欧洲众筹监管:当前的“百慕大三角”以及欧洲市场借贷和投资的未来前景

E. Macchiavello
{"title":"欧洲众筹监管:当前的“百慕大三角”以及欧洲市场借贷和投资的未来前景","authors":"E. Macchiavello","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3493688","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Marketplace lending and investing have been recently attracting increasing regulatory attention. However, regulatory responses to such phenomenon have been extremely varied, even in Europe, characterized by maximum harmonization in the field of financial regulation, continuous efforts in creating a single market and in centralizing supervision. Such fragmented framework poses the risk of different levels of investor protection in Europe, regulatory arbitrage, competition distortions, obstacles to cross-border activity and to existing EU passports. The European Commission, after an initial “wait-and-see” approach, adopted in March 2018 a proposal for a Regulation on European Crowdfunding Service Providers (ECSPs) for businesses. Such proposal, nonetheless, has undergone a number of significant revisions during the trilateral negotiations among the European Commission, the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union, underlying the ambiguous nature of crowdfunding and the complexity in reaching a common view on the same. The three European Institutions seem in fact to have divergent views of crowdfunding and different ideas on how to regulate it, this delaying the approval of the proposed Regulation. Will crowdfunding eventually escape such Bermuda Triangle receiving adequate regulation or is it destined to die in the process? The present paper, after briefly describing crowdfunding main features and regulatory trends in Member States, will critically analyze the ECSPs Regulation Proposal, with respect to all the three different versions, inferring from each text a different vision (and consequent envisioned regulation) of crowdfunding and of financial regulation in general, underlying their pros and cons and proposing adjustments to reach a functional, tiered and proportional regulation. Finally, after mentioning certain recent revisions in national crowdfunding laws (e.g. in Italy, Belgium, UK and Germany), the paper will conclude trying to forecast the future direction of the ongoing trilateral negotiations and the possible impact of the European Regulation on national crowdfunding laws and the sector.","PeriodicalId":405783,"journal":{"name":"PSN: Financial Institutions (Topic)","volume":"88 8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"‘What to Expect When You Are Expecting’ a European Crowdfunding Regulation: The Current ‘Bermuda Triangle’ and Future Scenarios for Marketplace Lending and Investing in Europe\",\"authors\":\"E. Macchiavello\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3493688\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Marketplace lending and investing have been recently attracting increasing regulatory attention. However, regulatory responses to such phenomenon have been extremely varied, even in Europe, characterized by maximum harmonization in the field of financial regulation, continuous efforts in creating a single market and in centralizing supervision. Such fragmented framework poses the risk of different levels of investor protection in Europe, regulatory arbitrage, competition distortions, obstacles to cross-border activity and to existing EU passports. The European Commission, after an initial “wait-and-see” approach, adopted in March 2018 a proposal for a Regulation on European Crowdfunding Service Providers (ECSPs) for businesses. Such proposal, nonetheless, has undergone a number of significant revisions during the trilateral negotiations among the European Commission, the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union, underlying the ambiguous nature of crowdfunding and the complexity in reaching a common view on the same. The three European Institutions seem in fact to have divergent views of crowdfunding and different ideas on how to regulate it, this delaying the approval of the proposed Regulation. Will crowdfunding eventually escape such Bermuda Triangle receiving adequate regulation or is it destined to die in the process? The present paper, after briefly describing crowdfunding main features and regulatory trends in Member States, will critically analyze the ECSPs Regulation Proposal, with respect to all the three different versions, inferring from each text a different vision (and consequent envisioned regulation) of crowdfunding and of financial regulation in general, underlying their pros and cons and proposing adjustments to reach a functional, tiered and proportional regulation. Finally, after mentioning certain recent revisions in national crowdfunding laws (e.g. in Italy, Belgium, UK and Germany), the paper will conclude trying to forecast the future direction of the ongoing trilateral negotiations and the possible impact of the European Regulation on national crowdfunding laws and the sector.\",\"PeriodicalId\":405783,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PSN: Financial Institutions (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"88 8 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-08-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PSN: Financial Institutions (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3493688\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PSN: Financial Institutions (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3493688","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

市场借贷和投资最近吸引了越来越多的监管关注。然而,即使在欧洲,对这种现象的管制反应也极为不同,其特点是在金融管制领域最大限度地协调一致,不断努力建立单一市场和集中监督。这种支离破碎的框架可能会在欧洲造成不同程度的投资者保护、监管套利、竞争扭曲、对跨境活动和现有欧盟护照构成障碍。欧盟委员会在最初的“观望”态度之后,于2018年3月通过了一项关于欧洲企业众筹服务提供商(ecsp)法规的提案。尽管如此,在欧盟委员会、欧洲议会和欧盟理事会的三边谈判中,这一提议经历了许多重大的修改,这是由于众筹的模糊性和在同一问题上达成共识的复杂性。事实上,这三家欧洲机构似乎对众筹有不同的看法,对如何监管它也有不同的想法,这推迟了拟议法规的批准。众筹最终会逃脱这样的百慕大三角,得到足够的监管吗?还是注定会在这个过程中消亡?本文在简要描述了众筹的主要特征和成员国的监管趋势之后,将批判性地分析ecsp监管提案,相对于所有三个不同的版本,从每个文本中推断出众筹和金融监管的不同愿景(以及随后设想的监管),潜在的利弊,并提出调整以达到功能,分层和比例监管。最后,在提到最近一些国家众筹法律的修订(如意大利、比利时、英国和德国)之后,本文将试图预测正在进行的三方谈判的未来方向,以及欧洲法规对国家众筹法律和行业可能产生的影响。
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
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
‘What to Expect When You Are Expecting’ a European Crowdfunding Regulation: The Current ‘Bermuda Triangle’ and Future Scenarios for Marketplace Lending and Investing in Europe
Marketplace lending and investing have been recently attracting increasing regulatory attention. However, regulatory responses to such phenomenon have been extremely varied, even in Europe, characterized by maximum harmonization in the field of financial regulation, continuous efforts in creating a single market and in centralizing supervision. Such fragmented framework poses the risk of different levels of investor protection in Europe, regulatory arbitrage, competition distortions, obstacles to cross-border activity and to existing EU passports. The European Commission, after an initial “wait-and-see” approach, adopted in March 2018 a proposal for a Regulation on European Crowdfunding Service Providers (ECSPs) for businesses. Such proposal, nonetheless, has undergone a number of significant revisions during the trilateral negotiations among the European Commission, the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union, underlying the ambiguous nature of crowdfunding and the complexity in reaching a common view on the same. The three European Institutions seem in fact to have divergent views of crowdfunding and different ideas on how to regulate it, this delaying the approval of the proposed Regulation. Will crowdfunding eventually escape such Bermuda Triangle receiving adequate regulation or is it destined to die in the process? The present paper, after briefly describing crowdfunding main features and regulatory trends in Member States, will critically analyze the ECSPs Regulation Proposal, with respect to all the three different versions, inferring from each text a different vision (and consequent envisioned regulation) of crowdfunding and of financial regulation in general, underlying their pros and cons and proposing adjustments to reach a functional, tiered and proportional regulation. Finally, after mentioning certain recent revisions in national crowdfunding laws (e.g. in Italy, Belgium, UK and Germany), the paper will conclude trying to forecast the future direction of the ongoing trilateral negotiations and the possible impact of the European Regulation on national crowdfunding laws and the sector.
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
期刊最新文献
Digitalization-Enabled Evolution of Customer Value Creation: An Executive View in Financial Services Entrepreneurial Orientation and its Impact on Organizational Performance. Case of Selected Micro Financial Institutions (MFIs) In Yaoundé, Cameroon Corruption and bank risk-taking: The deterring role of Shari’ah supervision The Internationalization of Domestic Banks and the Credit Channel of Monetary Policy Bank Information Production Over the Business Cycle
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1