The SEC has filed a complaint against JPMorgan Securities for failing to disclose a material fact in connection with the creation, sale and distribution of a product. We commented on it earlier this week - JP Morgan to Pay $153.6 Million to Settle SEC Charges. In essence, the Commission alleged that JP Morgan failed to inform investorsin a CDO that it created that a hedge fund helped to select the assets in in the CDO portfolio, and the hedge fund was short those same assets. As a result, according to the SEC, the hedge fund was poised to benefit if the CDO assets defaulted.
The allegation was familiar, since the Commission brought almost identical charges against Goldman Sachs last year. We discussed that case at SECLaw.com -The Impact of the SEC CDO Fraud Complaint against Goldman Sachs and here - Goldman's Defense to SEC Fraud Case
JP Morgan settled by paying $153.6 million (and no executives were harmed in the settlement). Goldman initially fought the case, and ultimately settled for $550 million.
Now commentators are questioning the disparity between the two penalties. Bloomberg's Jason Weil writes that JP Morgan caught a break. Aside from the money, the charges against JP Morgan were for negligence, the charges against Goldman Sachs were for fraud.
Without knowing the intimate details of the two cases, if there was a difference in the scienter, or intent, part of the violation, then that would explain the disparity in the fine. Also, as litigators are well aware, defendants often get a better deal settling early.
But that doesn't explain the signficant difference in the fines, nor does it explain why there was no individual at JP Morgan included in the sanctions, whereas individuals were included in the Goldman Sachs case.
Bloomberg says that the SEC won't explain the disparity, but also notes that the Commission will have to have the approval of United States District Judge Richard Berman before the settlement is effective. If Judge Berman asks, the SEC will be forced to explain.