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
G.H. Financials Hit with $150k Penalty for Violating CME Rules
Abstract:CME Group imposes a $150,000 fine on G.H. Financials for rule violations related to the prompt provision of crucial identity information, hindering effective market surveillance.

CME Group, a prominent international derivatives marketplace, has taken decisive disciplinary action against G.H. Financials, LLC, as indicated by the issuance of a formal notice. This action stems from a thorough investigation and subsequent findings by the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME) Business Conduct Committee. The matter revolves around alleged rule violations by G.H. Financials, which were neither admitted nor denied by the company as part of a settlement offer.
The investigation revealed that, spanning from March 2019 to March 2021, G.H. Financials, operating as a clearing member firm, maintained a customer omnibus account designed to cater to the customers of a foreign Introducing Broker. Within this timeframe, G.H. Financials faced persistent issues related to the prompt provision of the identities of individuals or teams assigned to operator IDs within the specified omnibus account. Specifically, when requested by Market Regulation, G.H. Financials failed to promptly deliver this crucial information.

The repercussions of this failure were significant, as it impeded the ability of Market Regulation to effectively monitor the messaging and trading activities of the Introducing Broker's customers. The affected markets included a spectrum of currency futures markets such as the Australian Dollar, British Pound, Canadian Dollar, Swiss Franc, Mexican Peso, New Zealand Dollar, Japanese Yen, Euro FX, and E-mini S&P 500.
In light of these findings, the Panel of the CME Business Conduct Committee unequivocally concluded that G.H. Financials had violated key CME Rules, specifically Rules 432.Q. and 576. Rule 432.Q. pertains to the provision of information, stating that prompt and accurate responses to inquiries from CME Group staff are imperative, while Rule 576 deals with the cooperation principle, emphasizing the obligation to cooperate with any investigation undertaken by CME Group.
As part of the settlement offer, the Panel has imposed a financial penalty on G.H. Financials. The company is obligated to pay a fine amounting to $150,000. This monetary penalty reflects the seriousness of the rule violations and serves as a deterrent to ensure adherence to the regulatory framework set forth by CME Group.
Disciplinary actions of this nature underscore the commitment of derivative marketplaces like CME Group to maintaining the integrity and transparency of financial markets. The penalties imposed are not merely punitive but are intended to reinforce compliance, fostering an environment where market participants adhere to the highest standards of conduct. The case of G.H. Financials serves as a reminder to all entities operating within the derivatives market of the paramount importance of timely and accurate disclosure in order to facilitate effective market surveillance and uphold the principles of fair and orderly trading.

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

InterTrader Exposed: Traders Report Unfair Account Blocks, Profit Removal & Additional Fee for Withd
Does InterTrader block your forex trading account, giving inexplicable reasons? Does the broker flag you with latency trading and cancel all your profits? Do you have to pay additional fees for withdrawals? Did the UK-based forex broker fail to recognize the deposit you made? Does the customer service fail to address your trading queries? In this InterTrader review article, we have shared such complaints. Read them out.

Grand Capital Doesn’t Feel GRAND for Traders with Withdrawal Denials & Long Processing Times
The trading environment does not seem that rosy for traders at Grand Capital, a Seychelles-based forex broker. Traders’ requests for withdrawals are alleged to be in the review process for months, making them frustrated and helpless. Despite meeting the guidelines, traders find it hard to withdraw funds, as suggested by their complaints online. What’s also troubling traders are long processing times concerning Grand Capital withdrawals. In this Grand Capital review segment, we have shared some complaints for you to look at. Read on!

EmiraX Markets Withdrawal Issues Exposed
EmiraX Markets Review reveals unregulated status, fake license claims, and withdrawal issues. Stay safe and avoid this broker.

ADSS Review: Traders Say NO to Trading B’coz of Withdrawal Blocks, Account Freeze & Trade Issues
Does ADSS give you plenty of excuses to deny you access to withdrawals? Is your withdrawal request pending for months or years? Do you witness account freezes from the United Arab Emirates-based forex broker? Do you struggle to open and close your forex positions on the ADSS app? Does the customer support service fail to respond to your trading queries? All these issues have become a rage online. In this ADSS Broker review article, we have highlighted actual trader wordings on these issues. Keep reading!
