Payment for Order Flow: Difference between revisions
From ACT Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
imported>Doug Williamson m (Standardise punctuation in abbreviation at start.) |
imported>Doug Williamson m (Categorise the page.) |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
More generally in the European Union, such payments may fall foul of the EU's [[MiFID]] rules on "inducements" reflected in the FCA's Handbook ([[http://fshandbook.info/FS/html/FCA/COBS/2/3]] at 2.3.1). | More generally in the European Union, such payments may fall foul of the EU's [[MiFID]] rules on "inducements" reflected in the FCA's Handbook ([[http://fshandbook.info/FS/html/FCA/COBS/2/3]] at 2.3.1). | ||
[[Category:Compliance_and_audit]] | |||
Revision as of 19:13, 31 July 2014
(PFOF).
Payment for order flow is defined by the UK Financial Conduct Authority in FG12/13 [1], origibnally issued by the FSA, as an arrangement whereby a broker receives payment from market makers, in exchange for sending order flow to them.
The FCA sees such arrangements (whatever called) as creating potential conflict of interest and pressing against best execution of orders for clients and, accordingly, compromising observation of its best execution rule.
More generally in the European Union, such payments may fall foul of the EU's MiFID rules on "inducements" reflected in the FCA's Handbook ([[2]] at 2.3.1).
