IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/eucflr/v17y2020i1p35-71n2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reflections on the EU Third Country Regime for Capital Markets in the Shadow of Brexit

Author

Listed:
  • Moloney Niamh

    (Law Department, London School of Economics and Political Science. United Kingdom of Great Britan and Northern Ireland)

Abstract

This article considers the recent evolution of the EU’s third country regime for capital market access in light of Brexit, the important series of legislative reforms adopted in March 2019 as the 2014-2019 European Parliament/Commission term closed, and the emergence of the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) as a material technocratic influence. The article suggests that while the capital market third country regime is changing (with Brexit a key but not exclusive driver of change), it is not being radically recast, although it is tightening. The regime remains broadly based on the more-or-less liberal ‘deference’ model which has long characterised EU third-country financial services policy. But it is becoming increasingly ‘on-shored’ by means of the direct application of EU rules and by ESMA’s oversight/supervision of certain third country actors. The significantly more restrictive approach being taken to third country central clearing counterparties is a marked development, but here the political and economic context is distinct. The implications of the overall shift towards a more ‘on-shore’, centralised, and potentially restrictive access regime are considered, and a modest reform prescription is offered.

Suggested Citation

  • Moloney Niamh, 2020. "Reflections on the EU Third Country Regime for Capital Markets in the Shadow of Brexit," European Company and Financial Law Review, De Gruyter, vol. 17(1), pages 35-71, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:bpj:eucflr:v:17:y:2020:i:1:p:35-71:n:2
    DOI: 10.1515/ecfr-2020-0002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/ecfr-2020-0002
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/ecfr-2020-0002?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:eucflr:v:17:y:2020:i:1:p:35-71:n:2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.