FCA v. Neil Danziger (benchmark submission rigging, 2018)

Judgment entered

✓ Checked against the primary document on October 3, 2026. The library's summary, tags and figures for this record were compared with the regulator's own document by an AI model (Claude) following written instructions, with sampled and disputed records read a second time. No lawyer has reviewed them. A checked record can still contain errors, and checked does not mean endorsed. See how we check records or report a correction.

Report an error in this record (fca-neil-danziger-benchmark-submission-rigging-2018) by email

In January 2018 the FCA fined former RBS trader Neil Danziger £250,000 and prohibited him for attempting to influence yen LIBOR submissions to benefit trading positions and for entering wash trades to pay brokerage to brokers.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

—

Disgorgement

—

Prejudgment interest

—

Total relief

—

Alleged gain

—

Penalty as published

£250k

A dash means the release did not state a figure we could extract, not that the figure is zero. Penalty and disgorgement are stored separately so aggregates across the library do not double-count the same dollars. This regulator states penalties in GBP. The figure is recorded as published and is not converted, so it does not appear in the USD totals or medians used elsewhere on this site.

What is alleged to have happened

The Financial Conduct Authority issued this final notice on 8 January 2018. It finds that between 14 February 2007 and 22 November 2010 Danziger was knowingly concerned in RBS's breach of Principle 5 in relation to LIBOR: he asked the primary submitters to move yen LIBOR submissions, made submissions as a substitute submitter that took account of other traders' requests and of trading positions, and obtained a broker's help to try to influence other panel banks. It also finds that between September 2008 and August 2009 he recklessly entered wash trades whose purpose was to pay brokerage to brokers with no legitimate commercial reason, which showed a lack of integrity.

The FCA imposed a £250,000 penalty and prohibited him from regulated functions. This library tags the matter as benchmark submission rigging and wash trading. The record also carried a cash-versus-derivatives tag, which the notice does not support: it mentions the cash markets only as the setting for broker deals. Its status was unknown and is now judgment.

For the regulator's own account of the facts, read the primary document linked above. This page deliberately summarises the structured record rather than reproducing the release.

What technique is this, and how does it work?

This action is tagged with 2 techniques in our taxonomy. The tagging is ours: regulators charge statutory provisions, not technique names, so the mapping is an editorial judgement described in our editorial policy.

• Benchmark submission rigging — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.
• Wash trading — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.

Timeline

1. 2018-01-08 FCA final notice

Primary documents

Everything on this page derives from the documents below. Where our summary and the primary document disagree, the primary document is right.

• FCA final notice

The linked release is published by the issuing regulator under its own terms. Our summary and narrative above are our own writing.

Related actions

Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.

Record added September 10, 2026. submit a correction.