Insider Trading Remains Difficult to Stop Despite Increased Scrutiny of Activist Investors

Insider trading remains a challenge due to legal ambiguity, high burden of proof, and pressure to plead guilty, undermining fair markets. Experts discuss heightened enforcement risk and need for stronger compliance.

author-image
Mahnoor Jehangir
Updated On
New Update
Insider Trading Remains Difficult to Stop Despite Increased Scrutiny of Activist Investors

Insider Trading Remains Difficult to Stop Despite Increased Scrutiny of Activist Investors

Insider trading continues to be a challenging issue to address due to the lack of a clear legal definition, the high burden of proof required to establish intent, and the pressure on defendants to plead guilty. Despite increased scrutiny of activist investors by climate, sec, the ambiguous nature of insider trading laws makes it difficult for prosecutors to prove criminal intent.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and other regulators have been closely monitoring the activities of activist investors for potential insider trading violations. However, the high burden of proof required to establish criminal liability often leads defendants to plead guilty, even if they may not have intended to engage in insider trading.

Why this matters: The challenges in stopping insider trading have significant implications for maintaining fair and transparent financial markets. The lack of a clear legal definition and the difficulty in proving intent can undermine investor confidence and create an uneven playing field.

Bill Martin, an O'Melveny counsel, will be participating in a panel discussion on insider trading, with a particular focus on 'shadow trading'. This involves using a company's confidential information to trade in the securities of another economically connected company. The panel will address the heightened enforcement risk and the need for market participants to reassess and strengthen their compliance and supervisory regimes to mitigate the risk of violations.

"The legal definition of insider trading is ambiguous, making it challenging for prosecutors to prove intent," according to the article. This ambiguity, combined with the high burden of proof and the pressure on defendants to plead guilty, contributes to the ongoing difficulties in effectively combating insider trading.

Key Takeaways

  • Insider trading laws lack clear definition, making intent hard to prove.
  • SEC closely monitors activist investors for potential insider trading.
  • Defendants often plead guilty due to high burden of proof.
  • Ambiguous laws undermine investor confidence and fair markets.
  • Experts discuss 'shadow trading' and need for stronger compliance.