February 1, 2013
Floyd Norris, the only journalist to whom I have written fan mail (sorry Gretchen, you’re next), has another interesting column about a case that the SEC has brought against an MBS trader, Jesse Litvak. The complaint alleges that
On numerous occasions from 2009 to 2011, Litvak lied to, or otherwise misled, customers about the price at which his firm had bought the MBS and the amount of his firm’s compensation for arranging the trades. On some occasions, Litvak also misled the customer into believing that he was arranging a MBS trade between customers, when Litvak really was selling the MBS out of Jefferies’ inventory. Litvak’s misconduct misled customers about the market price for the MBS, and, thus, about the transaction they were agreeing to. Litvak also misled customers about whether they were getting the best price for their MBS trades and how much money they were paying in compensation. MBS are generally illiquid and discovering a market price for them is difficult. Participants trading in the MBS market must rely on informal sources, including their broker, for this information.(1-2)
Norris is right to highlight what this case can reveal about the lack of transparency in the trading of MBS, a lack of transparency that does not exist in many other major secondary markets for securities.
But I was struck by how little is at stake in this SEC case. The complaint alleges that the misconduct occurred in 25 (count ’em, 25!) trades from 2009 through 2011 (7) and that Litvak’s behavior “generated over $2.7 million in additional revenue for his firm.” (2) Not for him personally, mind you, but for his firm! He, of course, should be punished if the allegations prove to be true. And yet . . ..
Time after time, the government brings cases against mid-level players somehow involved in the financial crisis. Time after time, people wonder why these are the best cases that can be brought. My earlier thoughts about this can be found here and here. Is it possible that even the SEC lacks the resources to investigate the massively document intensive cases that would get to the heart of the matter?