Home › Guides › What Happened to LIBOR?
An old, discontinued benchmark interest rate - replaced after banks were caught rigging it.
LIBOR stood for the London Interbank Offered Rate, and for almost forty years it was the most important interest-rate benchmark in the world. It was used as the reference rate inside an estimated $400 trillion of loans, mortgages, derivatives, and other financial contracts at its peak. Most adjustable-rate mortgages signed in the United States from the 2000s onward (earlier ones usually tracked Treasury or cost-of-funds indexes), most corporate loans with a floating rate, and most interest-rate swaps reset against LIBOR.
An old, discontinued benchmark interest rate - replaced after banks were caught rigging it.
LIBOR stood for the London Interbank Offered Rate, and for almost forty years it was the most important interest-rate benchmark in the world. It was used as the reference rate inside an estimated $400 trillion of loans, mortgages, derivatives, and other financial contracts at its peak. Most adjustable-rate mortgages signed in the United States from the 2000s onward (earlier ones usually tracked Treasury or cost-of-funds indexes), most corporate loans with a floating rate, and most interest-rate swaps reset against LIBOR.
The way LIBOR was calculated turned out to be its fatal flaw. Each business morning, a panel of roughly 11 to 18 big banks in London (16 for US dollars) would tell an industry group what they thought it would cost them to borrow money from other banks for various lengths of time. Those self-reported estimates got averaged together, and that average became LIBOR for the day. There was no requirement that the banks actually be borrowing at those rates - they just had to guess.
After the 2008 financial crisis, investigators discovered that traders at several of those panel banks had been quietly nudging their submissions in directions that made their trading desks money. If a trader was long an interest-rate position, he'd whisper to his colleague who submitted the rate to nudge LIBOR up a bit. The manipulation had been going on for years. The scandal led to more than $9 billion in fines across UBS, Barclays, Deutsche Bank, RBS, RaboBank, and others, plus criminal convictions in the UK and the US - most of which were later overturned on appeal (US appellate reversals in 2017 and 2022; the UK Supreme Court quashed Tom Hayes's conviction in 2025).
Regulators concluded the problem wasn't just the cheating - it was that the underlying market LIBOR was supposed to measure (banks borrowing from each other unsecured) had basically dried up after 2008. The benchmark had become guess-work even when banks were trying to guess honestly. So global regulators announced LIBOR would be retired and replaced with new benchmarks based on actual transactions. The U.S. dollar replacement is SOFR; the UK uses SONIA; the euro area uses €STR. USD LIBOR's final fixing was June 30, 2023.
London Interbank Offered Rate - survey-based benchmark used in ~$400T of contracts at peak.
LIBOR was a survey-based benchmark published each London morning. A panel of major international banks (between 11 and 18 panel banks depending on the currency) answered the same daily question: "At what rate could you borrow funds, were you to do so by asking for and then accepting interbank offers in a reasonable market size just prior to 11:00 AM London time?" The submissions were collected, the top 25% and bottom 25% were trimmed, and the average of the middle 50% became the published LIBOR for that currency and tenor.
At its peak LIBOR covered 10 currencies and 15 tenors - 150 separate fixings every business day. Reforms after the 2012 scandal cut it back to five currencies (USD, GBP, EUR, JPY, CHF) across seven standard tenors (overnight, 1-week, 1-month, 2-month, 3-month, 6-month, 12-month) - 35 fixings per day. The British Bankers' Association (BBA) administered LIBOR from its launch in 1986 until the 2012 scandal; the Intercontinental Exchange Benchmark Administration (ICE) took over in February 2014 in an attempt to restore credibility.
The Wheatley Review (HM Treasury, September 2012), commissioned after the early scandal revelations, concluded that LIBOR was badly damaged but should be comprehensively reformed rather than replaced, prescribing a 10-point plan: a new administrator, statutory regulation, transaction-anchored submissions, and fewer fixings. Replacement came only later, after those reforms failed to revive the underlying market. Post-2008, the actual unsecured interbank lending market had collapsed in volume - banks weren't really lending to each other in the way LIBOR assumed. Without a deep observable market to anchor submissions, panel banks were essentially being asked to estimate prices that didn't have real underlying transactions. Honest banks were left guessing; dishonest ones could lie cheaply because no one could verify.
The global response was coordinated through national-level working groups: ARRC (Alternative Reference Rates Committee, NY Fed) for USD, the Sterling Risk-Free Reference Rates Working Group for GBP, the euro-area working group for EUR, the Cross-Industry Committee on JPY Interest Rate Benchmarks for JPY, and the Swiss National Working Group for CHF. Each selected a transaction-based overnight risk-free rate: SOFR (USD, secured Treasury repo), SONIA (GBP, unsecured wholesale deposits), €STR (EUR, unsecured wholesale borrowing), TONA (JPY, unsecured call money), SARON (CHF, secured CHF repo).
Cessation timeline: GBP, CHF, JPY, EUR LIBOR ended December 31, 2021. USD overnight, 1-month, 3-month, 6-month, and 12-month LIBOR had their final fixings on June 30, 2023. USD 1-week and 2-month LIBOR had been discontinued earlier (December 31, 2021). Synthetic LIBOR settings were published in some jurisdictions for limited windows to serve tough legacy contracts; the last of them (synthetic USD 1-month, 3-month, and 6-month) ceased on September 30, 2024, ending LIBOR publication entirely.
Manipulation cases: aggregate global fines exceeded $9 billion. UBS settled for $1.5B (December 2012); Barclays $453M (June 2012, the first major settlement); Deutsche Bank $2.5B (April 2015); RBS $612M; RaboBank $1.07B; Société Générale $750M. (HSBC faced no U.S. regulatory LIBOR fine; its $100M payment in 2018 settled private U.S. class-action litigation.) Criminal convictions followed: Tom Hayes (former UBS and Citi trader) was sentenced to 14 years in the UK (later reduced to 11), though the UK Supreme Court quashed his conviction in July 2025. The Serious Fraud Office's Hayes prosecution was the high-water mark of individual LIBOR criminal accountability, and its reversal a decade later closed that chapter.
5 currencies × 7 tenors; trimmed mean of 11–18 panel banks; cessation USD 2023-06-30.
Mechanics of LIBOR publication: panel banks submitted to Thomson Reuters (later Refinitiv, then ICE BA) by 11:00 AM London time each business day. ICE BA computed the trimmed mean: drop the top 25% and bottom 25% of submissions, average the middle 50%. The number of submissions in the trimmed middle varied by tenor and currency depending on panel size. ICE published the LIBOR fixings at approximately 11:55 AM London.
FRED no longer carries LIBOR: all ICE Benchmark Administration series, including every USD LIBOR tenor (USDONTD156N through USD12MD156N), were removed from FRED effective January 31, 2022 at the source's request, so those series pages return no data. For historical fixings, ICE Benchmark Administration's licensed LIBOR archive is the canonical source.
The Wheatley Review (HM Treasury, September 2012) was the proximate trigger for the transition workstreams. Wheatley's key findings: (1) the underlying unsecured wholesale market was too thin to anchor LIBOR submissions; (2) panel banks' subjective inputs were inherently manipulable; (3) administrative oversight had been inadequate (BBA was a trade association without regulatory authority); (4) LIBOR should be comprehensively reformed rather than replaced, with submissions anchored in transaction data where possible. Replacement came later, once the reforms failed to revive the underlying market: the 2017 FCA announcement (Andrew Bailey speech) set the path to cessation.
Replacement-rate selection process: each currency working group ran a multi-year evaluation. The selection criteria emphasized (1) transaction-based observability, (2) market depth, (3) administrator independence, (4) representativeness, (5) suitability for derivatives and cash products. ARRC selected SOFR in 2017 from a final pair of contenders (SOFR vs OBFR). UK's Sterling RFR working group selected SONIA in 2017. The euro-area working group recommended €STR (the euro short-term rate, produced by the European Central Bank) in September 2018 over two secured repo-based candidates, GC Pooling Deferred and the RepoFunds Rate; €STR went on to replace EONIA as the euro overnight benchmark.
ISDA 2020 IBOR Fallbacks Protocol: the derivative-market mechanism for transitioning legacy LIBOR contracts to RFR replacements. Provided fallback language: at cessation, fixed-floating LIBOR contracts automatically switch to compounded RFR + a fixed credit spread adjustment. Spread adjustments were fixed on March 5, 2021: the FCA's announcement that day on the future cessation and loss of representativeness of all 35 LIBOR settings constituted the Index Cessation Event under the protocol, and Bloomberg, the IBOR fallback rate calculation agent, froze the spread adjustments at the 5-year historical median LIBOR-minus-compounded-RFR-in-arrears as of that date. Fixed adjustments for USD: 1M 11.448 bps, 2M 18.456 bps, 3M 26.161 bps, 6M 42.826 bps, 12M 71.513 bps.
Fallbacks Protocol adherence: ISDA Protocols are opt-in. By the cessation dates, the major dealers and most institutional counterparties had adhered. ISDA's 2020 Protocol covered legacy bilateral derivatives; cleared derivatives at LCH, CME, and Eurex were addressed through clearing-house rule changes. Aggregate notional that needed transition was estimated at $200T+ in derivatives alone.
U.S. tough-legacy contracts: U.S. business loans and securities that lacked workable fallback language and could not be amended bilaterally were addressed by the Adjustable Interest Rate (LIBOR) Act, signed March 2022. The Act installs a federal-statute fallback: applicable USD LIBOR contract → SOFR-based replacement plus ISDA spread adjustment, by operation of law. The Fed's Regulation ZZ (final rule December 2022) implements the Act's selection of specific SOFR rates by product type.
For legacy GBP/JPY/CHF/EUR LIBOR contracts that lacked clean fallback language: UK had a different regime - "synthetic LIBOR," published under FCA powers for a limited window to permit orderly transition of tough-legacy contracts, then wound down. Synthetic GBP and JPY LIBOR fixings continued briefly after the December 2021 cessation; synthetic USD 1M/3M/6M LIBOR was published from July 2023 in a limited window.
Credit-spread-rate alternatives: a small minority of U.S. business-loan market participants resisted SOFR (a secured Treasury repo rate) on the grounds that it doesn't capture bank funding-cost stress the way LIBOR did. Several credit-sensitive alternatives emerged: Ameribor (American Financial Exchange), AXI (Across-the-Curve Credit Spread Index), BSBY (Bloomberg Short-Term Bank Yield Index, discontinued November 2024). None achieved scale comparable to SOFR; BSBY's discontinuation effectively closed the credit-sensitive alternative path for most use cases.
Common practitioner mistakes when researching pre-2023 LIBOR data: (1) using LIBOR rates from the post-scandal 2014–2017 reform window without realizing the underlying market had become extremely thin, so the rates were of limited informational value; (2) comparing pre-2008 LIBOR-OIS spreads to post-2008 in the same chart without recognizing the regime change; (3) treating the various ICE LIBOR overnight rates as equivalent to today's SOFR or fed funds - they have different definitions and credit risk profiles.
ISDA 2020 IBOR Fallbacks Protocol; LIBOR Act 2022; aggregate fines >$9B globally.
The Tom Hayes prosecution (Serious Fraud Office, UK) was the most prominent individual LIBOR criminal case. Hayes, a former UBS and Citi yen-LIBOR trader, was convicted in August 2015 of eight counts of conspiracy to defraud and sentenced to 14 years (later reduced to 11 on appeal). His conviction relied on prosecution interpretation of LIBOR submission as a duty to give an honest, unbiased assessment - Hayes had clearly coordinated submissions across counterparties for trading-book benefit, and the jury accepted that this constituted fraud. After a referral by the Criminal Cases Review Commission in 2023 and a failed Court of Appeal challenge in March 2024, the UK Supreme Court quashed Hayes's conviction (along with Carlo Palombo's Euribor conviction) on July 23, 2025, ruling that the juries had been misdirected on whether trading-motivated submissions could still be honest. The SFO declined to seek a retrial.
U.S. LIBOR settlements: DOJ and CFTC pursued parallel actions. UBS paid about $1.5B (December 2012) across US (DOJ ~$500M, CFTC $700M), UK, and Swiss regulators - at the time the largest aggregate LIBOR resolution; Barclays $453M (June 2012, the first major settlement, leading to CEO Bob Diamond's resignation); Deutsche Bank $2.5B (April 2015, the largest); RBS $612M; RaboBank $1.07B; Société Générale $750M. HSBC faced no DOJ or CFTC LIBOR fine; it paid $100M in 2018 to settle private U.S. class-action LIBOR litigation. The settlements typically combined fines with deferred prosecution agreements requiring compliance overhauls.
Why LIBOR persisted after 2012 despite the scandal: lock-in effects. Trillions of contracts referenced it, and unilaterally switching benchmarks mid-contract isn't legally possible without bilateral agreement. The transition required coordinated industry action (ARRC, Sterling WG, etc.), industry adoption of new contract templates, and ultimately a fixed cessation date to force the migration. The 2017 Bailey speech (Andrew Bailey, then-FCA CEO) announcing that the FCA would not compel panel banks to submit after end-2021 was the watershed regulatory action.
The ICE BA reform efforts (2014–2017): ICE introduced waterfall methodology - Tier 1 (anchored in actual transactions), Tier 2 (transaction-based interpolation), Tier 3 (expert judgment based on related market data) - with submissions weighted toward observable transactions where available. The reform improved discipline but didn't solve the underlying problem that transaction volumes were too thin to anchor robust submissions, especially in stressed periods.
The deeper LIBOR vs SOFR conceptual difference: LIBOR was a credit-sensitive rate (it embedded bank credit risk and term premium for unsecured lending), while SOFR is a credit-risk-free rate (secured by Treasury collateral). In stress events, LIBOR spiked above the risk-free rate (LIBOR-OIS spread blew out to >350 bps in October 2008). SOFR does the opposite - in stress, SOFR can dislocate up briefly (September 2019) but typically settles back to near-Fed-funds. The structural difference means SOFR-based loans don't automatically reflect bank funding stress the way LIBOR-based loans did, which was one of the credit-sensitive-rate proponents' complaints.
Spread adjustment methodology rationale: the 5-year historical median was chosen as a robust estimator (insensitive to outliers) of the typical level difference between LIBOR and SOFR. The window chosen (5 years ending 2021-03-05) covered a relatively normal monetary policy environment, balancing stability with relevance. Critics noted that the chosen window sat structurally below historical averages because it included stretches of unusually compressed LIBOR-OIS spreads, including the zero-rate period that began in March 2020.
Synthetic LIBOR jurisdictional patchwork: UK FCA published synthetic GBP and JPY LIBOR (1M, 3M, 6M) for a limited window starting January 2022 to permit tough-legacy contract continuation. The methodology was forward-looking term RFR + ISDA spread adjustment. Synthetic JPY LIBOR ceased end-2022; synthetic GBP 1M and 6M ceased end-March 2023; synthetic GBP 3M continued briefly into 2024. Synthetic USD 1M, 3M, 6M LIBOR was published from July 2023 by ICE BA under FCA designation for tough-legacy use and ceased on September 30, 2024, ending LIBOR publication permanently.
Cross-border ramifications: LIBOR-referenced contracts existed globally even where the local currency wasn't LIBOR-denominated. Mortgages in Hungary, Romania, and elsewhere referenced CHF LIBOR for currency-mismatched loans (a notorious cause of consumer financial distress when CHF appreciated post-2015). Replacement-rate availability and transition mechanics for non-G5 jurisdictions presented complex legal-political challenges; many of those contracts have been settled or restructured rather than purely cleanly transitioned to RFR.
Legacy LIBOR data continues to be useful for historical analysis: pre-2008 LIBOR-OIS spreads reflected term unsecured bank funding costs cleanly; the 2008 LIBOR-OIS blowout is one of the canonical financial-stress indicators. Post-2008 LIBOR fixings are less informationally rich because the underlying market was thin. Researchers comparing pre- and post-LIBOR regimes need to handle the structural break carefully.
For an institutional reference, the Federal Reserve's LIBOR Transition Resources page (https://www.newyorkfed.org/arrc) and ICE Benchmark Administration's historical LIBOR archives are the canonical primary sources. ISDA's Benchmark Reform and Transition page documents the derivatives-side mechanics. The Wheatley Review (2012) is the foundational reform document and is still worth reading for institutional history.