Binck Bank N.V.

• LiftedNetherlands Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM)

  Debarment

  In this state since

  12 Sept 2026

  Designated

  1 Jul 2016

  Reason given

  https://www.afm.nl/nl -nl/nieuws/2016/jul/boete-binckbank-misleidende-reclames [original (Dutch)] AFM imposes an administrative fine on BinckBank for providing misleading information in advertising On 01 July 2016, the Netherlands Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM) imposed an administrative fine of €750,000 on BinckBank N.V. (BinckBank). BinckBank offers individual asset management under the name Alex Vermogensbeheer (Alex). The fine was imposed because advertising concerning Alex in the period from 08 September 2012 to 26 August 2014 included unclear and misleading information. Advertising rules Consumers must be able to rely on the fact that the information in advertisements concerning financial services is clear and not misleading. The AFM is authorised to take action if a financial undertaking misrepresents the facts. This protects consumers and prevents competitive advantages for financial undertakings that do not comply with the rules. Unclear and misleading advertising The AFM investigated 3 Alex advertising campaigns, which consisted of television advertisements and internet banners. The campaigns lasted a total of nearly 2 years. The investigated advertisements showed each time a realised cumulative return. The AFM investigation made clear that this return had been realised by only one specific portfolio with its own characteristics (referred to by BinckBank as an example portfolio). The advertisements are unclear because they did not indicate in any way that the return shown applied only to the example portfolio. The average cumulative return that had actually been realised by investors over the same period was structurally lower. The cumulative returns also had a large spread. The high return shown in the advertising was therefore misleading. And finally, the advertisements were also misleading because BinckBank incorrectly suggested a connection between its procedures and the return shown. Higher fine A fine of €500,000 may be imposed for this violation. This amount may be adjusted if the degree of culpability or the seriousness or duration of that violation are grounds for doing so. In the present case, the AFM submits a higher fine on BinckBank because the violation is very serious and there is a high degree of culpability. The AFM considers that the degree of culpability of the actions of BinckBank is increased. BinckBank had a consultancy organisation perform an investigation prior to the start of the campaigns. The investigation showed that the cumulative return of the example portfolio clearly differed from the average return realised by clients and that the cumulative returns had a strong spread. BinckBank nevertheless started the campaigns and did not keep a finger on the pulse to see how the example portfolio was developing when compared to the actual investor portfolios. The information submitted by BinckBank showed that the number of investor portfolios grew considerably during the campaign that lasted almost 2 years. The AFM considers that, in view of the duration and positive effect for BinckBank at the expense of confidence in the market, an increase of the fine in connection with the seriousness and duration of the violation is appropriate. BinckBank's size and financial capacity are no reason for the AFM to reduce the fine. The AFM considers a fine of €750,000 appropriate in view of the offence.

  Document

  The publisher's document (https://registers.esma.europa.eu/publication/details?core=esma_registers_sanctions&docId=sn4904)

  Stated by

  ESMA Sanctions Register

  First recorded here

  12 Sept 2026

  Listing id

  4904

• In forceNetherlands Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM)

  Debarment

  In this state since

  12 Sept 2026

  Designated

  16 Mar 2016

  Reason given

  https://www.afm.nl/nl -nl/nieuws/2016/jul/boete-binckbank-niet-tijdig-melden-transacties [original (Dutch)] AFM imposes fine on BinckBank for not timely reporting transactions The fine is irrevocable. On 16 March 2016, the Authority of Financial Markets (AFM) imposed a fine of € 500,000 on BinckBank N.V. (BinckBank) in Amsterdam, as BinckBank failed to meet its transaction reporting obligation on time. The Financial Supervision Act (Wft) obliges investment firms to trade in listed financial instruments to report the transaction data to the AFM. This must be done as soon as possible, but no later than the end of the next working day. The AFM uses the reported transactions to detect market abuse, thus promoting the fair and efficient functioning of capital markets, enabling investors to rely on it. On August 18, 2014, BinckBank received a formal warning from the AFM for breach of the transaction reporting obligation due to non-timely reporting of transactions made by BinckBank from mid-2010 on the Luxembourg stock exchange. Subsequently, the AFM found that BinckBank also failed to report its transactions on XBRD (derivatives exchange in Brussels) and XMON (Paris Stock Exchange) and over-the-counter transactions (OTC transactions) in time. BinckBank only announced on October 16, 2014, transactions that it had made on XBRD and XMON during the period 3 February 2011 until 1 October 2014. The OTC transactions made by BinckBank in the period from March 12, 2010 to October 28, 2014, they reported to AFM on January 29, 2015. BinckBank has failed to report in due time Article 4: 90th, third paragraph, breach Wft. The basic amount for this violation is € 500,000. In determining the amount of the fine, the AFM considered the severity and duration of the infringement, and the plea, scope and bearing capacity of BinckBank. The AFM has not seen any grounds for establishing the amount of the fine at a lower or higher level. Now that no appeal or objection is possible against the decision, the fine has become final.

  Document

  The publisher's document (https://registers.esma.europa.eu/publication/details?core=esma_registers_sanctions&docId=sn4888)

  Stated by

  ESMA Sanctions Register

  First recorded here

  12 Sept 2026

  Listing id

  4888

• In forceNetherlands Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM)

  MiFID

  In this state since

  12 Sept 2026

  Designated

  1 Jul 2016

  Reason given

  https://www.afm.nl/nl -nl/nieuws/2016/jul/boete-binckbank-misleidende-reclames [original (Dutch)] AFM imposes an administrative fine on BinckBank for providing misleading information in advertising On 01 July 2016, the Netherlands Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM) imposed an administrative fine of €750,000 on BinckBank N.V. (BinckBank). BinckBank offers individual asset management under the name Alex Vermogensbeheer (Alex). The fine was imposed because advertising concerning Alex in the period from 08 September 2012 to 26 August 2014 included unclear and misleading information. Advertising rules Consumers must be able to rely on the fact that the information in advertisements concerning financial services is clear and not misleading. The AFM is authorised to take action if a financial undertaking misrepresents the facts. This protects consumers and prevents competitive advantages for financial undertakings that do not comply with the rules. Unclear and misleading advertising The AFM investigated 3 Alex advertising campaigns, which consisted of television advertisements and internet banners. The campaigns lasted a total of nearly 2 years. The investigated advertisements showed each time a realised cumulative return. The AFM investigation made clear that this return had been realised by only one specific portfolio with its own characteristics (referred to by BinckBank as an example portfolio). The advertisements are unclear because they did not indicate in any way that the return shown applied only to the example portfolio. The average cumulative return that had actually been realised by investors over the same period was structurally lower. The cumulative returns also had a large spread. The high return shown in the advertising was therefore misleading. And finally, the advertisements were also misleading because BinckBank incorrectly suggested a connection between its procedures and the return shown. Higher fine A fine of €500,000 may be imposed for this violation. This amount may be adjusted if the degree of culpability or the seriousness or duration of that violation are grounds for doing so. In the present case, the AFM submits a higher fine on BinckBank because the violation is very serious and there is a high degree of culpability. The AFM considers that the degree of culpability of the actions of BinckBank is increased. BinckBank had a consultancy organisation perform an investigation prior to the start of the campaigns. The investigation showed that the cumulative return of the example portfolio clearly differed from the average return realised by clients and that the cumulative returns had a strong spread. BinckBank nevertheless started the campaigns and did not keep a finger on the pulse to see how the example portfolio was developing when compared to the actual investor portfolios. The information submitted by BinckBank showed that the number of investor portfolios grew considerably during the campaign that lasted almost 2 years. The AFM considers that, in view of the duration and positive effect for BinckBank at the expense of confidence in the market, an increase of the fine in connection with the seriousness and duration of the violation is appropriate. BinckBank's size and financial capacity are no reason for the AFM to reduce the fine. The AFM considers a fine of €750,000 appropriate in view of the offence.

  Document

  The publisher's document (https://registers.esma.europa.eu/publication/details?core=esma_registers_sanctions&docId=sn4904)

  Stated by

  ESMA Sanctions Register

  First recorded here

  12 Sept 2026

  Listing id

  4904

• In forceNetherlands Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM)

  MiFID

  In this state since

  12 Sept 2026

  Designated

  16 Mar 2016

  Reason given

  https://www.afm.nl/nl -nl/nieuws/2016/jul/boete-binckbank-niet-tijdig-melden-transacties [original (Dutch)] AFM imposes fine on BinckBank for not timely reporting transactions The fine is irrevocable. On 16 March 2016, the Authority of Financial Markets (AFM) imposed a fine of € 500,000 on BinckBank N.V. (BinckBank) in Amsterdam, as BinckBank failed to meet its transaction reporting obligation on time. The Financial Supervision Act (Wft) obliges investment firms to trade in listed financial instruments to report the transaction data to the AFM. This must be done as soon as possible, but no later than the end of the next working day. The AFM uses the reported transactions to detect market abuse, thus promoting the fair and efficient functioning of capital markets, enabling investors to rely on it. On August 18, 2014, BinckBank received a formal warning from the AFM for breach of the transaction reporting obligation due to non-timely reporting of transactions made by BinckBank from mid-2010 on the Luxembourg stock exchange. Subsequently, the AFM found that BinckBank also failed to report its transactions on XBRD (derivatives exchange in Brussels) and XMON (Paris Stock Exchange) and over-the-counter transactions (OTC transactions) in time. BinckBank only announced on October 16, 2014, transactions that it had made on XBRD and XMON during the period 3 February 2011 until 1 October 2014. The OTC transactions made by BinckBank in the period from March 12, 2010 to October 28, 2014, they reported to AFM on January 29, 2015. BinckBank has failed to report in due time Article 4: 90th, third paragraph, breach Wft. The basic amount for this violation is € 500,000. In determining the amount of the fine, the AFM considered the severity and duration of the infringement, and the plea, scope and bearing capacity of BinckBank. The AFM has not seen any grounds for establishing the amount of the fine at a lower or higher level. Now that no appeal or objection is possible against the decision, the fine has become final.

  Document

  The publisher's document (https://registers.esma.europa.eu/publication/details?core=esma_registers_sanctions&docId=sn4888)

  Stated by

  ESMA Sanctions Register

  First recorded here

  12 Sept 2026

  Listing id

  4888

No ownership verdict was on file for this company on 25 October 2026.

As recorded by the assessment reading taken on 25 September 2026, 18:00 UTC, the newest on or before the date. Only “checked, not found” means a source was read in full and held nothing for the company.

Where the company is registered or connected

• NL: registered here

  No company register for this jurisdiction has been connected to this system, and none has been examined. No register here states who owns this jurisdiction's companies, so an ownership chain reaching one stops.

• Whether each listing was in force is rebuilt from what was recorded here: when it was first read, when a source stopped or resumed carrying it, and when its published term ended. A listing in force at an authority before this system first read it is shown from that first read.
• No ownership verdict is kept for this company. Verdicts are kept for companies registered where shareholders are read here: Estonia, Latvia and Poland.

For each source behind this file, the newest read made on or before the date: the version of it that stood.

• Australia DFAT Consolidated List

  Read on 19 October 2026. No date from the publisher is read for this file, so its age is not known here. 3,650 records read.

• Brazil CEIS (national procurement exclusions)

  Read on 21 October 2026. No date from the publisher is read for this file, so its age is not known here. 23,804 records read.

• Brazil MTE employer register (lista suja)

  Read on 21 October 2026. No date from the publisher is read for this file, so its age is not known here. 508 records read.

• Brazil TCU (firms declared inidôneas)

  Read on 22 October 2026. No date from the publisher is read for this file, so its age is not known here. 94 records read.

• Canada Consolidated Autonomous Sanctions List

  Read on 19 October 2026. No date from the publisher is read for this file, so its age is not known here. 5,708 records read.

• EBRD Ineligible Entities

  Read on 22 October 2026. No date from the publisher is read for this file, so its age is not known here. 1,278 records read.

• ESMA Sanctions Register

  Read on 23 October 2026. No date from the publisher is read for this file, so its age is not known here. 845 records read.

• EU Consolidated Sanctions List

  Read on 19 October 2026. The publisher dates the file 15 October 2026, 4 days before it was read. 6,234 records read. Publisher's version: globalFileId 185699.

• France AMF blacklist of unauthorised actors

  Read on 23 October 2026. No date from the publisher is read for this file, so its age is not known here. 2,574 records read.

• IDB Sanctioned Firms and Individuals

  Read on 23 October 2026. No date from the publisher is read for this file, so its age is not known here. 530 records read.

• Japan MOF Sanctions List

  Read on 19 October 2026. No date from the publisher is read for this file, so its age is not known here. 2,900 records read.

• Latvia FID frozen assets register

  Read on 20 October 2026. No date from the publisher is read for this file, so its age is not known here. 183 records read.

• Malaysia BNM financial consumer alert list

  Read on 19 October 2026. No date from the publisher is read for this file, so its age is not known here. 588 records read.

• Malaysia SC investor alert list

  Read on 19 October 2026. No date from the publisher is read for this file, so its age is not known here. 1,795 records read.

• Moldova procurement ban list

  Read on 29 September 2026. No date from the publisher is read for this file, so its age is not known here. 22 records read.

• New Zealand Russia Sanctions Register

  Read on 20 October 2026. No date from the publisher is read for this file, so its age is not known here. 529 records read.

• Norges Bank (fund exclusions and observation)

  Read on 20 October 2026. No date from the publisher is read for this file, so its age is not known here. 201 records read.

• OFAC Consolidated (non-SDN)

  Read on 19 October 2026. The publisher dates the file 14 September 2026, 35 days before it was read. 481 records read.

• OFAC SDN

  Read on 19 October 2026. The publisher dates the file 15 October 2026, 4 days before it was read. 17,556 records read.

• Poland MSWiA sanctions list

  Read on 21 October 2026. No date from the publisher is read for this file, so its age is not known here. 131 records read.

• SAM.gov Exclusions (US federal)

  Read on 24 October 2026. No date from the publisher is read for this file, so its age is not known here. 10,194 records read.

• Slovenia KPK business restrictions

  Read on 15 October 2026. No date from the publisher is read for this file, so its age is not known here. 4,351 records read.

• Swiss FINMA warning list

  Read on 19 October 2026. No date from the publisher is read for this file, so its age is not known here. 2,372 records read.

• Switzerland SECO Sanctions List

  Read on 19 October 2026. The publisher dates the file 15 October 2026, 4 days before it was read. 7,040 records read.

• Taiwan SHTC export entity list

  Read on 21 October 2026. No date from the publisher is read for this file, so its age is not known here. 11,664 records read.

• Türkiye MASAK asset freezes

  Read on 22 October 2026. No date from the publisher is read for this file, so its age is not known here. 2,304 records read.

• UK OFSI Consolidated List

  Read on 8 October 2026. The file carries no date of its own; its newest record is dated 3 June 2026, 127 days before it was read. Newest designation in the file: 2025-12-19. 5,120 records read.

• UK Sanctions List (FCDO)

  Read on 19 October 2026. The publisher dates the file 16 October 2026, 3 days before it was read. 5,705 records read.

• UN Security Council Consolidated List

  Read on 19 October 2026. The publisher dates the file 17 October 2026, 2 days before it was read. 1,010 records read.

• US CBP forced-labour orders (WRO & Findings)

  Read on 20 October 2026. No date from the publisher is read for this file, so its age is not known here. 63 records read.

• US Consolidated Screening List

  Read on 19 October 2026. No date from the publisher is read for this file, so its age is not known here. 6,474 records read.

• US UFLPA Entity List

  Read on 20 October 2026. No date from the publisher is read for this file, so its age is not known here. 205 records read.

• World Bank Listing of Ineligible Firms and Individuals

  Read on 23 October 2026. No date from the publisher is read for this file, so its age is not known here. 1,539 records read.

Taken

25 September 2026, 18:00 UTC

Methodology

Version 5

Level

Low

Score recorded

45 of 100

Digest

f7c2108af67f4c49a9f9de8a0e4ac5d38944d6c9A fingerprint of everything the reading says. The same reading always has this digest, and any change in it gives another.

Reading id

8c2cdb6e-e33b-4d90-858b-270f96e05352

Address

https://apolika.com/entities/37e62ff3-8b54-44c6-998e-dc113910279c/evidence?as_of=2026-10-25The same address gives the same day's file tomorrow. What was recorded after the date is not in it.

As data

https://apolika.com/api/entities/37e62ff3-8b54-44c6-998e-dc113910279c/evidence?as_of=2026-10-25T00%3A51%3A00.499Z

Made

25 October 2026, 00:51 UTC