SEC v. Citigroup Global Markets, Inc. (2015)
Settled
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.
In 2015, the Securities and Exchange Commission settled an action with Citigroup Global Markets, Inc. over surveillance and compliance failures: its trade-monitoring reports omitted thousands of trades from 2002 to 2012, and advisory orders were routed to an affiliated market maker in 2007 to 2010. The release records a civil penalty of $15,000,000.
The record
| Agency | SEC |
|---|---|
| Release number | 3-16764 |
| Date filed | 2015-08-19 |
| Date resolved | 2015-08-19 |
| Status | settled |
| Asset class | bonds, equities |
| Venue | NYSE, Nasdaq |
| Criminal parallel | No |
| Defendants | Citigroup Global Markets, Inc. |
| Also named elsewhere | Citigroup Global Markets Inc. |
| Cited as charged or alleged | Advisers Act s.206 ; Securities Act s.17(a) |
| Techniques |
What was ordered
- Civil penalty
- $15m
- Disgorgement
- —
- Prejudgment interest
- —
- Total relief
- $15m
- Alleged gain
- —
What is alleged to have happened
the Securities and Exchange Commission announced this matter on August 19, 2015 as release 34-75729. The respondent named is Citigroup Global Markets, Inc. (1 entity). The Commission found that for about ten years the firm's daily trade reports missed several trading platforms, so thousands of trades went unmonitored, and that from October 2007 to February 2010 more than 467,000 advisory-client orders were inadvertently executed on a principal basis by an affiliated market maker, without detection for over two years. The firm consented to a censure, a cease-and-desist order under Exchange Act Section 15(g) and Advisers Act Section 206(4), and a $15 million civil penalty.
The order charges failures to maintain and enforce policies, including those on misuse of confidential information, but finds no insider trading by anyone. This library therefore no longer tags it as insider trading. No other technique fits, so it carries no technique tag.
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.
Timeline
Primary documents
Everything on this page derives from the documents below. Where our summary and the primary document disagree, the primary document is right.