Cypriot financial regulator Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission (CySEC) has announced that at its meeting held on meeting held on the 1st of July 2024, it decided to impose a total administrative fine of €50,000 to the CIF IC Markets (EU) Ltd (LEI 549300O8CKXT0AKIWS77) (the ‘Company’), for violations of the Investment Services and Activities and Regulated Markets Law of 2017, as in force (the ‘L.87(I)/2017’).

Regarding the reasons for the fine (see more details below), FNG spoke with an official spokesperson at IC Markets who had the following response, in which the company says it refutes the decision and will appeal the ruling, calling the fine “unjustified”.

IC Markets (EU) Ltd strongly refutes the decision made by the Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission (CySEC). The fines are, in our view, unjustified and fail to reflect the true operational standards of our Company.

We firmly disagree with CySEC’s conclusions, particularly the assertion that we did not take sufficient steps to achieve the best possible execution results for our clients. IC Markets has always maintained robust internal systems, including comprehensive ex-ante checks on pricing, and has consistently taken prompt corrective actions where necessary. The finding that our cost and charge disclosures were insufficient is not aligned with the clear and detailed information we provide to clients on both our platform and website.

Our execution practices are based on comprehensive market fundamentals, including real-time analysis of market liquidity and depth. This allows us to deliver the best prices for our clients, particularly in high-volume trades where market dynamics are constantly shifting. We maintain that the regulator’s decision fails to consider these key aspects.

This is a testament to the fact that as a broker, we are considered one of the best execution venues for traders. Regardless of CySEC’s conclusions, traders themselves make their decisions, and the market has consistently chosen IC Markets. The trading conditions we provide speak for themselves—whatever CySEC’s views may be, traders know the reality, and we remain the best. Therefore, any regulatory stance that attempts to overlook these undeniable market dynamics is disconnected from the actual trading landscape and fails to reflect the preferences and realities of professional traders worldwide.

Our commitment to transparency, top-tier execution, and client protection remains unchallenged, and we will appeal this ruling in the appropriate legal forum.

Regarding the reasons for the fine CySEC imposed to the Company, the regulator noted the following:

A. A fine of €30,000 for violation of section 28(1)(a) of the L.87(I)/2017, as the Company did not take all sufficient steps to obtain, when executing orders, the best possible result for its clients, taking into account the price and the size.

B. A fine of €10,000 for violation of section 28(4) of the L.87(I)/2017, as the Company did not comply with its obligation to establish and implement effective arrangements for complying with section 28(1) of the L.87(I)/2017.

C. A fine of €10,000 for violation of section 25(4)(b) of the L.87(I)/2017, as the Company did not ensure that the information about costs and charges that was notified to the clients, allowed the clients or the potential clients, to understand with clarity the cost and the cumulative effect of the cost, on return of the investment.

As factors in determining the amount of all the above administrative fines, CySEC said it took into account for each case:

1. The seriousness that the legislator attaches to violations of this kind, which is reflected by the administrative sanctions and measures provided for in the article 71(6) of the Law.

2. The importance attached to ensuring that the persons subject to supervision of the Company fully comply with the provisions of Law 87(I)/2017.

3. The financial strength of the Company.

4. The Company’s cooperation with the regulator.

5. The fact that the Company has not committed a similar violation in the past.

While in particular CySEC said it took into account:

6. In relation to article 28(1)(a) of Law 87(I)/2017–

6.1 The importance attached to the protection of the interests of the clients of a CIF, which is achieved by ensuring that the CIF executes its clients’ orders for their benefit and with the best possible result.

6.2 The fact that the Company has taken corrective measures.

7. In relation to article 28(4) of Law 87(I)/2017–

7.1 The importance attached to the protection of the interests of the clients of a CIF, which is achieved by drawing up and implementing an effective policy execution of customer orders, which allows the CIF to achieve this best possible result for their benefit.

7.2 The fact that the Company has taken corrective measures.

8. In relation to article 25(4)(b) of Law 87(I)/2017–

8.1 The importance attached to the protection of the interests of the clients of a CIF, which is achieved through ensuring the provision of information which allow the customer to understand the total cost and cumulative effect of the return on investment.

8.2 The Company’s intention to take corrective measures.