Global Rules for a Global Market Place? – The Regulation and Supervision of FinTech Providers

Matthias B. Lehmann
{"title":"Global Rules for a Global Market Place? – The Regulation and Supervision of FinTech Providers","authors":"Matthias B. Lehmann","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3421963","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Financial technology (FinTech) revolutionizes the way in which financial services are rendered. Although the phenomenon is not new, it has taken on a novel dimension. Markets which were once national are morphing into global ones. The interest in regulating them not only exists, but to some extent is even higher compared to traditional services. This article illustrates the many different needs for regulating FinTech providers, from the protection of investors and consumers to the fight against money laundering and tax evasion. The article demonstrates that these questions cannot be adequately addressed by a laboratory free space or by self-regulation. It also shows that idiosyncratic national rules would result in legal fragmentation and deprive the world of the benefit that digital services can provide. \n \nThe paper suggests therefore that global standards would be the most adequate solution for the regulation of global services. It proposes to re-conceptualize the FSB and to transform it into a ‘Financial Stability and Innovation Board’. In light of the diverging customs, knowledge and practices of residents around the world, the global standards need to be complemented by tailored national rules. Also, global rule harmonization will not cause differences in supervision to disappear. Regulatory competition and arbitrage might give incentives to countries to lower their supervisory standards, accepting negative externalities for residents of other states in order to become a global FinTech hub. This tendency must be countered by a competition for the strictest quality of supervision. Since such a competition requires transparency, this article suggests requiring mandatory information about the competent supervisor in any marketing and customer communication by a FinTech service provider. Through experience and ratings of supervisors, a run for quality will be triggered.","PeriodicalId":383457,"journal":{"name":"European Banking Institute (EBI) Research Paper Series","volume":"62 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Banking Institute (EBI) Research Paper Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3421963","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Financial technology (FinTech) revolutionizes the way in which financial services are rendered. Although the phenomenon is not new, it has taken on a novel dimension. Markets which were once national are morphing into global ones. The interest in regulating them not only exists, but to some extent is even higher compared to traditional services. This article illustrates the many different needs for regulating FinTech providers, from the protection of investors and consumers to the fight against money laundering and tax evasion. The article demonstrates that these questions cannot be adequately addressed by a laboratory free space or by self-regulation. It also shows that idiosyncratic national rules would result in legal fragmentation and deprive the world of the benefit that digital services can provide. The paper suggests therefore that global standards would be the most adequate solution for the regulation of global services. It proposes to re-conceptualize the FSB and to transform it into a ‘Financial Stability and Innovation Board’. In light of the diverging customs, knowledge and practices of residents around the world, the global standards need to be complemented by tailored national rules. Also, global rule harmonization will not cause differences in supervision to disappear. Regulatory competition and arbitrage might give incentives to countries to lower their supervisory standards, accepting negative externalities for residents of other states in order to become a global FinTech hub. This tendency must be countered by a competition for the strictest quality of supervision. Since such a competition requires transparency, this article suggests requiring mandatory information about the competent supervisor in any marketing and customer communication by a FinTech service provider. Through experience and ratings of supervisors, a run for quality will be triggered.
全球市场的全球规则?-监管和监督金融科技提供商
金融科技(FinTech)彻底改变了提供金融服务的方式。尽管这一现象并不新鲜,但它呈现出了一种新的维度。曾经的国家市场正在转变为全球市场。监管它们的兴趣不仅存在,而且在某种程度上甚至比传统服务更高。本文阐述了监管金融科技提供商的许多不同需求,从保护投资者和消费者到打击洗钱和逃税。文章表明,这些问题不能通过实验室自由空间或自我调节来充分解决。它还表明,特殊的国家规则将导致法律分裂,并剥夺世界数字服务可以提供的好处。因此,本文认为,全球标准将是全球服务监管的最适当的解决方案。它建议重新定义金融稳定委员会,并将其转变为“金融稳定与创新委员会”。鉴于世界各地居民的习俗、知识和做法存在差异,全球标准需要有针对性的国家规则加以补充。同样,全球规则的协调也不会导致监管差异的消失。监管竞争和套利可能会激励各国降低监管标准,接受其他国家居民的负外部性,以成为全球金融科技中心。这种趋势必须通过争夺最严格的监管质量来加以遏制。由于这种竞争需要透明度,本文建议要求金融科技服务提供商在任何营销和客户沟通中提供有关主管的强制性信息。通过监督员的经验和评级,将触发质量运行。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信