What happens if intent cannot be proven in an insider dealing case but the effect of the activity can?

In cases of insider dealing, proving intent is typically a crucial component for establishing liability; however, if the effects of the insider dealing can be demonstrated even in the absence of proven intent, significant penalties can still be imposed.

The rationale behind this is that the financial markets rely heavily on transparency and fairness. Even if a party did not intend to commit insider dealing, the impact of their actions can still undermine market integrity and investor confidence. Consequently, regulatory bodies may impose substantial fines to deter such behavior, to emphasize that the effects of insider trading are serious and warrant strong consequences, regardless of intent.

This preventive approach serves to uphold market integrity by ensuring that individuals and entities are held accountable for their actions, especially those that can distort or manipulate market conditions. It reinforces the message that maintaining a fair trading environment is paramount, even if there is ambiguity about the trader's intent in individual cases.