AI Hallucination Research › Findings by audience › Practitioners › United States › Stockbrokers / Trading Reps › Detail › Finding
Practitioners — Stockbrokers / Trading Reps · Last updated 11 Jun 2026 · Hallucination Register
Share / Print X LinkedIn Email

Finding#3, Multi-DCO haircut tiebreaker: highest-accepted-rate rule omitted

RLB Citation ID: RLB-F-US-CFTC-DIGITAL-ASSET-COLLATERAL-TOKENIZED-ASSETS-STAFF-GUIDANCE-2025-Q007
AI's failure:Misstated Rule Risk for Stockbrokers / Trading Reps:Liability / PI exposure
What the RLB Specialist Panel found

Finding#3, Multi-DCO haircut tiebreaker: highest-accepted-rate rule omitted

Impact for Stockbrokers / Trading Reps in the United States advising on the CFTC Digital Asset Collateral No-Action Relief and Tokenized Asset Staff Guidance (Market Participants Division, December 2025)

A Stockbrokers / Trading Reps relying on the AI's 20%-floor description applies it as the universal rule. In the multi-DCO scenario the operative rule is the highest accepted haircut, so the team's working assumption produces systematically light coverage wherever any DCO accepts the asset at a higher rate. The error is silent in the firm's own controls because the test is built around the wrong reference.

References — raw findings (per AI model)
This finding also affects
← Previous finding Finding#2, Weekly reporting obligation: inversion of 3-month sunset rule
Cite this finding

Each finding has a stable Citation ID (RLB-F-… for aggregated case-study findings, RLB-H-… for raw per-model hallucinations) — like a DOI, the ID always resolves to the canonical finding even if URLs change.

RLB Citation ID: RLB-F-US-CFTC-DIGITAL-ASSET-COLLATERAL-TOKENIZED-ASSETS-STAFF-GUIDANCE-2025-Q007
Plain text Download 
RegLeg Specialist Panel (2026). "Finding#3, Multi-DCO haircut tiebreaker: highest-accepted-rate rule omitted — Practitioners — Stockbrokers / Trading Reps." Citation ID: RLB-F-US-CFTC-DIGITAL-ASSET-COLLATERAL-TOKENIZED-ASSETS-STAFF-GUIDANCE-2025-Q007. RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research, published 2026-06-11. https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j3/US/CFTC/DIGITAL-ASSET-COLLATERAL-TOKENIZED-ASSETS-STAFF-GUIDANCE-2025/practitioners/stockbrokers-trading-reps/finding/US-CFTC-US-001-DIGITAL-ASSET-COLLATERAL-TOKENIZED-ASSETS-STAFF-GUIDANCE-2025-v1-007/
APA 7th edition Download 
RegLeg Specialist Panel. (2026). Finding#3, Multi-DCO haircut tiebreaker: highest-accepted-rate rule omitted [Hallucination finding RLB-F-US-CFTC-DIGITAL-ASSET-COLLATERAL-TOKENIZED-ASSETS-STAFF-GUIDANCE-2025-Q007]. RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research. https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j3/US/CFTC/DIGITAL-ASSET-COLLATERAL-TOKENIZED-ASSETS-STAFF-GUIDANCE-2025/practitioners/stockbrokers-trading-reps/finding/US-CFTC-US-001-DIGITAL-ASSET-COLLATERAL-TOKENIZED-ASSETS-STAFF-GUIDANCE-2025-v1-007/
Bluebook / OSCOLA (US + UK legal) Download 
RegLeg Specialist Panel, Finding#3, Multi-DCO haircut tiebreaker: highest-accepted-rate rule omitted [RLB-F-US-CFTC-DIGITAL-ASSET-COLLATERAL-TOKENIZED-ASSETS-STAFF-GUIDANCE-2025-Q007], RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research (June 11, 2026), https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j3/US/CFTC/DIGITAL-ASSET-COLLATERAL-TOKENIZED-ASSETS-STAFF-GUIDANCE-2025/practitioners/stockbrokers-trading-reps/finding/US-CFTC-US-001-DIGITAL-ASSET-COLLATERAL-TOKENIZED-ASSETS-STAFF-GUIDANCE-2025-v1-007/.
BibTeX Download 
@misc{reglegbrief_RLB_F_US_CFTC_DIGITAL_ASSET_COLLATERAL_TOKENIZED_ASSETS_STAFF_GUIDANCE_2025_Q007,
  author    = {RegLeg Specialist Panel},
  title     = {Finding#3, Multi-DCO haircut tiebreaker: highest-accepted-rate rule omitted},
  year      = {2026},
  publisher = {RegLegBrief AI Hallucination Research},
  note      = {Hallucination finding Citation ID: RLB-F-US-CFTC-DIGITAL-ASSET-COLLATERAL-TOKENIZED-ASSETS-STAFF-GUIDANCE-2025-Q007},
  url       = {https://reglegbrief.com/regulators/j3/US/CFTC/DIGITAL-ASSET-COLLATERAL-TOKENIZED-ASSETS-STAFF-GUIDANCE-2025/practitioners/stockbrokers-trading-reps/finding/US-CFTC-US-001-DIGITAL-ASSET-COLLATERAL-TOKENIZED-ASSETS-STAFF-GUIDANCE-2025-v1-007/}
}
← Back to case study summary Case study detail →
About Citation IDs →

Every finding on this page compares an AI subject's account of the rule against the regulator's verbatim text from the regulator's own portal. Both are linked. Each delta, its root causes, and impact analysis are documented and published with immutable Citation IDs.