英国脱欧后欧盟和英国金融服务业的对等决策

Q2 Social Sciences

European Business Law Review Pub Date : 2022-04-01 DOI:10.54648/eulr2022021

Emil Nästega°rd

{"title":"英国脱欧后欧盟和英国金融服务业的对等决策","authors":"Emil Nästega°rd","doi":"10.54648/eulr2022021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Financial services are largely left out of the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement that was reached at the end of December 2020. The issue of cross-border market access for financial services firms based in the EU and in the UK could be resolved by the adoption of mutual equivalence decisions. The UK made a number of equivalence decisions pre-Brexit to allow EU-based financial services firms access to the UK market. The EU has not reciprocated. Consequently, UK-based financial services firms have moved business into the EU to maintain client access. The article discusses advantages and disadvantages of the EU and the UK’s different strategies as regards market access and whether equivalence decisions in the area of financial services can be used to build up a trustful relationship between the EU and the UK post-Brexit.\nEquivalence decisions, Brexit, pre-Brexit regulation, post-Brexit regulation, financial services regulation, Joint UK-EU Financial Regulatory Forum, market efficiency, market relocation, Singapore-on-Thames, systemic risks","PeriodicalId":53431,"journal":{"name":"European Business Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Equivalence Decisions in the EU and UK Financial Services Sectors Post-Brexit\",\"authors\":\"Emil Nästega°rd\",\"doi\":\"10.54648/eulr2022021\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Financial services are largely left out of the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement that was reached at the end of December 2020. The issue of cross-border market access for financial services firms based in the EU and in the UK could be resolved by the adoption of mutual equivalence decisions. The UK made a number of equivalence decisions pre-Brexit to allow EU-based financial services firms access to the UK market. The EU has not reciprocated. Consequently, UK-based financial services firms have moved business into the EU to maintain client access. The article discusses advantages and disadvantages of the EU and the UK’s different strategies as regards market access and whether equivalence decisions in the area of financial services can be used to build up a trustful relationship between the EU and the UK post-Brexit.\\nEquivalence decisions, Brexit, pre-Brexit regulation, post-Brexit regulation, financial services regulation, Joint UK-EU Financial Regulatory Forum, market efficiency, market relocation, Singapore-on-Thames, systemic risks\",\"PeriodicalId\":53431,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Business Law Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Business Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54648/eulr2022021\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Business Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/eulr2022021","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

金融服务在很大程度上被排除在2020年12月底达成的《欧盟-英国贸易与合作协定》之外。总部位于欧盟和英国的金融服务公司的跨境市场准入问题可以通过采取相互对等的决定来解决。英国在脱欧前做出了一些对等决定，允许总部位于欧盟的金融服务公司进入英国市场。欧盟没有做出回应。因此，总部位于英国的金融服务公司已将业务转移到欧盟，以保持客户准入。本文讨论了欧盟和英国在市场准入方面的不同战略的优缺点，以及金融服务领域的对等决策是否可以用来在脱欧后建立欧盟和英国之间的信任关系。对等决策、脱欧、脱欧前监管、脱欧后监管、金融服务监管，英国-欧盟金融监管联合论坛、市场效率、市场迁移、泰晤士河畔新加坡、系统性风险

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Equivalence Decisions in the EU and UK Financial Services Sectors Post-Brexit

Financial services are largely left out of the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement that was reached at the end of December 2020. The issue of cross-border market access for financial services firms based in the EU and in the UK could be resolved by the adoption of mutual equivalence decisions. The UK made a number of equivalence decisions pre-Brexit to allow EU-based financial services firms access to the UK market. The EU has not reciprocated. Consequently, UK-based financial services firms have moved business into the EU to maintain client access. The article discusses advantages and disadvantages of the EU and the UK’s different strategies as regards market access and whether equivalence decisions in the area of financial services can be used to build up a trustful relationship between the EU and the UK post-Brexit. Equivalence decisions, Brexit, pre-Brexit regulation, post-Brexit regulation, financial services regulation, Joint UK-EU Financial Regulatory Forum, market efficiency, market relocation, Singapore-on-Thames, systemic risks

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

European Business Law Review Social Sciences-Law

CiteScore

1.10

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： The mission of the European Business Law Review is to provide a forum for analysis and discussion of business law, including European Union law and the laws of the Member States and other European countries, as well as legal frameworks and issues in international and comparative contexts. The Review moves freely over the boundaries that divide the law, and covers business law, broadly defined, in public or private law, domestic, European or international law. Our topics of interest include commercial, financial, corporate, private and regulatory laws with a broadly business dimension. The Review offers current, authoritative scholarship on a wide range of issues and developments, featuring contributors providing an international as well as a European perspective. The Review is an invaluable source of current scholarship, information, practical analysis, and expert guidance for all practising lawyers, advisers, and scholars dealing with European business law on a regular basis. The Review has over 25 years established the highest scholarly standards. It distinguishes itself as open-minded, embracing interests that appeal to the scholarly, practitioner and policy-making spheres. It practices strict routines of peer review. The Review imposes no word limit on submissions, subject to the appropriateness of the word length to the subject under discussion.