Goldman Sachs Fraud Case Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Goldman Sachs Fraud Case - Research Paper Example Goldman Sachs Fraud Case Introduction Goldman Sachs defrauded investors by failing to reveal the apparent conflict of interest on mortgage investment it floated as the housing market became sour. The charges that were brought forward by the Securities Exchange Commission against Goldman Sachs argued for unlawful action and fraud in the trading of toxic subprime mortgage derivative securities. Nevertheless, Goldman Sachs affirmed that they were merely following normal business practices and had not committed any wrong. The Goldman Sachs fraud case elicited critical issues centering on the inadequacy of the investment banking practices, and raised the question whether it is a case of deceptive or unethical behavior (Craig & Scannell, 2010). The three-month legal ordeal erased close to $20billion of the firm’s stock-market value. A lively public discussion that followed the charge of Goldman Sachs by SEC centered on whether Goldman Sachs, broadly viewed as an embodiment of bubble -era greed, was also a lawbreaker. Questions emanated on whether Goldman bankers warranted condemnation for deliberately exploiting the naivety of investors to gain from the trading of debt instruments that were bets on a market Goldman Sachs was doomed to collapse (Whalen & Bhala, 2011). Although the transaction entailed in the SEC’s lawsuit can be regarded as small by Goldman Sachs’ standards, its arrangement alludes to weighty questions regarding the fault of the banks in driving up a market within mortgage-derived securities that lingered practically inclined to self-destruction (Buell, 2011). The SEC was asking whether Goldman Sachs gained from both sides in a way that contravened their fiduciary obligation to their customers. The SEC claimed that investors essentially lost over $1billion dollars and that Paulson’s short option debt instrument on the credit instrument derived a profit of more than $1billion (Jones, 2010). Email traffic pointed out that Tour re plus others were aware of the subprime mishap as early as January 2007 before the crisis became full blown. The SEC sought a restriction, disgorgement of profits, and sanctions with regard to interest and civil monetary penalties (Craig & Scannell, 2010). In addition to these charges, criminal prosecutors were exploring whether Goldman Sachs or its employees committed securities fraud with regard to the firm’s mortgage trading. #1 The Fraud Goldman’s case entailed four forms of securities that all played some roles amid the 2008 financial downturn: first, the residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) embodying a form of security derived from pooling of mortgages on residential real-estate into bonds; a credit-default swap (CDS) representing a form of insurance policy; a collateralized debt obligation (CDO) representing a debt security collateralized by debt obligation; and, synthetic CDO’s (SCDOs) equivalent to ordinary to ordinary CDOs excluding that inv estors own CDOs on real securities rather than the real securities themselves. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filed a civil fraud charge against Goldman Sachs & Co, as well its vice presidents for fraud for misrepresenting information meant for investors by misstating key facts regarding a financial product connected to subprime mortgages at a moment when the housing market within the United States started to crumble and lose value (Buell, 2011).