证券业中介机构的监管——澳大利亚的建议

IF 0.6 4区 社会学 Q2 LAW
P. Latimer
{"title":"证券业中介机构的监管——澳大利亚的建议","authors":"P. Latimer","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3124591","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In its one hundred ninety-eight page A Review of the Licensing Provisions of the Securities Industry Act and Codes (Review) published in October 1985,1 the Australian National Companies and Securities Commission, upon reviewing the licensing provisions of the Securities Industry Act of 1980 Commonwealth and Codes, stated what many had long felt, that \"the present licensing system is not working adequately to provide adequate investor protection.\"'2 The Review considers, instead, a move to the United States/Canadian model of supervised self-regulation by self-regulatory organizations (SROs) in combination with the maintenance of the existing method of regulation by the Commission.3 This article endeavors to address the Australian proposals and to compare them with the North American experience. In particular, the article will initially review the various theories of occupational licensure.4 Next, it will discuss the ramifications of self-regulation by","PeriodicalId":43790,"journal":{"name":"University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law","volume":"1 1","pages":"1"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"1987-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Regulation of Securities Industry Intermediaries--Australian Proposals\",\"authors\":\"P. Latimer\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3124591\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In its one hundred ninety-eight page A Review of the Licensing Provisions of the Securities Industry Act and Codes (Review) published in October 1985,1 the Australian National Companies and Securities Commission, upon reviewing the licensing provisions of the Securities Industry Act of 1980 Commonwealth and Codes, stated what many had long felt, that \\\"the present licensing system is not working adequately to provide adequate investor protection.\\\"'2 The Review considers, instead, a move to the United States/Canadian model of supervised self-regulation by self-regulatory organizations (SROs) in combination with the maintenance of the existing method of regulation by the Commission.3 This article endeavors to address the Australian proposals and to compare them with the North American experience. In particular, the article will initially review the various theories of occupational licensure.4 Next, it will discuss the ramifications of self-regulation by\",\"PeriodicalId\":43790,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"1\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"1987-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3124591\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3124591","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在1985年10月出版的长达198页的《证券业法案和守则许可条款审查》(审查)中,1澳大利亚国家公司和证券委员会在审查了1980年联邦证券业法案和守则的许可条款后,陈述了许多人长期以来的感觉,即“目前的许可制度不能充分地为投资者提供足够的保护。”2相反,《评论》考虑向美国/加拿大的自我监管组织(sro)的监督自我监管模式靠拢,同时维持欧盟委员会现有的监管方法。3本文试图解决澳大利亚的建议,并将其与北美的经验进行比较。特别是,本文将初步回顾职业许可的各种理论接下来,它将讨论自我监管的后果
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Regulation of Securities Industry Intermediaries--Australian Proposals
In its one hundred ninety-eight page A Review of the Licensing Provisions of the Securities Industry Act and Codes (Review) published in October 1985,1 the Australian National Companies and Securities Commission, upon reviewing the licensing provisions of the Securities Industry Act of 1980 Commonwealth and Codes, stated what many had long felt, that "the present licensing system is not working adequately to provide adequate investor protection."'2 The Review considers, instead, a move to the United States/Canadian model of supervised self-regulation by self-regulatory organizations (SROs) in combination with the maintenance of the existing method of regulation by the Commission.3 This article endeavors to address the Australian proposals and to compare them with the North American experience. In particular, the article will initially review the various theories of occupational licensure.4 Next, it will discuss the ramifications of self-regulation by
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
0.60
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