零售结构性投资产品的产品干预:新加坡、香港和台湾的规则比较

Christopher C. Chen
{"title":"零售结构性投资产品的产品干预:新加坡、香港和台湾的规则比较","authors":"Christopher C. Chen","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2826206","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article compares new product intervention rules in Singapore, Hong Kong and Taiwan for complex structured investment products. Singapore’s approach is to improve firms’ internal safeguard, while Hong Kong’s approach is to require prior authorisation for new unlisted structured investment products by the securities regulator. Taiwan’s approach is to have a self regulatory body reviewing a product beforehand. This article argues that it is difficult to review the merit of a financial product in advance and thus it is difficult to have a true gatekeeper for toxic financial products. Before product intervention, we must first identify clear objectives. Regulators have to strengthen the accountability of the reviewer and create concrete review standards if additional ex ante product review is preferred. Regulators may also consider setting up some minimum standards for retail financial products through public debate in order to filter unwanted features from the retail market.","PeriodicalId":172026,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Comparative Law (Topic)","volume":"78 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Product Intervention for Retail Structured Investment Products: A Comparison of Rules in Singapore, Hong Kong and Taiwan\",\"authors\":\"Christopher C. Chen\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.2826206\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article compares new product intervention rules in Singapore, Hong Kong and Taiwan for complex structured investment products. Singapore’s approach is to improve firms’ internal safeguard, while Hong Kong’s approach is to require prior authorisation for new unlisted structured investment products by the securities regulator. Taiwan’s approach is to have a self regulatory body reviewing a product beforehand. This article argues that it is difficult to review the merit of a financial product in advance and thus it is difficult to have a true gatekeeper for toxic financial products. Before product intervention, we must first identify clear objectives. Regulators have to strengthen the accountability of the reviewer and create concrete review standards if additional ex ante product review is preferred. Regulators may also consider setting up some minimum standards for retail financial products through public debate in order to filter unwanted features from the retail market.\",\"PeriodicalId\":172026,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"LSN: Comparative Law (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"78 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-08-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"LSN: Comparative Law (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2826206\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSN: Comparative Law (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2826206","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文比较了新加坡、香港和台湾针对复杂结构性投资产品的新产品干预规则。新加坡的做法是改善公司的内部保障,而香港的做法是要求证券监管机构事先批准新的非上市结构性投资产品。台湾的做法是让一个自我监管机构事先对产品进行审查。本文认为,很难事先审查金融产品的优点,因此很难有一个真正的看门人对有毒的金融产品。在产品干预之前,我们必须首先确定明确的目标。如果需要额外的事前产品审查,监管机构必须加强审查人员的问责制,并制定具体的审查标准。监管机构还可以考虑通过公开讨论为零售金融产品设定一些最低标准,以过滤零售市场中不需要的特征。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Product Intervention for Retail Structured Investment Products: A Comparison of Rules in Singapore, Hong Kong and Taiwan
This article compares new product intervention rules in Singapore, Hong Kong and Taiwan for complex structured investment products. Singapore’s approach is to improve firms’ internal safeguard, while Hong Kong’s approach is to require prior authorisation for new unlisted structured investment products by the securities regulator. Taiwan’s approach is to have a self regulatory body reviewing a product beforehand. This article argues that it is difficult to review the merit of a financial product in advance and thus it is difficult to have a true gatekeeper for toxic financial products. Before product intervention, we must first identify clear objectives. Regulators have to strengthen the accountability of the reviewer and create concrete review standards if additional ex ante product review is preferred. Regulators may also consider setting up some minimum standards for retail financial products through public debate in order to filter unwanted features from the retail market.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信