IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/jfcpps/jfc-09-2015-0044.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Libor benchmark: practice, crime and reforms

Author

Listed:
  • Peter Yeoh

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to trace how and why the market-designed Libor benchmark turned bad, thereby necessitating a regulatory response. Design/methodology/approach - The study relies on primary and secondary data in the public domain and complemented by a single-case study. Findings - The study demonstrates how and why Libor benchmark rigging led to reforms in the UK and elsewhere. Research limitations/implications - The study relying mainly on the secondary data analysis needs to be enhanced by further empirical-based studies. Practical implications - Insights generated by the study suggest why it might not be worthwhile for market participants to game the system. Social implications - Libor benchmark affects the financial system widely with varying significance to the wider public. With better regulatory oversight, its negative impact is expected to be mitigated considerably. Originality/value - The seriousness with which the enforcement agency and judiciary now treat financial crime weakens the earlier public perception that white-collar crime is enforced differently.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter Yeoh, 2016. "Libor benchmark: practice, crime and reforms," Journal of Financial Crime, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 23(4), pages 1140-1153, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:eme:jfcpps:jfc-09-2015-0044
    DOI: 10.1108/JFC-09-2015-0044
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JFC-09-2015-0044/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JFC-09-2015-0044/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/JFC-09-2015-0044?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:jfcpps:jfc-09-2015-0044. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.