Deutsche Bank Pegged With $55 Million Fine by SEC
The SEC says Deutsche inflated the value of a portfolio of derivatives by $1.5-$3.3 bn.
As a result, the bank has settled with the SEC on a $55 million fine.
The SEC's investigation found that Deutsche Bank inflated the value of a portfolio of leveraged derivatives during crisis by an estimated $1.5-$3.3 billion during that time period.
"At the height of the financial crisis, Deutsche Bank's financial statements did not reflect the significant risk in these large, complex illiquid positions," said Andrew Ceresney, director of the SEC's Division of Enforcement, in a statement. "Deutsche Bank failed to make reasonable judgments when valuing its positions and lacked robust internal controls over financial reporting."
For the exact breakdown of where Deutsche Bank erred, here is the meat of the SEC press release:
An SEC investigation found that Deutsche Bank overvalued a portfolio of derivatives consisting of "Leveraged Super Senior" (LSS) trades through which the bank purchased protection against credit default losses. Because the trades were leveraged, the collateral posted for these positions by the sellers was only a fraction (approximately 9 percent) of the $98 billion total in purchased protection. This leverage created a "gap risk" that the market value of Deutsche Bank's protection could at some point exceed the available collateral, and the sellers could decide to unwind the trade rather than post additional collateral in that scenario. Therefore, Deutsche Bank was protected only up to the collateral level and not for the full market value of its credit protection. Deutsche Bank initially took the gap risk into account in its financial statements by adjusting down the value of the LSS positions.
According to the SEC's order instituting a settled administrative proceeding, when the credit markets started to deteriorate in 2008, Deutsche Bank steadily altered its methodologies for measuring the gap risk. Each change in methodology reduced the value assigned to the gap risk until Deutsche Bank eventually stopped adjusting for gap risk altogether. For financial reporting purposes, Deutsche Bank essentially measured its gap risk at $0 and improperly valued its LSS positions as though the market value of its protection was fully collateralized. According to internal calculations not for the purpose of financial reporting, Deutsche Bank estimated that it was exposed to a gap risk ranging from $1.5 billion to $3.3 billion during that time period.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@waterstechnology.com or view our subscription options here: https://subscriptions.waterstechnology.com/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@waterstechnology.com to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@waterstechnology.com to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@waterstechnology.com
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@waterstechnology.com
More on Regulation
New EBA taxonomy could help banks track AI risk
Extra loss flags will allow banks to track transversal risks like geopolitics and AI, say experts.
Risk managers question US reach of Dora third-party list
Some EU subsidiaries included, but regulator control over cloud providers could still be limited.
Where have four years of Cusip legal drama gone?
The IMD Wrap: The antitrust case against Cusip Global Services has been a long, winding road. Reb recaps what you might have missed.
2026 will be the year agent armies awaken
Waters Wrap: Several AI experts have recently said that the next 12 months will see significant progress for agentic AI. Are capital markets firms ready for this shift from generative AI to agents?
Despite regulatory thaw in US, major questions remain globally for 2026
From crypto and tokenization to the CAT to consolidated tapes to T+1’s advancement, the regulatory space will be front and center in the New Year.
Will overnight trading in equity markets expand next year? It’s complicated.
The potential for expanded overnight trading in US equity markets sparked debate this year, whether people liked it or not.
Waters Wavelength Ep. 342: LexisNexis Risk Solutions’ Sophie Lagouanelle
This week, Sophie Lagouanelle, chief product officer for financial crime compliance at LNRS, joins the podcast to discuss trends in the space moving into 2026.
Citadel Securities, BlackRock, Nasdaq mull tokenized equities’ impact on regulations
An SEC panel of broker-dealers, market-makers and crypto specialists debated the ramifications of a future with tokenized equities.