FTC reportedly launches oil price-fixing investigation
Wondering why gas prices are so high in parts of the country (Chicago, were looking at you)? So is the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).
June 25, 2013 at 09:00 AM
5 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Wondering why gas prices are so high in parts of the country (Chicago, we're looking at you)? So is the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), which has launched an investigation into the pricing of crude oil and petroleum-derived products, according to a Bloomberg report.
The agency's investigation comes on the heels of a similar European Union probe, which also includes the pricing of crude oil-derived products and biofuels. Earlier this year, EU authorities raided the offices of Royal Dutch Shell Plc, Statoil ASA and BP Plc, and also reportedly looked into the methods of Platts, a McGraw Hill-owned price publisher whose price assessments are often used as a benchmark in energy markets.
The Department of Justice's antitrust division reportedly asked the FTC to handle the investigation, suggesting that any resulting charges would likely not be criminal, Bloomberg reports.
Past FTC investigations into oil prices have generally centered on market forces—such as problems at refineries or shifts in global demand—not the setting of benchmark prices, according to Reuters. But benchmarks have come under increased regulatory scrutiny in the past few years, notably when it was revealed that a group of British bankers had been manipulating the London Interbank Offered Rate (Libor)—the benchmark for global interest rates.
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission is separately looking into reports of “spoofing” in the West Texas Intermediate crude-oil market. “Spoofing” occurs when a trader makes a bogus bid and then cancels it before the trade is completed.
For more InsideCounsel coverage of the oil industry, see:
Wondering why gas prices are so high in parts of the country (Chicago, we're looking at you)? So is the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), which has launched an investigation into the pricing of crude oil and petroleum-derived products, according to a Bloomberg report.
The agency's investigation comes on the heels of a similar European Union probe, which also includes the pricing of crude oil-derived products and biofuels. Earlier this year, EU authorities raided the offices of
The Department of Justice's antitrust division reportedly asked the FTC to handle the investigation, suggesting that any resulting charges would likely not be criminal, Bloomberg reports.
Past FTC investigations into oil prices have generally centered on market forces—such as problems at refineries or shifts in global demand—not the setting of benchmark prices, according to Reuters. But benchmarks have come under increased regulatory scrutiny in the past few years, notably when it was revealed that a group of British bankers had been manipulating the London Interbank Offered Rate (Libor)—the benchmark for global interest rates.
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission is separately looking into reports of “spoofing” in the West Texas Intermediate crude-oil market. “Spoofing” occurs when a trader makes a bogus bid and then cancels it before the trade is completed.
For more InsideCounsel coverage of the oil industry, see:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSenators Grill Visa, Mastercard Execs on Alleged Anticompetitive Practices, Fees
Trump's SEC Likely to Halt 'Off-Channel' Texting Probe That's Led to Billions in Fines
Trump Likely to Keep Up Antitrust Enforcement, but Dial Back the Antagonism
5 minute readFTC Sues Cash-Advance Fintech Dave, Says It Deceives the 'Financially Vulnerable'
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250