The National Futures Association (NFA) has fined Marex Spectron International Limited $350,000 for letting unregistered staff handle orders from U.S. customers. It is the second time in four years the London broker has settled the same type of case.

The NFA's Business Conduct Committee issued the decision on June 30. Marex Spectron neither admitted nor denied the findings, which cover a breach of an NFA registration rule and a related supervision requirement.

A Second Case Over the Same Conduct

The penalty runs 40% higher than the $250,000 the firm paid in 2022 after an earlier NFA examination. Both cases centered on the same London energy division.

In the current matter, examiners found 14 Marex Spectron brokers soliciting or accepting orders from U.S. customers without registering with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission as associated persons. NFA rules require that status for anyone dealing with American clients.

• Marex to Acquire Geneva-Based Market Maker Valcourt to Boost Fixed Income Business
• Marex Adds Chinese Futures Trading to Services for Global Clients
• Marex Group Acquires UK Market Maker Winterflood in £103.9 Million Cash Deal

Thirteen of the 14 worked in London and one in Dubai, according to the complaint. They handled about 75 trades for 20 U.S. customers between February and April 2024, and made up roughly 40% of the brokers on the London energy desk.

Why Registration Applies

A CFTC exemption lets brokers based outside the United States skip registration if they deal only with non-U.S. customers. NFA said the 14 individuals did not qualify, because their clients were companies formed or headquartered in the United States.

One example in the complaint describes a London broker arranging a crude oil contract-for-difference trade in March 2024 for a client that firm records identified as an Illinois company based in Chicago.

Repeat Findings Draw Sharper Language

The firm's first NFA case, filed in 2022, followed a 2020 examination and named 18 brokers in the same division. That case also ended in a settlement, alongside separate NFA actions that year against Coquest and Interactive Brokers.

NFA said the repeat findings were "especially troubling" given the earlier complaint, and that the firm had not put effective controls in place to stop the conduct from recurring.

Regulators pointed to one broker, identified only as Employee 1, who was flagged back in the 2020 examination. The firm had said a registered colleague would take over his U.S. business. It later acknowledged he arranged more than 50 trades for U.S. customers between June 2021 and June 2024 while still unregistered.