Saturday, June 30, 2012

Reuters: Regulatory News: UPDATE 1-UK orders bank review, calls Diamond to panel

Reuters: Regulatory News
Reuters.com is your source for breaking news, business, financial and investing news, including personal finance and stocks. Reuters is the leading global provider of news, financial information and technology solutions to the world's media, financial institutions, businesses and individuals. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
UPDATE 1-UK orders bank review, calls Diamond to panel
Jun 30th 2012, 13:04

Sat Jun 30, 2012 9:04am EDT

By Avril Ormsby

LONDON, June 30 (Reuters) - The British government has ordered an independent review into the workings of key lending rates between banks, after Barclays was found guilty of rigging them, a spokeswoman for Britain's Prime Minister said on Saturday.

The decision follows news that U.S. and British authorities fined Barclays $450 million for manipulating the London Interbank Offer Rate (Libor), the interest rate on loans that banks make to each other.

More banks are expected to be drawn into the scandal, which has fuelled public outrage at the culture and practices of the banking industry and prompted calls from lawmakers across the political spectrum for an inquiry.

The government plans a short, urgent review that would allow it to amend the Financial Services Bill currently going through parliament, the Prime Minister's spokeswoman said. The review will examine Libor and the possibility of criminal sanctions.

When asked about a full public inquiry, Prime Minister David Cameron referred to a series of inquiries that had already taken place.

"Let's take our time, think this through carefully...Let's get this right," he told BBC television.

A public inquiry would be a risky step for a government already under fire after a string of embarrassing revelations in a year of public hearings following last year's phone-hacking scandal.

The American boss of Barclays, Bob Diamond, has been summoned to appear before British lawmakers on Wednesday July 4 to answer questions about the scandal.

On his last appearance before a parliamentary committee last year Diamond said it was time for bankers to stop apologising. He is now under intense pressure to quit the bank, where he ran the investment banking arm Barclays Capital when the interest rate rigging occurred in 2005-2009.

"Parliament and the public need to know what went wrong and whether the perpetrators have been rooted out," said Andrew Tyrie, head of Parliament's Treasury Select Committee, which will be questioning Diamond.

"We also need to be given confidence that this has been put right."

Barclays was the first bank to settle in an investigation that is looking at other large financial institutions in Europe, Japan and North America, including Citigroup, HSBC and UBS. No criminal charges have been filed but Britain has called in the fraud squad to investigate possible crimes.

Bank of England Governor Mervyn King launched an angry attack on British banking culture on Friday, saying something had gone very wrong with an industry which he derided for resorting to "deceitful" methods to make money.

The country's most powerful monetary official, he said a fundamental overhaul was needed for a sector that is reeling from a string of financial scandals.

Britain's banking industry, one of the largest cogs in Britain's economy and important for tax revenue, has been knocked by a series of damaging headlines.

In the same week as the LIBOR scandal erupted, Britain's Financial Services Authority said it had settled with four banks - Barclays, RBS, HSBC and Lloyds - after finding evidence they mis-sold products to protect small businesses against a rise in interest rates.

Justice Secretary Ken Clarke said that if any of the ongoing investigations revealed suspected criminal offences "they should be brought to trial".

"We are very bad at prosecuting financial crime in this country," he told BBC radio on Saturday.

"That is why when we're setting up the National Crime Agency we should look at the record of the Serious Fraud Office. I suspect financial crime is easier to get away with in this country than practically any other sort of crime."

  • Link this
  • Share this
  • Digg this
  • Email
  • Reprints

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

Reuters: Regulatory News: UK orders review of interbank rates

Reuters: Regulatory News
Reuters.com is your source for breaking news, business, financial and investing news, including personal finance and stocks. Reuters is the leading global provider of news, financial information and technology solutions to the world's media, financial institutions, businesses and individuals. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
UK orders review of interbank rates
Jun 30th 2012, 11:30

LONDON, June 30 | Sat Jun 30, 2012 7:30am EDT

LONDON, June 30 (Reuters) - The British government has ordered an independent review into the workings of interbank lending rates, known as the London Interbank Offer Rate (LIBOR), a spokeswoman for Britain's Prime Minister said on Saturday.

The decision follows news earlier this week that U.S. and British authorities fined Barclays $450 million for manipulating the rate at which banks lend to each other overnight.

More banks are expected to be drawn into the scandal as the investigation continues and the affair has fuelled public outrage at the culture and practices of the banking industry.

No further details of the review were available.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

Friday, June 29, 2012

Reuters: Regulatory News: UPDATE 3-U.S. CFTC floats overseas treatment of swaps rules

Reuters: Regulatory News
Reuters.com is your source for breaking news, business, financial and investing news, including personal finance and stocks. Reuters is the leading global provider of news, financial information and technology solutions to the world's media, financial institutions, businesses and individuals. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
UPDATE 3-U.S. CFTC floats overseas treatment of swaps rules
Jun 30th 2012, 01:03

Fri Jun 29, 2012 9:03pm EDT

  By Alexandra Alper      WASHINGTON, June 29 (Reuters) - The U.S. Commodity Futures  Trading Commission voted unanimously behind closed doors on  Friday to propose two key measures outlining how U.S. swaps  regulations will apply overseas.      The measures had previously been slated for a public vote  last Thursday, but the meeting was abruptly canceled due to  last-minute negotiations between two Democratic commissioners.      The CFTC was tasked by the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial reform  law with writing a raft of rules to boost transparency and limit  risk in the murky, $650 trillion, over-the-counter swaps market.      One of the most hotly debated pieces of the new regime is  how broadly U.S. derivatives rules will reach into the overseas  operations of U.S. and foreign banks.      Regulators have struggled to balance the need for broad  oversight -- to prevent offshore risk from damaging the U.S.  financial system -- with the aim of creating a level playing  field that gives no firm a competitive advantage.      "We must not forget the lessons of the 2008 crisis and  earlier," CFTC Chairman Gary Gensler said in a statement. "Swaps  executed offshore by U.S. financial institutions can send risk  straight back to our shores."      One measure proposed by the CFTC gives guidance on which  entities and transactions will be subject to U.S. "entity level"  and "transaction level" rules.      "Entity level" rules include how much capital is needed to  back a trade, while "transaction level" requirements detail the  amount of collateral a firm must put up for its transactions.      The second measure would grant U.S. and foreign firms a  delay in complying with certain "entity level" requirements such  as business conduct standards.      Foreign firms will have 12 months to comply, while U.S.  firms will have until January 2013.      To take advantage of the delay, foreign firms would have to  register with the National Futures Association and submit a  compliance plan for meeting U.S. or foreign swaps rules.       It is not yet clear in practice how aggressive the overseas  reach will be. The guidance will be put out for public comment  for 45 days, while the proposed compliance delay will be put for  30 days of comments.        HOT DEBATE      U.S. regulators are first in line to put swaps reforms in  place, which has led U.S. banks to fear their business will move  abroad to firms not subject to tough U.S. rules.      But U.S. regulators point to recent history to demonstrate  the need for broad regulations.      "The recent Barclays matter, the JPMorgan loss and many  other illustrations make the case for this far better than  anything else," said Bart Chilton, a Democratic commissioner at  the CFTC.       JPMorgan Chase & Co announced a multibillion-dollar  trading loss on a complex derivatives trade, and U.S. and  British authorities fined Barclays $450 million for  manipulating the rate at which banks lend to each other,  reigniting calls for tough banking oversight.       Risky derivatives trading at overseas subsidiaries of firms  such as insurer American International Group severely  damaged the U.S. financial system during the 2007-2009 financial  crisis and led to multibillion-dollar taxpayer bailouts.      Scott O'Malia, a Republican commissioner and frequent critic  of the agency's rules, voted for the measures, but criticized  the guidance as overly broad, and lacking sufficient  collaboration with foreign regulators.        "I would like to make it clear that if I were asked to vote  on the proposed guidance as final, my vote would be no," he said  in a statement.      O'Malia also said he would have preferred that the agency  issue a formal rule instead of guidance. Rules, unlike guidance,  require the agency perform a cost benefit analysis, which have  been fodder for industry suits against the CFTC.      The Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association  echoed O'Malia's concern.      "We are disappointed that the CFTC has issued proposed  guidance in an attempt to circumvent the requirement for a  cost-benefit analysis," said Tim Ryan President of SIFMA, one of  the groups that has sued the agency over a cost benefit  analysis.      The CFTC is not required to issued guidance or a rule about  the reach of its swaps rules.      A swap is a financial contract in which two parties exchange  cash flows on debt, currencies, or other assets, to hedge risk  or make a profit.      The guidance and the delay will be available for public  comment for 45 days and 30 days, respectively, after which the  CFTC would vote on the final versions.  
  • Link this
  • Share this
  • Digg this
  • Email
  • Reprints

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

Reuters: Regulatory News: UPDATE 1-US trade panel remands Motorola Mobility case

Reuters: Regulatory News
Reuters.com is your source for breaking news, business, financial and investing news, including personal finance and stocks. Reuters is the leading global provider of news, financial information and technology solutions to the world's media, financial institutions, businesses and individuals. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
UPDATE 1-US trade panel remands Motorola Mobility case
Jun 30th 2012, 00:43

Fri Jun 29, 2012 8:43pm EDT

* ITC sends complaint against Microsoft back to judge

* Final decision had been due in August

WASHINGTON, June 29 (Reuters) - A U.S. trade panel has decided to defer a final ruling on a complaint filed by Google unit Motorola Mobility accusing Microsoft of infringing its patents to make its popular Xbox.

A judge at the U.S. International Trade Commission ruled in April that Microsoft infringed four patents owned by Motorola Mobility, now a Google unit, but did not infringe on a fifth named in the complaint.

The full commission said on Friday that it would send the case back to the judge for reconsideration. That reconsideration will likely take months. A final decision in the case had been expected in August.

Motorola Mobility, which was recently acquired by Google, had asked for the infringing devices to be barred from importation into the United States.

The ITC is a popular venue for patent lawsuits because it can bar the importation of infringing products and because it issues decisions relatively quickly.

Motorola Mobility had accused Microsoft of infringing on patents for technology like wireless connection of the Xbox to the Internet and technology for video compression to speed transmission.

Friday's ITC decision "should result in dismissal of Motorola's entire case against the Xbox," said Microsoft Deputy General Counsel David Howard. "On three patents the commission directed the judge to apply clear legal authority that should result in dismissal of those patents. In addition, the commission directed the judge to consider whether certain contractual commitments made by Google should result in dismissal of the remaining patent."

Motorola Mobility has filed related lawsuits against Microsoft in federal courts in Wisconsin and Florida. They are stayed pending an ITC decision.

In a related case in Germany, a court in Mannheim ordered Microsoft in early May to remove its popular Xbox gaming consoles and Windows 7 operating system software from the German market.

Microsoft maintains it will not need to because a judge in Seattle gave Microsoft a preliminary injunction against Motorola Mobility to prevent enforcement of any German court order.

In a further development in the patent wars, U.S. antitrust regulators are investigating whether Motorola Mobility is living up to licensing commitments it made when its patents were adopted as industry standards, sources said on Friday.

The International Trade Commission case is No. 337-752.

  • Link this
  • Share this
  • Digg this
  • Email
  • Reprints

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

Reuters: Regulatory News: CORRECTED-After health ruling, will US be ready for the law?

Reuters: Regulatory News
Reuters.com is your source for breaking news, business, financial and investing news, including personal finance and stocks. Reuters is the leading global provider of news, financial information and technology solutions to the world's media, financial institutions, businesses and individuals. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
CORRECTED-After health ruling, will US be ready for the law?
Jun 30th 2012, 00:42

Fri Jun 29, 2012 8:42pm EDT

(Corrects name of Wisconsin Governor)

* Court ruling fails to erase doubts about implementation

* Health officials insist expansion will go forward

* Some states seem unlikely to budge as election looms

By David Morgan

WASHINGTON, June 29 (Reuters) - Now that the Supreme Court has removed the main legal challenge to President Barack Obama's healthcare overhaul, policy experts question whether enough U.S. states will be ready to implement the law when it takes full effect in 2014.

Up to now, most states have avoided decisive action to build the private insurance exchanges that would extend health coverage to an additional 16 million Americans. Governors in largely Republican states who oppose the entire law may still refuse to act on the exchanges, requiring the federal government to step in to operate them.

"We will be ready to ensure that every American has access to affordable, high quality coverage on Jan. 1, 2014," Mike Hash, an official overseeing the exchanges effort at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), said on Friday.

HHS says that 34 states have received $850 million in grants to help plan and build the exchanges. Accepting the funds alone does not signal significant progress, however.

According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, which tracks healthcare issues, 17 states have made no significant progress towards establishing an exchange or rejected the idea. Most of them voted for Republican candidates during the 2008 elections that brought Obama, a Democrat, to power.

Another 18 states are studying their options, leaving only 15 that have taken concrete steps to establish an exchange, Kaiser said.

Some health experts fear that many of the states holding off now will wait until the November elections in the hope Republicans will win control of the White House or Congress and repeal the law.

Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker announced on Thursday that he intended to do just that and other Republican governors, including Sam Brownback of Kansas, expressed similar views.

"If states really have the will to throw themselves into this, there is time to set up an exchange. But if states are going to wait for the election, then there isn't time," said health economist Jonathan Gruber of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Former Obama administration officials acknowledge that two years of political battles since the healthcare law was passed in 2010 might hamper its full introduction.

"We have taken a two year diversion - which is one thing I'm worried about ... Everyone knows the law is going to be implemented and the question now really is how well," said Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, a former Obama healthcare adviser.

The Supreme Court ruling on Thursday upheld the core of the law, but also allowed states to opt out of a planned expansion of the Medicaid health program for the poor. That could also jeopardize the law's aim of enrolling another 16 million of the most vulnerable Americans via Medicaid.

TIME OF THE ESSENCE

With the exchanges, timing is key. States must build information technology systems capable of quickly evaluating individual applicants to see if they are eligible for private insurance or Medicaid, based on household income and other factors. Only Massachusetts, which overhauled its health system in 2006, has built one to date.

Gruber estimates that any given state could require a year to build an exchange's infrastructure. Those that wait until after the November ballot could be ill-prepared by the autumn of 2013 when the federal government expects exchanges to offer open enrollment.

The administration set a Nov. 16, 2012, deadline for states to confirm they are building an exchange and maintains that will leave the federal government enough time to step in and set one up where needed.

But health experts say federal exchanges could create service gaps by overlooking unique features in state health system, while posing political risks to local officials by providing benefits they denied to their citizens.

"Our objective is that every state will operate a state-based exchange," Hash said.

Joseph Antos, a health expert with the conservative American Enterprise Institute, believes the administration could have difficulty setting up federal exchanges because of the sheer complexity of the task.

"They won't be ready everywhere. And even the degree of readiness - the idea that everything's going to be smooth - smooth is not the word you attach to implementation," he added (Additional reporting by Salimah Ebrahim; editing by Michele Gershberg and Andre Grenon)

  • Link this
  • Share this
  • Digg this
  • Email
  • Reprints

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

Reuters: Regulatory News: UPDATE 1-After health ruling, will US be ready for the law?

Reuters: Regulatory News
Reuters.com is your source for breaking news, business, financial and investing news, including personal finance and stocks. Reuters is the leading global provider of news, financial information and technology solutions to the world's media, financial institutions, businesses and individuals. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
UPDATE 1-After health ruling, will US be ready for the law?
Jun 29th 2012, 22:35

Fri Jun 29, 2012 6:35pm EDT

* Court ruling fails to erase doubts about implementation

* Health officials insist expansion will go forward

* Some states seem unlikely to budge as election looms

By David Morgan

WASHINGTON, June 29 (Reuters) - Now that the Supreme Court has removed the main legal challenge to President Barack Obama's healthcare overhaul, policy experts question whether enough U.S. states will be ready to implement the law when it takes full effect in 2014.

Up to now, most states have avoided decisive action to build the private insurance exchanges that would extend health coverage to an additional 16 million Americans. Governors in largely Republican states who oppose the entire law may still refuse to act on the exchanges, requiring the federal government to step in to operate them.

"We will be ready to ensure that every American has access to affordable, high quality coverage on Jan. 1, 2014," Mike Hash, an official overseeing the exchanges effort at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), said on Friday.

HHS says that 34 states have received $850 million in grants to help plan and build the exchanges. Accepting the funds alone does not signal significant progress, however.

According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, which tracks healthcare issues, 17 states have made no significant progress towards establishing an exchange or rejected the idea. Most of them voted for Republican candidates during the 2008 elections that brought Obama, a Democrat, to power.

Another 18 states are studying their options, leaving only 15 that have taken concrete steps to establish an exchange, Kaiser said.

Some health experts fear that many of the states holding off now will wait until the November elections in the hope Republicans will win control of the White House or Congress and repeal the law. Wisconsin Governor Rick Scott announced on Thursday that he intended to do just that and other Republican governors, including Sam Brownback of Kansas, expressed similar views.

"If states really have the will to throw themselves into this, there is time to set up an exchange. But if states are going to wait for the election, then there isn't time," said health economist Jonathan Gruber of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Former Obama administration officials acknowledge that two years of political battles since the healthcare law was passed in 2010 might hamper its full introduction.

"We have taken a two year diversion - which is one thing I'm worried about ... Everyone knows the law is going to be implemented and the question now really is how well," said Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, a former Obama healthcare adviser.

The Supreme Court ruling on Thursday upheld the core of the law, but also allowed states to opt out of a planned expansion of the Medicaid health program for the poor. That could also jeopardize the law's aim of enrolling another 16 million of the most vulnerable Americans via Medicaid.

"Come this November, we are going to elect a new President and a new Congress who will repeal and replace Obamacare. That's why we have refused to implement the Obamacare health exchange or the Medicaid expansion," Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal said in an emailed statement.

TIME OF THE ESSENCE

With the exchanges, timing is key. States must build information technology systems capable of quickly evaluating individual applicants to see if they are eligible for private insurance or Medicaid, based on household income and other factors. Only Massachusetts, which overhauled its health system in 2006, has built one to date.

Gruber estimates that any given state could require a year to build an exchange's infrastructure. Those that wait until after the November ballot could be ill-prepared by the autumn of 2013 when the federal government expects exchanges to offer open enrollment.

The administration set a Nov. 16, 2012, deadline for states to confirm they are building an exchange and maintains that will leave the federal government enough time to step in and set one up where needed.

But health experts say federal exchanges could create service gaps by overlooking unique features in state health system, while posing political risks to local officials by providing benefits they denied to their citizens.

"Our objective is that every state will operate a state-based exchange," Hash said.

Joseph Antos, a health expert with the conservative American Enterprise Institute, believes the administration could have difficulty setting up federal exchanges because of the sheer complexity of the task.

"They won't be ready everywhere. And even the degree of readiness - the idea that everything's going to be smooth - smooth is not the word you attach to implementation," he said.

  • Link this
  • Share this
  • Digg this
  • Email
  • Reprints

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

Reuters: Regulatory News: US trade panel remands Motorola Mobility case

Reuters: Regulatory News
Reuters.com is your source for breaking news, business, financial and investing news, including personal finance and stocks. Reuters is the leading global provider of news, financial information and technology solutions to the world's media, financial institutions, businesses and individuals. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
US trade panel remands Motorola Mobility case
Jun 29th 2012, 22:57

Fri Jun 29, 2012 6:57pm EDT

* ITC sends complaint against Microsoft back to judge

* Final decision had been due in August

WASHINGTON, June 29 (Reuters) - A U.S. trade panel has decided to defer a final ruling on a complaint filed by Google unit Motorola Mobility accusing Microsoft of infringing its patents to make its popular Xbox.

A judge at the U.S. International Trade Commission ruled in April that Microsoft infringed four patents owned by Motorola Mobility, now a Google unit, but did not infringe on a fifth named in the complaint.

The full commission said on Friday that it would send the case back to the judge for reconsideration. That reconsideration will likely take months. A final decision in the case had been expected in August.

Motorola Mobility, which was recently acquired by Google, had asked for the infringing devices to be barred from importation into the United States.

The ITC is a popular venue for patent lawsuits because it can bar the importation of infringing products and because it issues decisions relatively quickly.

Motorola Mobility had accused Microsoft of infringing on patents for technology like wireless connection of the Xbox to the Internet and technology for video compression to speed transmission.

Motorola Mobility has filed related lawsuits against Microsoft in federal courts in Wisconsin and Florida. They are stayed pending an ITC decision.

In a related case in Germany, a court in Mannheim ordered Microsoft in early May to remove its popular Xbox gaming consoles and Windows 7 operating system software from the German market.

Microsoft maintains it will not need to because a judge in Seattle gave Microsoft a preliminary injunction against Motorola Mobility to prevent enforcement of any German court order.

In a further development in the patent wars, U.S. antitrust regulators are investigating whether Motorola Mobility is living up to licensing commitments it made when its patents were adopted as industry standards, sources said on Friday.

The International Trade Commission case is No. 337-752.

  • Link this
  • Share this
  • Digg this
  • Email
  • Reprints

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

Reuters: Regulatory News: NYSE catch saves broker from disastrous blunder

Reuters: Regulatory News
Reuters.com is your source for breaking news, business, financial and investing news, including personal finance and stocks. Reuters is the leading global provider of news, financial information and technology solutions to the world's media, financial institutions, businesses and individuals. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
NYSE catch saves broker from disastrous blunder
Jun 29th 2012, 23:11

Fri Jun 29, 2012 7:11pm EDT

* Erroneous order for 17 mln Monster Worldwide shares caught

* Stock halted to avoid egregious closing price

* Broker meant to place Monster Beverage order

By John McCrank

NEW YORK, June 29 (Reuters) - They might be tooting their own horn, but the New York Stock Exchange may have a point.

A programming error on a massive trade by a broker-dealer on Friday nearly caused a "disastrous" set of events at market close that could have cost millions, but was caught by a person overseeing end of day trading, the exchange, owned by NYSE Euronext, said.

The event illustrates the difference in market structure between a fully electronic exchange and the Big Board, which has a hybrid system where the open and close are monitored by flesh and blood "Designated Market Makers" (DMMs), said Lou Pastina, executive vice president of operations at NYSE.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has been taking a deep look into market structure issues ever since the May 6, 2010 flash crash. Its sanctioned electronic exchange Direct Edge Holdings LLC in October, saying weak internal controls led to millions of dollars in trading losses and a systems outage.

The SEC is now considering forcing Nasdaq OMX Group to upgrade its trading systems following Facebook's May 18 market debut, which was marred by technical glitches that led to losses estimated in the hundreds of millions, according to a Wall Street Journal report.

WRONG MONSTER

At 3:59:59 p.m. Eastern time on Friday, a broker-dealer placed an order for 17 million shares of Monster Worldwide , which was trading at $8.50 a share, with no offers in site.

Typically, when an order comes in at the close, NYSE has a procedure to go out and solicit contra-side interests to fill the order, but given the thin book for Monster Worldwide, something smelled off this time, said Pastina.

The DMM saw it, alerted the operations staff, the stock was halted, and the broker-dealer was contacted. It turned out the broker-dealer did not want to buy Monster Worldwide. Rather, it was looking to buy an unspecified amount of Monster Beverage Corp, the Sara Lee coffee and tea spinoff that was a new entrant to the S&P 500.

"They had a programming error, so we were able to prevent a disastrous situation," said Pastina.

Total trading volume on Friday in online job firm Monster Worldwide did not even hit 1 million shares.

Had the 17 million share order gone through, the stock, which had a share buy imbalance of 17,000, would have soared as the buy orders - there were about 60 of them - would have continued to automatically execute until there were no more offers.

It would have clearly been an erroneous execution.

"Anybody who would have sold that stock would have thought, 'hey, this is terrific,' but it would have been subject to a clearly erroneous trade," said Pastina.

"That may have come later and they may have sold that stock and turned around and used that money to buy something else, and it would have been a compound error for the sellers."

  • Link this
  • Share this
  • Digg this
  • Email
  • Reprints

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

Reuters: Regulatory News: US investigating Google unit over patent licensing

Reuters: Regulatory News
Reuters.com is your source for breaking news, business, financial and investing news, including personal finance and stocks. Reuters is the leading global provider of news, financial information and technology solutions to the world's media, financial institutions, businesses and individuals. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
US investigating Google unit over patent licensing
Jun 29th 2012, 22:33

Fri Jun 29, 2012 6:33pm EDT

* Involves industry Wi-Fi and video standards

* Google says it takes licensing commitments seriously

WASHINGTON, June 29 (Reuters) - U.S. antitrust regulators are investigating whether Google unit Motorola Mobility is living up to licensing commitments made when its patents were adopted as industry standards, two people familiar with the probe said on Friday.

The Federal Trade Commission sent civil investigative demands, essentially civil subpoenas, to companies this week asking them about Motorola Mobility's licensing practices, one person said.

The industry standards affected have to do with Wi-Fi and video standards, one of the people said.

Motorola Mobility has sued Microsoft Corp for infringement of industry standard patents and asked for its Xbox product to be barred from the U.S. market.

Standard-setting bodies meet periodically to determine which technology will be used industry-wide, which ensures devices will work together. Companies who hold those patents commit to licensing them broadly and on reasonable terms, even to competitors.

"We take our commitments to license on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms very seriously," a Google spokeswoman said in an email when asked about the probe.

A spokeswoman for Microsoft confirmed receipt of the FTC inquiry but declined to describe what was in it. Apple Inc declined comment on whether it received a similar inquiry.

The FTC declined to comment.

The FTC also has a broader investigation underway into whether Google distorts its search results to steer people to its related businesses, like Google Places. The agency recently hired a big name litigator, Beth Wilkinson, to lead its probe.

Bloomberg was the first to report the Motorola patent investigation on Friday.

  • Link this
  • Share this
  • Digg this
  • Email
  • Reprints

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

Reuters: Regulatory News: Online school can't open without N. Carolina OK: judge

Reuters: Regulatory News
Reuters.com is your source for breaking news, business, financial and investing news, including personal finance and stocks. Reuters is the leading global provider of news, financial information and technology solutions to the world's media, financial institutions, businesses and individuals. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
Online school can't open without N. Carolina OK: judge
Jun 29th 2012, 21:59

By Wade Rawlins

RALEIGH, N.C., June 29 | Fri Jun 29, 2012 5:59pm EDT

RALEIGH, N.C., June 29 (Reuters) - A judge said on Friday that a private company cannot open the first online charter school in North Carolina this fall unless it has the approval of a state agency.

Wake County Superior Court Judge Abraham Penn Jones ruled that the State Board of Education has final authority to evaluate and approve applications for charter schools, including cyber schools. He said an administrative law judge had overstepped his authority by approving the school.

During the past decade, online learning for students from kindergarten through high school has evolved from a novelty into a growing phenomenon driven by a handful of large for-profit companies such as K12, according to the National Education Policy Center. Online charter schools receive public school funding, allowing entrepreneurs to turn education into a government financed for-profit enterprise.

North Carolina Learns Inc, a company funded by K12 Inc , a for-profit education company, received preliminary approval in January from the Cabarrus County School Board to open the North Carolina Virtual Academy, the state's first online charter school.

The company then applied to the State Board of Education for final approval of the charter. But the Board did not respond to the application, saying it would not consider any online charter schools applications for 2012-13.

The company sued the state and an administrative law judge granted approval of the application.

The state of North Carolina appealed the decision and the judge's ruling on Friday was on that appeal.

Some 89 school boards in the state passed resolutions opposing the online charter school.

Virtual schools already exist in at least 27 states. Students study at home and use computers to interact with teachers who may be hundreds or thousands of miles away. Online virtual schools represent the fastest-growing alternative to traditional K-12 education in the United States, according to the National Education Policy Center. But professional educators remain skeptical of full-time online education for young students.

Cyber schools remain relatively unregulated and concerns have arisen about the quality of education, teacher certification and student performance. A 2011 study by Stanford University found that students in online charter schools in Pennsylvania performed significantly worse in reading and math than their peers in traditional public schools. The National Education Policy Center said there is no research evidence that full-time virtual school for K-12 students is an adequate replacement for traditional face-to-face learning.

The court decision did not set any deadline for reviewing the online charter school.

Fletcher Hartsell, an attorney for N.C. Learns Inc, said the North Carolina Virtual Academy had received inquiries of interest from about 1,000 families, representing 1,700 students.

He said the board of directors of N.C. Learns would have to decide the next move. "There is always the possibility of an appeal," Hartsell said.

  • Link this
  • Share this
  • Digg this
  • Email
  • Reprints

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

Reuters: Regulatory News: UPDATE 1-US lawmakers press DOE to speed LNG export review

Reuters: Regulatory News
Reuters.com is your source for breaking news, business, financial and investing news, including personal finance and stocks. Reuters is the leading global provider of news, financial information and technology solutions to the world's media, financial institutions, businesses and individuals. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
UPDATE 1-US lawmakers press DOE to speed LNG export review
Jun 29th 2012, 21:40

Fri Jun 29, 2012 5:40pm EDT

* DOE needs renewed sense of urgency on exports-letter

* Few lawmakers had taken up LNG export issue

* Lawmakers say U.S. risks falling behind Australia, Canada

By Ayesha Rascoe

WASHINGTON, June 29 (Reuters) - U.S. lawmakers representing states rich in shale gas called for the Obama administration to expedite approval of liquefied natural gas exports on Friday, mounting the first real push in support of gas exports on Capitol Hill.

A bipartisan coalition of 21 lawmakers in the House of Representatives said the Obama administration needs to move forward with its review of companies looking to export LNG.

"We urge you to bring a renewed sense of urgency to the approval process," the group said in a letter to Energy Secretary Steven Chu.

Until now, lawmakers have mostly stayed on the sidelines regarding the issue of selling gas abroad, a prospect that has come to the forefront due to the booming U.S. natural gas sector, but potentially pits manufacturers against the oil and gas industry.

The few lawmakers that had been vocal about exports, including Congressman Edward Markey and Senator Ron Wyden, raised concerns that the United States might be at risk of trading away its newfound energy security advantage and raising prices for consumers.

STALLED PROCESS

Drilling innovations have allowed companies to tap vast shale gas reserves in places not traditionally associated with oil and gas production, such as Pennsylvania and Ohio. The rapid expansion has also led to a gas glut that has pushed gas prices down to levels producers say are unsustainable.

"One answer to the growing supply and demand imbalance is to allow American producers to capture a share of a growing global LNG market," the lawmakers said in their letter.

The letter in support of exports was spearheaded by Ohio congressmen Bill Johnson, a Republican, and Tim Ryan, a Democrat.

"We're certainly encouraged to see Congress weighing in on the issue at the Department of Energy," said Bill Cooper, head of the Center for Liquefied Natural Gas, a trade group for the industry. "We hope it's the start of a groundswell of support."

Critics of exports argue cheap gas prices have helped spur a manufacturing resurgence that is threatened by moves to sell U.S. gas to overseas. Dow Chemical has argued that the government should not allow unlimited gas exports.

The Obama administration, which must approve exports to all but a handful of countries with free trade agreements, is weighing about eight LNG export applications from companies, including Dominion Resources and Southern Co.

The department approved exports from just one project, Cheniere Energy's Sabine Pass terminal. After that approval, the department said it would wait on the results from a study of the economic implications of exports before acting on anymore applications.

While the study was initially due out in March, the department has pushed back its release, saying the report will come out some time this summer.

In their letter to Chu, the lawmakers bemoaned the "stalled" approval process, warning that the United States could fall behind countries like Australia and Canada that are also moving ahead with plans to export gas.

Still, the lawmakers urged the department to carefully monitor market conditions to protect manufacturers' access to affordable natural gas.

  • Link this
  • Share this
  • Digg this
  • Email
  • Reprints

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

Reuters: Regulatory News: After health ruling, will US be ready for the law?

Reuters: Regulatory News
Reuters.com is your source for breaking news, business, financial and investing news, including personal finance and stocks. Reuters is the leading global provider of news, financial information and technology solutions to the world's media, financial institutions, businesses and individuals. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
After health ruling, will US be ready for the law?
Jun 29th 2012, 21:41

Fri Jun 29, 2012 5:41pm EDT

* Court ruling fails to erase doubts about implementation

* Health officials insist expansion will go forward

* Some states seem unlikely to budge as election looms

By David Morgan

WASHINGTON, June 29 (Reuters) - Now that the Supreme Court has removed the main legal challenge to President Barack Obama's healthcare overhaul, policy experts question whether enough U.S. states will be ready to implement the law when it takes full effect in 2014.

Up to now, most states have avoided decisive action to build the private insurance exchanges that would extend health coverage to an additional 16 million Americans. Governors in largely Republican states who oppose the entire law may still refuse to act on the exchanges, requiring the federal government to step in to operate them.

"We will be ready to ensure that every American has access to affordable, high quality coverage on Jan. 1, 2014," Mike Hash, an official overseeing the exchanges effort at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), said on Friday.

HHS says that 34 states have received $850 million in grants to help plan and build the exchanges. Accepting the funds alone does not signal significant progress, however.

According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, which tracks healthcare issues, 17 states have made no significant progress towards establishing an exchange or rejected the idea. Most of them voted for Republican candidates during the 2008 elections that brought Obama, a Democrat, to power.

Another 18 states are studying their options, leaving only 15 that have taken concrete steps to establish an exchange, Kaiser said.

Some health experts fear that many of the states holding off now will wait until the November elections in the hope Republicans will win control of the White House or Congress and repeal the law. Wisconsin Governor Rick Scott announced on Thursday that he intended to do just that and other Republican governors, including Sam Brownback of Kansas, expressed similar views.

"If states really have the will to throw themselves into this, there is time to set up an exchange. But if states are going to wait for the election, then there isn't time," said health economist Jonathan Gruber of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Former Obama administration officials acknowledge that two years of political battles since the healthcare law was passed in 2010 might hamper its full introduction.

"We have taken a two year diversion - which is one thing I'm worried about ... Everyone knows the law is going to be implemented and the question now really is how well," said Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, a former Obama healthcare adviser.

The Supreme Court ruling on Thursday upheld the core of the law, but also allowed states to opt out of a planned expansion of the Medicaid health program for the poor. That could also jeopardize the law's aim of enrolling another 16 million of the most vulnerable Americans via Medicaid.

TIME OF THE ESSENCE

With the exchanges, timing is key. States must build information technology systems capable of quickly evaluating individual applicants to see if they are eligible for private insurance or Medicaid, based on household income and other factors. Only Massachusetts, which overhauled its health system in 2006, has built one to date.

Gruber estimates that any given state could require a year to build an exchange's infrastructure. Those that wait until after the November ballot could be ill-prepared by the autumn of 2013 when the federal government expects exchanges to offer open enrollment.

The administration set a Nov. 16, 2012, deadline for states to confirm they are building an exchange and maintains that will leave the federal government enough time to step in and set one up where needed.

But health experts say federal exchanges could create service gaps by overlooking unique features in state health system, while posing political risks to local officials by providing benefits they denied to their citizens.

"Our objective is that every state will operate a state-based exchange," Hash said.

Joseph Antos, a health expert with the conservative American Enterprise Institute, believes the administration could have difficulty setting up federal exchanges because of the sheer complexity of the task.

"They won't be ready everywhere. And even the degree of readiness - the idea that everything's going to be smooth - smooth is not the word you attach to implementation," he added

  • Link this
  • Share this
  • Digg this
  • Email
  • Reprints

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

Reuters: Regulatory News: UPDATE 1-American Eagle sees $35-$50 mln loss from kids brand exit

Reuters: Regulatory News
Reuters.com is your source for breaking news, business, financial and investing news, including personal finance and stocks. Reuters is the leading global provider of news, financial information and technology solutions to the world's media, financial institutions, businesses and individuals. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
UPDATE 1-American Eagle sees $35-$50 mln loss from kids brand exit
Jun 29th 2012, 21:16

June 29 | Fri Jun 29, 2012 5:16pm EDT

June 29 (Reuters) - American Eagle Outfitters Inc said it expects to incur an after-tax loss of $35 million to $50 million related to the disposal of its children's brand, 77kids.

The apparel retailer had said in May it was exploring options, including an effort to sell the money-losing chain, which includes 22 stores and an online business.

The loss would include $25 million to $38 million in charges related to the closing and $10 million to $12 million in operational costs during the exit period, the company said in an SEC filing.

The company will take the losses primarily in the second and third quarters.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

Reuters: Regulatory News: A tax or a penalty? Romney, Obama camps debate healthcare ruling

Reuters: Regulatory News
Reuters.com is your source for breaking news, business, financial and investing news, including personal finance and stocks. Reuters is the leading global provider of news, financial information and technology solutions to the world's media, financial institutions, businesses and individuals. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
A tax or a penalty? Romney, Obama camps debate healthcare ruling
Jun 29th 2012, 20:32

Fri Jun 29, 2012 4:32pm EDT

* Romney raises nearly $5 million after court ruling

* Adds "greater urgency" to election

* White House calls mandate levy a penalty, not tax

By Steve Holland

WASHINGTON, June 29 (Reuters) - Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney took his fight against President Barack Obama's newly upheld healthcare law out on the campaign trail on Friday, attempting to use it to galvanize support for his bid to oust Obama on Nov. 6.

Campaign supporters of Obama sought to blunt Republican criticism that the law will amount to a new tax increase on Americans. A 5-4 majority of U.S. Supreme Court justices ruled the law constitutional on Thursday by saying it falls under Congress' authority to levy taxes.

Romney, at a fundraiser in New York, said the court's decision calls for "greater urgency, I believe, in the election" and that in order to replace Obama's healthcare law "you've got to replace President Obama."

His supporters have responded, pouring nearly $5 million in campaign donations in little more than 24 hours since the ruling was unveiled. Obama's campaign insisted Obama had raised more but did not disclose a number.

Obama's court victory protects his landmark domestic policy achievement but also leaves him open to election-year attacks from Republicans who say the law kills jobs by putting a burden on small businesses.

A ruling by the court that the centerpiece of Obama's law - the "individual mandate" which requires Americans to have health insurance - is in fact a tax, gives Republicans an extra stick with which to hit the Democratic incumbent.

The White House and Obama's campaign argued the court was wrong to label it a tax. Those who refuse the law's mandate to buy health insurance would be required to pay a fine. Only about 1 percent of Americans would likely fall under this category, the administration said.

"So your choice is to purchase health care reform or a penalty will be administered," White House spokesman Jay Carney told reporters aboard Air Force One.

The Supreme Court ruling fell in the midst of a tense period in the presidential campaign with Obama and Romney running closely in opinion polls and trying to define each other as unfit for the White House.

In a sign of the bitterness of the fight, the Romney campaign on Friday issued an ad featuring Secretary of State Hillary Clinton criticizing Obama during the 2008 campaign.

Obama's primary opponent at the time, Clinton accused her fellow Democrat of lying about her record and said "shame on you Barack Obama." The ad is running in the swing states of Ohio, New Hampshire, Nevada, Colorado, North Carolina, Virginia and Iowa.

TAX ISSUE

The Obama campaign accuses Romney of double standards by criticizing the requirement to buy health insurance even though it formed part of the healthcare plan he developed for Massachusetts when he was governor there.

"That was right then, you should ask why he doesn't think it's not right now," Obama senior strategist David Axelrod told NBC's "Today" show.

Romney has offered few specifics on how he would replace the Obama reforms, although he said he would work to retain popular provisions such as blocking insurance companies from forbidding coverage of patients with pre-existing medical conditions.

David Yepsen, director of the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute at Southern Illinois University, said the tax issue may catch fire in the campaign.

"I think that's going to be a fair argument to take to voters. Obama says he's not raising taxes, the Supreme Court says this is a tax. Voters are going to have to decide whether they like this idea," said Yepsen.

The Romney campaign says the law would a have far bigger impact on taxes than just penalizing people who refuse to buy insurance, but instead would raise $500 billion over 10 years.

This charge is based on a March 2011 estimate from the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, which said the legislation will increase federal revenues in various ways, mostly by increasing the Hospital Insurance payroll tax and imposing fees on certain manufacturers and insurers. Democrats have disputed that.

  • Link this
  • Share this
  • Digg this
  • Email
  • Reprints

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

 
Great HTML Templates from easytemplates.com.