Tackling cross‐border market abuse
| Published date | 01 January 2006 |
| Date | 01 January 2006 |
| Pages | 29-36 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/13581980610644734 |
| Author | Carlos Conceicao |
| Subject Matter | Accounting & finance |
Tackling cross-border market
abuse
Carlos Conceicao
The Financial Services Authority, London, UK
Abstract
Purpose – This paper aims to explore the key challenges faced by regulators following the
implementation of the market abuse directive (MAD) in developing a consistent approach to tackling
market abuse. The paper seeks to argue that how regulators respond to these challenges will have a
significant impact on the success of the key objectives of MAD, which is to foster a cross-border
regime with common standards of market conduct.
Design/methodology/approach – An observation by the author which looks at the areas in which
regulators need to develop greater cross-border co-operation.
Findings – Suggests that, notwithstanding the introduction of MAD, there are substantial
differences in the way European regulators tackle market abuse.
Originality/value – A useful summary of the implications of MAD on European regulators and how
they might be addressed.
Keywords Financial control,Securities
Paper type Viewpoint
Introduction
The market abuse directive (MAD) was implemented in the UK with effect from 1
July 2005. In broad terms it seems unlikely that the nature, or indeed number of
market abuse cases taken by the Financial Services Authority’s (FSA’s)
Enforcement Division will change substantially following implementation of
MAD. Arguably of greater long-term significance to the work of the FSA, and other
European regulators, are the requirements pursuant to the directive to cooperate
with each other in the investigation of market abuse. The paper explores the key
challenges faced by regulators in this area and argues that how regulators respond
to these challenges will have a significant impact on the success of one of the key
objectives of MAD which is to foster a cross-border regime with common standards
of market conduct.
Market abuse in the UK post-MAD
In broad terms, the types of behaviour covered by the old market abuse regim e in
the UK and MAD are similar. Following implementation of MAD, the types of
behaviour which can amount to market abuse under Section 118 of the Financial
Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA) have increased from three to seven.
Moreover, whereas prior to implementation, the market abuse regime was confined
to UK prescribed markets, the new regime additionally applies to qualifying
investments trading (or for which a request for admission to trading has been
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1358-1988.htm
The opinions and views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views
of the FSA.
Tackling
cross-border
market abuse
29
Journal of Financial Regulation and
Compliance
Vol. 14 No. 1, 2006
pp. 29-36
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
1358-1988
DOI 10.1108/13581980610644734
To continue reading
Request your trial