Page 33 - 期货和衍生品行业监管动态(2022年7月)
P. 33

期货和衍生品行业监管动态




                        该行政令还发现,Powerline 在向客户提供燃料对冲策略的过程中而充当

                   CTA,但其并未进行任何注册。

                        CFTC 的调查与 CME 的平行调查是同时进行的,CME 还发布了一份纪律处


                   分通知,Powerline 同意支付 225,000 美元罚款并缴纳违法所得。

                   10. CFTC Orders Powerline Petroleum, LLC to Pay $875,000 For Fraud, False

                   Statements to CME, and Failure to Register as a Commodity Trading Advisor

                   (2022/7/19)


                        The Commodity Futures Trading Commission today issued an order filing and

                   simultaneously settling charges against Powerline Petroleum, LLC (Powerline), its

                   co-founder and owner, Darren Dohme, and other owner, Adam Wright, for

                   misleading clients regarding the nature of Powerline’s role, and financial interest in
                   the clients’ transactions, and for making false statements to the Chicago Mercantile


                   Exchange (CME), a board of trade and designated contract market. Powerline and
                   Dohme are also charged with failing to register Powerline as a Commodity Trading

                   Advisor (CTA) and for failure to make required disclosures.


                        The order imposes a $375,000 civil monetary penalty and $500,000 in

                   disgorgement, with Dohme and Wright’s monetary obligation capped at $150,000

                   each. The order also imposes six-month trading and three-month registration bans on

                   Powerline, Dohme, and Wright.


                        “We are committed to ensuring that market participants are honestly served by

                   intermediaries and advisors, and that those intermediaries and advisors provide all the

                   transparency that our statutes and regulations require,” said CFTC Acting Director of

                   Enforcement Gretchen Lowe. “Further, as this case shows, we will not tolerate false

                   and misleading statements being made to our exchanges.”


                        Case Background

                        The order finds that Powerline, Dohme, and Wright defrauded clients by failing

                   to adequately disclose that Powerline acted as the counterparty to its clients’




                                                             22
   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38