数据报告:市场结构和监管框架

Christian Schmies, Alexander Sajnovits
{"title":"数据报告:市场结构和监管框架","authors":"Christian Schmies, Alexander Sajnovits","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3726054","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The European legislature has identified weaknesses in the functioning and transparency of financial markets as major shortcomings of the regulatory framework under MiFID I. The new MiFID II/MiFIR regime essentially addresses these identified deficits by means of three regulatory measures: First, it considerably extends the scope and increases the stringency of the obligations with regard to pre- and post-trade transparency with a view to improving the quality of pre- and post-trade transparency data. Second, it instigates a shift towards increased trading on regulated trading venues or on other regulated platforms (more extensive market regulation and trading obligations) and, third, it extends the scope of reporting obligations vis-à-vis the supervisory authorities to enable better monitoring of the financial markets. The already extensive Level 1 requirements have been further specified by numerous pieces of highly detailed Level 2 legal acts. In addition, ESMA has already issued several guidelines and Q&As to harmonize supervisory practice. The resulting network of regulations poses immense challenges for legal practice - as is increasingly characteristic of European capital market law today. The paper sets out to shed some light on the subject.","PeriodicalId":20999,"journal":{"name":"Regulation of Financial Institutions eJournal","volume":"37 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Data Reporting: Market Structures and Regulatory Framework\",\"authors\":\"Christian Schmies, Alexander Sajnovits\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3726054\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The European legislature has identified weaknesses in the functioning and transparency of financial markets as major shortcomings of the regulatory framework under MiFID I. The new MiFID II/MiFIR regime essentially addresses these identified deficits by means of three regulatory measures: First, it considerably extends the scope and increases the stringency of the obligations with regard to pre- and post-trade transparency with a view to improving the quality of pre- and post-trade transparency data. Second, it instigates a shift towards increased trading on regulated trading venues or on other regulated platforms (more extensive market regulation and trading obligations) and, third, it extends the scope of reporting obligations vis-à-vis the supervisory authorities to enable better monitoring of the financial markets. The already extensive Level 1 requirements have been further specified by numerous pieces of highly detailed Level 2 legal acts. In addition, ESMA has already issued several guidelines and Q&As to harmonize supervisory practice. The resulting network of regulations poses immense challenges for legal practice - as is increasingly characteristic of European capital market law today. The paper sets out to shed some light on the subject.\",\"PeriodicalId\":20999,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Regulation of Financial Institutions eJournal\",\"volume\":\"37 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-11-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Regulation of Financial Institutions eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3726054\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Regulation of Financial Institutions eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3726054","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

欧洲立法机构已经将金融市场运作和透明度方面的弱点确定为MiFID i下监管框架的主要缺点。新的MiFID II/MiFIR制度基本上通过三种监管措施解决了这些已确定的缺陷:第一,它大大扩大了贸易前和贸易后透明度方面义务的范围和严格程度,以期提高贸易前和贸易后透明度数据的质量。第二,它促使人们转向在受监管的交易场所或其他受监管的平台上增加交易(更广泛的市场监管和交易义务);第三,它扩大了向-à-vis监管机构报告义务的范围,以便更好地监测金融市场。已经非常广泛的第1级要求又被许多非常详细的第2级法律行为进一步规定。此外,ESMA已经发布了一些指导方针和Q&以协调监管实践。由此产生的法规网络给法律实践带来了巨大的挑战——这是当今欧洲资本市场法日益突出的特点。这篇论文试图阐明这个问题。
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
Data Reporting: Market Structures and Regulatory Framework
The European legislature has identified weaknesses in the functioning and transparency of financial markets as major shortcomings of the regulatory framework under MiFID I. The new MiFID II/MiFIR regime essentially addresses these identified deficits by means of three regulatory measures: First, it considerably extends the scope and increases the stringency of the obligations with regard to pre- and post-trade transparency with a view to improving the quality of pre- and post-trade transparency data. Second, it instigates a shift towards increased trading on regulated trading venues or on other regulated platforms (more extensive market regulation and trading obligations) and, third, it extends the scope of reporting obligations vis-à-vis the supervisory authorities to enable better monitoring of the financial markets. The already extensive Level 1 requirements have been further specified by numerous pieces of highly detailed Level 2 legal acts. In addition, ESMA has already issued several guidelines and Q&As to harmonize supervisory practice. The resulting network of regulations poses immense challenges for legal practice - as is increasingly characteristic of European capital market law today. The paper sets out to shed some light on the subject.
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
Did FinTech Lenders Facilitate PPP Fraud? Financial Reform and Public Good Provision: Municipal Bankruptcy Law and the Financing of Hospitals How Do Acquisitions Affect the Mental Health of Employees? Anti-Discrimination Insurance Pricing: Regulations, Fairness Criteria, and Models The Unintended Benefits of Increased Disclosure Frequency: Evidence from the Brokerage House Industry
×
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