FCA v. Paul White (benchmark submission rigging, 2016)

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-paul-white-benchmark-submission-rigging-2016) by email

In April 2016 the FCA publicly censured and prohibited Paul White, RBS's primary yen and Swiss franc LIBOR submitter from 2007 to 2010, for submissions influenced by derivatives traders' requests, a broker's requests and trading positions. It imposed no fine because of his hardship.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

—

Disgorgement

—

Prejudgment interest

—

Total relief

—

Alleged gain

—

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.

What is alleged to have happened

The Financial Conduct Authority issued this final notice on 8 April 2016. It finds that between 8 March 2007 and 24 November 2010 White, as RBS's primary JPY and CHF LIBOR submitter, was knowingly concerned in the bank's breach of Principle 5. He took into account requests from derivatives traders, requests relayed by a broker for a trader at another panel bank, and trading positions, and he acted recklessly and without integrity by closing his mind to the risk that this was improper.

The FCA published a statement of misconduct as a public censure and prohibited him from regulated functions. It said it would have fined him £250,000 but did not, because he showed serious financial hardship; the record had shown that figure as a penalty, and it is now cleared.

This library tags the matter as benchmark submission rigging because the conduct is skewed LIBOR submissions.

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 one technique 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.

Timeline

1. 2016-04-08 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.