively curb suspicious trading, armed with robust controls and the necessary resources. These entities should be adept at detecting potential market malpractices swiftly and must address any red flags raised by regulatory bodies like ASIC promptly.
Delving into specifics, ASIC's apprehensions stem from certain Closing Single Price Auction (CSPA) orders. These orders were lodged by an Interactive Brokers' client on the ASX from 10 March to 5 November 2021. This particular client, known for trading in Orthocell Ltd. (OCC) shares, wasn't a novice but an industry insider.
Interactive Brokers, given the clients trading patterns, should have been on high alert. Indicators of suspicion included:
- Late entry or modification in the CSPA.
- Trivial volume and value of orders.
- Manipulation to keep the OCC's price at the day's peak.
- Discrepancies in the clients trading throughout the pertinent day.

Moreover, the MDP highlighted that Interactive Brokers turned a blind eye when the client seemed to artificially boost the closing price of OCC. This activity painted a distorted image concerning OCC's price.
Adding fuel to the fire, ASIC alerted Interactive Brokers on 14 October 2021 about the irregularities. Yet, the client's suspicious trading didn't halt. Alarmingly, the client's activities prompted 44 ‘marking the close’ notifications on Interactive Brokers surveillance system between 10 February and 13 October 2021.
MDP criticized Interactive Brokers' lackadaisical response:
- Delays in addressing alerts.
- Insufficient documentation during alert assessments.
- Inaction regarding the client's trading behavior.
- Only reporting suspicious activities to ASIC on 5 November 2021.
It became evident that Interactive Brokers either lacked qualified personnel to handle such alerts or failed to provide appropriate supervision. The MDP underscored that high-risk alerts require immediate attention and comprehensive reviews within two weeks.
Interactive Brokers' inability to uphold the necessary 'organizational and technical resources' was not just an oversight but negligence, threatening the market's efficiency and integrity.
However, it's pivotal to note that settling the infringement doesn't equate to Interactive Brokers admitting any wrongdoing. The firm is not deemed to have breached any sections of the Corporations Act.
For continuous updates on this topic and more, it's recommended to check out the WikiFX App.
Download the WikiFX App here: https://www.wikifx.com/en/download.html.

Disclaimer:
The views in this article only represent the author's personal views, and do not constitute investment advice on this platform. This platform does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness and timeliness of the information in the article, and will not be liable for any loss caused by the use of or reliance on the information in the article.
Read more

JP Markets Review: High Spread & Commission, Fake Bonus Lure & Withdrawal Hassles Frustrate Traders
Have you been lured into opening a JP Markets Forex Trading Account with a high bonus offer that never existed? Have you found the spread and commission charges higher on JP Markets Login than what’s advertised on the broker’s website? Wondering why you are not able to withdraw funds from your trading account? Well, all of these hint at a potential forex investment scam. Many traders have expressed their disappointment while sharing the JP Markets Review online. In this article, we have shared certain complaints. Take a look at them.

How to Choose A Forex Broker Today
Learn how to choose a Forex Broker with a regulation‑first checklist, fee transparency tips, and risk safeguards to trade with confidence today.

Angel one 2025 Review & Complaints
Angel One is a well-known name in the forex market. People are familiar with the name , but is this broker really worth your interest? What do real users say about Angel One, and what complaints have they shared? In this Angel One 2025 review, you will explore all these details.

Exclusive Markets Under the Scanner: Traders Report High Swap Charges, Deposit Discrepancies & More
Is your forex trading account experience at Exclusive Markets far from good? Do you witness high swap fees and daily charges? Does the deposit fail to reflect in your Exclusive Markets Login? Don’t receive adequate response from the customer support official on your trading queries? You are not alone! Traders have already alleged that the forex broker is involved in these activities. In this Exclusive Markets WikiFX review article, we shared some traders’ comments. Read on to know about them.
