Who Is Responsible for Libor Rate-Fixing?

Abstract

The U.S. Department of Justice’s pursuit of the participants in the LIBOR conspiracy almost exclusively through fraud claims stands in dramatic contrast with the European Commission’s use of antitrust law to impose fines on the same parties for the same conduct. This short note describes the U.S. approach and presents an alternative that would have focused on the British Bankers’ Association as a vehicle for an anticompetitive conspiracy among its bank members. The note also criticizes the U.S. district court decision that dismissed private antitrust claims for the LIBOR conspiracy, a decision that was later reversed by the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.