MiFID II与场外衍生品多边交易监管:OTF是否适用?

IF 2 Q1 LAW
Simon Helm
{"title":"MiFID II与场外衍生品多边交易监管:OTF是否适用?","authors":"Simon Helm","doi":"10.1093/jfr/fjac009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This article identifies barriers to the complete implementation of the organized trading facility (OTF) as a new category of trading venue under the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (Directive 2014/65/EU) (MiFID II). It argues that attempts to reconcile the competing claims of incumbent regulated markets and dealer banks operating broker crossing networks in the cash securities markets led to a market design that is not suitable for the over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives markets. The result has been that multilateral trading in the wholesale secondary markets has not been incorporated in trading venues, as was intended, and that changes that are better aligned to market requirements are needed. These include reform of requirements transposed from the cash securities markets, such as standardized fee structures, and relaxation of restrictions on interactions between an OTF and other OTFs or systematic internalizers.","PeriodicalId":42830,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Financial Regulation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"MiFID II and the Regulation of Multilateral Trading in OTC Derivatives: Is the OTF Fit for Purpose?\",\"authors\":\"Simon Helm\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jfr/fjac009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n This article identifies barriers to the complete implementation of the organized trading facility (OTF) as a new category of trading venue under the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (Directive 2014/65/EU) (MiFID II). It argues that attempts to reconcile the competing claims of incumbent regulated markets and dealer banks operating broker crossing networks in the cash securities markets led to a market design that is not suitable for the over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives markets. The result has been that multilateral trading in the wholesale secondary markets has not been incorporated in trading venues, as was intended, and that changes that are better aligned to market requirements are needed. These include reform of requirements transposed from the cash securities markets, such as standardized fee structures, and relaxation of restrictions on interactions between an OTF and other OTFs or systematic internalizers.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42830,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Financial Regulation\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Financial Regulation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jfr/fjac009\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Financial Regulation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jfr/fjac009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文确定了在金融工具市场指令(指令2014/65/EU) (MiFID II)下,有组织交易设施(OTF)作为一种新的交易场所类别的完全实施的障碍。本文认为,试图调和现有受监管市场和在现金证券市场中经营经纪人交叉网络的交易商银行的竞争主张,导致市场设计不适合场外(OTC)衍生品市场。其结果是,批发二级市场的多边交易并未如预期的那样纳入交易场所,因此需要进行更符合市场需求的变革。这些措施包括改革从现金证券市场转移而来的要求,例如标准化收费结构,以及放宽对一个场外交易基金与其他场外交易基金或系统性内部化机构之间相互作用的限制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
MiFID II and the Regulation of Multilateral Trading in OTC Derivatives: Is the OTF Fit for Purpose?
This article identifies barriers to the complete implementation of the organized trading facility (OTF) as a new category of trading venue under the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (Directive 2014/65/EU) (MiFID II). It argues that attempts to reconcile the competing claims of incumbent regulated markets and dealer banks operating broker crossing networks in the cash securities markets led to a market design that is not suitable for the over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives markets. The result has been that multilateral trading in the wholesale secondary markets has not been incorporated in trading venues, as was intended, and that changes that are better aligned to market requirements are needed. These include reform of requirements transposed from the cash securities markets, such as standardized fee structures, and relaxation of restrictions on interactions between an OTF and other OTFs or systematic internalizers.
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
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
3.80%
发文量
12
×
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