美国视角下的等效性

IF 2.1 4区 社会学 Q3 BUSINESS European Business Organization Law Review Pub Date : 2023-12-19 DOI:10.1007/s40804-023-00305-2
Lissa L. Broome
{"title":"美国视角下的等效性","authors":"Lissa L. Broome","doi":"10.1007/s40804-023-00305-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The EU and the US are more similar than they are different in their approach to equivalence. The world of derivatives is where the equivalence approach is most developed in the US, although in the US, equivalence is referred to as substituted compliance and is found only after a determination that the foreign regulatory regime is comparable to that in the US. US substituted compliance has been developed through the regulatory process, meaning that it is subject to continued development and could change over time at the whim of the regulators who are then in charge. In the case of credit institutions (EU) or commercial/retail banking (US), both the EU and the US largely follow an extra-territorial or territorial approach applying national law to a branch of a foreign entity doing business in the US (the extra-territorial approach) or requiring that a US subsidiary or intermediate holding company be established that is fully subject to US law (the territorial approach). In the provision of investment services, equivalence may theoretically be used to determine whether a third-country firm may offer investment services without a branch throughout the EU. As a practical matter, the only way to access the EU internal market is through a subsidiary established in a Member State (the territorial approach). A few broker-dealer activities may be conducted by foreign firms in the US without registering with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), but otherwise foreign firms must register with the SEC and become a member of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) self-regulatory organization to engage in underwriting, private placement, and mergers and acquisitions advisory services.</p>","PeriodicalId":45278,"journal":{"name":"European Business Organization Law Review","volume":"24 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A US Perspective on Equivalence\",\"authors\":\"Lissa L. Broome\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40804-023-00305-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The EU and the US are more similar than they are different in their approach to equivalence. The world of derivatives is where the equivalence approach is most developed in the US, although in the US, equivalence is referred to as substituted compliance and is found only after a determination that the foreign regulatory regime is comparable to that in the US. US substituted compliance has been developed through the regulatory process, meaning that it is subject to continued development and could change over time at the whim of the regulators who are then in charge. In the case of credit institutions (EU) or commercial/retail banking (US), both the EU and the US largely follow an extra-territorial or territorial approach applying national law to a branch of a foreign entity doing business in the US (the extra-territorial approach) or requiring that a US subsidiary or intermediate holding company be established that is fully subject to US law (the territorial approach). In the provision of investment services, equivalence may theoretically be used to determine whether a third-country firm may offer investment services without a branch throughout the EU. As a practical matter, the only way to access the EU internal market is through a subsidiary established in a Member State (the territorial approach). A few broker-dealer activities may be conducted by foreign firms in the US without registering with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), but otherwise foreign firms must register with the SEC and become a member of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) self-regulatory organization to engage in underwriting, private placement, and mergers and acquisitions advisory services.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45278,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Business Organization Law Review\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Business Organization Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40804-023-00305-2\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Business Organization Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40804-023-00305-2","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

欧盟和美国在等效性方面的相似之处多于不同之处。衍生品领域是美国等效方法发展最为成熟的领域,不过在美国,等效被称为替代合规,只有在确定外国监管制度与美国监管制度具有可比性之后才能认定。美国的替代合规性是通过监管程序制定的,这意味着它需要不断发展,并可能随着时间的推移,由当时负责的监管机构随意改变。就信贷机构(欧盟)或商业/零售银行(美国)而言,欧盟和美国主要采用域外或属地方法,对在美国开展业务的外国实体的分支机构适用国内法(域外方法),或要求设立完全受美国法律管辖的美国子公司或中间控股公司(属地方法)。在提供投资服务方面,理论上可以使用等效性来确定第三国公司是否可以在没有分支机构的情况下在整个欧盟提供投资服务。实际上,进入欧盟内部市场的唯一途径是通过在成员国设立子公司(属地方法)。外国公司可在美国开展少数经纪交易活动,无需向美国证券交易委员会(SEC)注册,但除此之外,外国公司必须向美国证券交易委员会注册,并成为金融业监管局(FINRA)自律组织的成员,才能从事承销、私募和并购咨询服务。
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
A US Perspective on Equivalence

The EU and the US are more similar than they are different in their approach to equivalence. The world of derivatives is where the equivalence approach is most developed in the US, although in the US, equivalence is referred to as substituted compliance and is found only after a determination that the foreign regulatory regime is comparable to that in the US. US substituted compliance has been developed through the regulatory process, meaning that it is subject to continued development and could change over time at the whim of the regulators who are then in charge. In the case of credit institutions (EU) or commercial/retail banking (US), both the EU and the US largely follow an extra-territorial or territorial approach applying national law to a branch of a foreign entity doing business in the US (the extra-territorial approach) or requiring that a US subsidiary or intermediate holding company be established that is fully subject to US law (the territorial approach). In the provision of investment services, equivalence may theoretically be used to determine whether a third-country firm may offer investment services without a branch throughout the EU. As a practical matter, the only way to access the EU internal market is through a subsidiary established in a Member State (the territorial approach). A few broker-dealer activities may be conducted by foreign firms in the US without registering with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), but otherwise foreign firms must register with the SEC and become a member of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) self-regulatory organization to engage in underwriting, private placement, and mergers and acquisitions advisory services.

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
4.60
自引率
9.50%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: The European Business Organization Law Review (EBOR) aims to promote a scholarly debate which critically analyses the whole range of organizations chosen by companies, groups of companies, and state-owned enterprises to pursue their business activities and offer goods and services all over the European Union. At issue are the enactment of corporate laws, the theory of firm, the theory of capital markets and related legal topics.
期刊最新文献
Enterprise Foundations and Faithful Agency as Drivers of Sustainable Long-Termism in Philanthropy Solving Investors’ Problems with Access to Evidence in Damages Litigation: Suggestions for a Future Issuer Liability Regime ESG & Executive Remuneration in Europe Interpretation of the Scope of International Commercial Arbitration Agreements: A Comparison of Swiss and Turkish Case Law Addressing the Flaws of the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation: Moving from Disclosures to Labelling and Sustainability Due Diligence
×
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