Search results

Several recent developments (notably, the breakdown of traditional distinctions between different types of financial activity, the globalisation of financial markets and increasing emphasis on systemic stability as a regulatory objective) have prompted policy‐makers to search for an ‘optimum’ regulatory structure that is adapted to the new market environment. Further impetus has been given to this debate by the radical overhaul of regulatory structures, along quite different lines in Australia, the UK and Japan, and the ongoing deliberations within the US Congress over structured financial reform. This paper examines alternative ways of organising the regulatory function in the context of the new financial market environment. The first section reviews the objectives, targets and techniques of regulation. The second section describes the new market environment and the restructuring of the financial services industry. The third section assesses the implications of this new environment for the structure of regulation. The fourth section addresses the international dimension. The final section provides a summary and conclusion. The paper is based on a presentation made at the World Bank Conference, El Salvador, June 1998.

Some 40 years have now passed since the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) began seriously to attack the problem of insider trading in its seminal Cady, Roberts decision. Since then, a complex pattern of regulation has evolved, largely through a common law process of judicial interpretation of the open‐ended anti‐fraud provision of the federal securities laws, Rule 10b‐5. While many interpretative questions still remain open, US law in this area broadly prohibits trading based on material non‐public information when:

This article gives an in‐depth examination of the Securities and Exchange Commission's new Regulation S‐P. This rule implements the privacy requirements of last year's financial modernization legislation, better known as the Gramm‐Leach‐Bliley Financial Services Modernization Act. That legislation contains a Title designed to protect the financial privacy of consumers. Regulation S‐P is the SEC's Implementation of that provision. The authors walk the reader through this regulation and its application in some detail. You cannot practice in this industry without a familiarity of Regulation S‐P. This article will take you very far along that path.

The literature on the growth and regulations pertaining to private security has been largely confined to western countries, with very little published on other jurisdictions including South Korea. The purpose of this paper is to provide a general account of the development of the South Korean industry and an assessment of regulation, covering the period from 1950 to the present day, and to explore areas of possible improvement in regulation.

A research synthesis method was utilised to identify and integrate qualitative materials on turning points and regulatory changes, with the addition of a gap analysis based on established concepts of best practice in industry regulation.

The security industry in South Korea has grown exponentially, worth over $2.7 billion per annum. Notwithstanding this, regulation evolved through piecemeal rather than comprehensive changes. The problem is similar to those found in many other countries. However, in South Korea, over-reliance on market mechanisms of regulation, combined with the government’s lukewarm stance on stimulating the non-public security sector, means that there are inadequate guarantees of baseline competence and integrity.

The study demonstrates the need for governments to be more proactive and consultative in regulating the burgeoning security industry, and move away from ad hoc responses to industry problems. Regulation should be comprehensive in covering all relevant operational aspects of security work that are reflective of a growth profile. Regulatory agencies should actively explore training programmes linked to career path development and professionalisation. Execution of regulatory enforcement should be independent from political or third-party influence. Regulators should be innovative in applying and evaluating research-based regulatory strategies.

The study provides a comprehensive overview of the South Korean security industry and regulatory issues, adding to a more international understanding of regulatory challenges in security.

The paper seeks to address the problems facing securities regulators arising from the internationalisation of markets by considering the efficacy of three means of effecting international uniformity or harmonisation of the substantive rules of law for securities and their enforcement. These are multilateral arrangements, bilateral arrangements and mutual recognition and harmonisation of securities laws. In doing so, the paper examines a number of current arrangements for international cooperation on securities regulation and enforcement, in particular Australia's use of MOUs and its adaptation of the Corporations Law.

The purpose of this summary is to provide excerpts of selected Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) Regulatory Notices and Disciplinary Actions issued in April, May, and June 2010.

The paper provides excerpts from FINRA Regulatory Notice 10‐18, Master Accounts and Sub‐Accounts; 10‐22, Regulation D Offerings; 10‐23, Trade Reporting and Compliance Engine (TRACE); 10‐24, Trade Reporting; 10‐27, Customer Complaint Reporting; and 10‐30, Trading‐Pause Pilot Program; provides summaries of selected disciplinary actions.

(10‐18) If a firm has notice that the sub‐accounts of a master account have different beneficial ownership (but does not know the identities of the beneficial owners) or the firm is privy to facts and/or circumstances that would reasonably raise the issue as to whether the sub‐accounts, in fact, may have separate beneficial owners, then the firm must inquire further and satisfy itself as to the beneficial ownership of each such sub‐account. (10‐22) A broker‐dealer has a duty – enforceable under federal securities laws and FINRA rules – to conduct a reasonable investigation of securities that it recommends, including those sold in a Regulation D offering. (10‐23) On February 22, 2010, the SEC approved the second major proposed expansion of TRACE to include Asset‐backed Securities as TRACE‐Eligible Securities, to require the reporting of Asset‐backed Securities transactions and to establish reporting fees. (10‐27) Starting on July 1, 2010, the beginning of the third calendar quarter, firms must use revised and new product codes to report statistical information regarding written customer complaints relating to annuities and life settlement products. (10‐30) On June 10, 2010, FINRA began a pilot program in which it will halt trading otherwise than on an exchange with respect to securities included in the S&P 500® Index where the primary listing market has issued a trading pause due to extraordinary market volatility. Selected disciplinary actions: FINRA announced that it has settled charges with two additional firms relating to the sale of auction rate securities (ARS) that became illiquid when auctions froze in February 2008. FINRA announced that it has fined five broker‐dealers a total of $385,000 for the illegal sale of more than 8 billion shares of penny stock on behalf of their customers.

These are direct excerpts designed to provide a useful digest for the reader and an indication of regulatory trends. The FINRA staff is aware of this summary but has neither reviewed nor edited it. For further detail as well as other useful information, the reader should visit www.finra.org.

The purpose of the paper is to summarize and discuss selected investor‐protection and other related enhancements to federal securities regulation contained in the Dodd‐Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.

The paper discusses the following investor protections and related enhancements: enhanced whistleblower incentives and protections; expanded SEC investor‐protection administrative functions including the establishment of an Office of the Investor Advocate, the appointment of an Ombudsman, and the establishment on a permanent basis of an Investor Advisory Committee; expanded enforcement authority against aiders and abettors of securities violations; evaluation of the existing standards of care employed by broker‐dealers and investment advisers; a narrowing of exemptions from registration under the Securities Act, including by directing the SEC to enact rules to disqualify “bad actors” from relying on Rule 506 of Regulation D and adjusting the definition of “accredited investor” for purposes of the SEC's rules under the Securities Act; an exemption for certain small companies from the auditor attestation requirements of Sarbanes‐Oxley; provisions to increase the oversight and accountability of credit rating agencies; and steps to bolster the regulatory oversight of the municipal securities market, including by creating a new class of regulated intermediaries – “municipal advisors”

The Dodd‐Frank Act leaves many critical issues to be fleshed out through further SEC rulemaking and in the implementation phase, including: procedures regarding whistleblower information submitted to the SEC; the actual role of the Office of the Investor Advocate; whether the SEC will adopt a broker‐dealer fiduciary‐duty standard of care; additional texture on rules disqualifying bad actors from relying on Rule 506 of Regulation D; adjustments to net worth requirements related to accredited investor status; rules on disclosure of credit ratings in registration statements; and qualification standards for municipal advisors.

Public companies and other persons affected by the Dodd‐Frank Act should: keep abreast of key developments in the rulemaking phase; possibly participate in the rulemaking process: develop realistic strategies to respond to the proposed rules; develop compliance action plans; and review whistleblower‐related compliance policies and procedures.

The paper provides expert guidance from experienced securities and financial services lawyers.

Modernized information systems (IS) have brought enterprises not only enormous benefits, but also linked information threats. Most enterprises solve their IS security‐related problems using technical means alone, and focus on technical rather than managerial controls, which may imply potential crises. This study examines whether the security preparation of firms matches the severity of IS threats they perceive in developing countries, especially in issues concerning “people” and “administration”. Additionally, this study discusses appropriate threat mitigation strategies for the four sectors as well.

Using an empirical study, this study explores the past and current concerns of IS threats of firms in different industries, and the countermeasures prepared by them to protect themselves from such threats. The empirical data was provided by 109 Taiwanese enterprises from four sectors.

The analytical results revealed the differences in both the IS threats concerned and the security scopes prepared among the four sectors. Moreover, the preparation scopes were not commensurate with the perceived severity of threats. All four industries rated the network as posing the strongest threat, following regulation and personnel issues, while among the countermeasures in use, these three issues have larger application deficiencies.

This study concludes that the firms do not well prepare themselves against IS threats entailed to non‐technical administration issues and discusses appropriate threat mitigation strategies for the four sectors. Specifically, firms should be aware of IS threats to their business and prepare suitable security protections.

Most governments would profess either to having a model regulatory system for their markets or at least to having a proposal for a model regulatory system. The leading international grouping of securities market regulators, the International Organisation of Securities Commissions (IOSCO), which comprises the regulatory bodies of almost 100 countries with day‐to‐day responsibility for securities regulation and the administration of securities laws, has devised a benchmark standard of regulatory best practice against which regulators around the world can reliably measure their operations' effectiveness.

Information intensive industries such as financial services are being transformed by the Internet. Specifically, it is the interactive, multimedia side of the Internet, known as the World Wide Web (Web) which is driving this transformation. Without the intense graphics, sound bites and other capabilities provided by the Web, the Internet would be a pretty dull place to visit.