NeoXam’s Post

Efforts to bring the KRX system into operation and expectations for market upgrade target by 2025 Sharing about the goal of upgrading the emerging market at the Stock Market Forum with the theme: “Building Foundations – Accumulating – Accelerating” organized by Báo Đầu tư on the morning of March 5, Ms. Pham Thi Thuy Linh, Deputy Head of the Market Development Department, State Securities Commission, expects to achieve the goal of upgrading the market by 2025. Vietnam’s criteria currently meet 7 out of 9 criteria, and there are 2 criteria that need to be improved: pre-trading foreign investor deposit and foreign investor ownership ratio. For the deposit requirement, the Securities Commission has discussed with international rating agencies to find solutions. At the same time, the Ministry of Finance proposes to amend and supplement some documents, no longer requiring a 100% deposit in foreign currency for foreign investors, ensuring foreign operations and payment activities. Ms. Pham Thi Thuy Linh, Deputy Head of the Market Development Department, State Securities Commission. “The implementation work has high support from market members. We expect to achieve the goal of upgrading the market by 2025. The current progress sets the target for the year 2025, and this issue depends a lot on the rating assessment period and the customer experience. We hope securities companies will promote communication to investors when they have a good experience.” Regarding foreign ownership ratio, the Securities Commission, together with the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Planning and Investment, reviews the industry and publishes transparent information in English for investors to easily grasp the ownership ratio of enterprises. The Ministry of Planning and Investment is recommended to coordinate with other ministries and sectors to review industries and may open up to foreign investors in non-essential industries. In addition, the State Securities Commission will report to the Ministry of Finance on amending regulations on English information disclosure applied to public companies and listed companies of a large scale. It is expected to apply to English information disclosure for regular information disclosure and listed organizations of a large scale from January 1, 2025, for abnormal information from January 1, 2026, and apply to all public companies in information disclosure activities from January 1, 2028. “The implementation work has high support from market members. We expect to achieve the goal of upgrading the market by 2025. The current progress sets the target for the year 2025, and this issue depends a lot on the rating assessment period and the customer experience. We hope securities companies will promote communication to investors when they have a good experience,” said Ms. Linh. Regarding the KRX system, according to a representative of the Securities Commission, for the current information disclosure system being deployed, secu...

There has been recently a renewed interest in the "capital markets union" concept. This concept has been used as an umbrella for most regulatory initiatives taken by the Commission since 2015. It should come as no surprise, then, that this renewed interest leads to revisiting topics that already have been abundantly discussed by EU lawmakers in the recent past. This is not to say that the basic intuition -namely, that european capital markets remain too small and fragmented- is wrong. Regulation is surely not the single answer but we should do all we can to make progress. I believe, in particular, that the effect of the continued fragmentation of supervision should not be underestimated. Not only does that create unnecessary cost and impediments to the emergence of paneuropean players and infrastructures, that is also the main source of the low quality of the european rulebook. Indeed every piece of european regulation is negociated with a view to prevent any loophole from being used with a competitive purpose by other member states or NCAs. If we fail to ensure that these paneuropean players are supervised at EU level, we will need to take the slower, more painful route of building a common supervisory culture. ESMA should then prioritise not so much the topics that are most relevant from a risk perspective than the ones that leave most room for divergence in supervisory practices. In addition, lawmakers should make sure that host NCAs have the relevant power to adress supervisory weak spots in the retail space and that we have some regulatory flexibility eg through the issuance of "no action letters" by ESMA.

A glimmer of light on measuring the performance of regulators? Government response to proposals in House of Lords Industry and Regulators Committee report ‘Who Watches the Watchdogs’? https://lnkd.in/eJc77Djh Para 64. says: 'To deliver the best outcomes for consumers, businesses, and the environment, it is also essential that regulators operate to clear and consistent duties and objectives. Multiple respondents raised concerns in their responses to the Smarter Regulation and the Regulatory Landscape Call for Evidence that consumer interests were not sufficiently considered in the duties and objectives of regulators, or that they were often de-prioritised where conflicts occur. The government will develop a framework to allow for the consistent evaluation of regulator statutory duties across all regulators, where specific evidence of problems has been identified. These reviews where applied would be undertaken by sponsoring departments but in close collaboration with the Smarter Regulation Directorate in the Department for Business and Trade and, as applicable, ensuring join-up with the Public Bodies Team. As part of the monitoring and evaluation process, consideration will be given to whether consumer groups are sufficiently represented in a regulator’s decision making.' None of this will happen unless civil society and consumer groups make sure it does. We also need to ensure the appropriate performance metrics are used - see previous post.

Measuring the performance of regulators/ innovation, growth and competitiveness It's usually policy wonks like me who tend to care about issues like this. But, this stuff really matters. https://lnkd.in/ebZC2D9d Government has recently given key sectoral regulators a growth and competitiveness objective - to support growth, competitiveness, and innovation in the sectors they regulate and in the economy generally. Industry lobbyists have created a false narrative that regulation is a 'burden', or 'barrier' that stifles innovation and competition. Worryingly Government buys in to this false narrative. Government is also requiring regulators to produce specific operational metrics on their performance in supporting the industries they regulate. Regulators will have to produce data on numbers of firms authorised/ licensed, numbers of applications received/ removed, 'burdens' removed, what proportion of interventions support growth, and performance in attracting overseas business. Financial Inclusion Centre and others have raised serious concerns that this new competitiveness and growth agenda could compromise strategic and operational independence of the regulators and compromise the ability of the regulators to deliver on their critical statutory objectives such as protecting consumers and making markets work for society. We argued in our submission to House of Lords Industry and Regulators Committee Inquiry on regulatory accountability that regulators 'should be judged on how well they make the industries they regulate serve the interests of the real economy, environment and society, not on how well they serve the interests of regulated industries'. https://lnkd.in/e9WYbjxG Of course, regulators should be transparent on operational efficiency. But, the problem is that it is actually very hard to tell whether or not regulators are doing a good job in protecting consumers or making markets work. We particularly care about the performance of financial markets and financial regulators. Civil society can infer that financial regulators are performing well by, for example, the absence of regular misselling scandals. There is some data on financial inclusion provided by the very helpful FCA Financial Lives Survey. However, there is a glaring lack of consistent, comprehensive performance metrics and data on how well financial markets are serving the needs of the real economy, environment, and society. And, this means, we are unable to judge how well the financial regulators are performing in making financial markets work. This is why The Financial Inclusion Centre is developing a new performance framework for the financial regulators. Watch this space. #financialregulation

Since the turn of the year, we've witnessed so many debates about how digital markets will be regulated. What will 2024 bring? Christon Shenolikar, senior associate in our Competition practice, shares some of his thoughts about the new #digital regulatory regime. Hear more from Christon and others in part 1 of our predictions series from the UK Competition, Regulation and Trade team here: https://lnkd.in/eRMHFept #digitallaw #2024predictions

2024 is shaping up to be a big year on a number of fronts from a competition law perspective - we’ve put together some predictions on what to expect, identifying key themes and trends for businesses. Stay tuned for Part 2 later this week!

The HSF Competition, Regulation and Trade team have just published Part 1 of our predictions for 2024 in the competition space, which includes a contribution from Stephen Wisking and I on the upcoming UK digital markets regime. You can also check out our predictions on consumer law enforcement (Natalia Rodriguez and Kristien Geeurickx) and consumer welfare / the cost of living (Susan Black and Samuel Tappenden). Thoughts welcome and feel free to let us know how we did next year! #competitionlaw #digitalmarkets #2024predictions #remindmeinoneyear

Members of our market-leading Competition, Regulation and Trade team have come together to predict what’s on the horizon in the competition space in the UK in 2024 – identifying the key themes and trends that businesses will need to navigate in the coming year. This is Part 1 of 2 in our predictions series – part 2 will follow later this week. #competitionlaw #crt #2024predictions

📽 In this new HDIW video Alice Guedel, Policy Officer at European Commission DG FISMA offers highlights on the #EUDigitalFinancePlatform recently launched by the European Commission. Designed as a collaborative space, this platform is a cornerstone for building relationships between #supervisors and #innovators within the #Fintech sector.   💡 Alice provides an in-depth look at the platform's numerous features, including a comprehensive mapping of fintech companies across the EU and the innovative cross-border testing feature, which allows for the experimentation of new products in diverse regulatory environments, fostering a harmonious #EU #financial #market.   A significant focus of this video is the recent establishment of the #DataHub. Now that the Data Hub is up and running, Fintechs can access supervisory data to test new applications and develop AI/ML models. The first synthetic datasets have just been published. You can access them here 👉 https://lnkd.in/dRC8fMvR This data-sharing initiative is essential for testing new products or applications and offers a fertile ground for training advanced #AI and #ML models. Alice explains in detail how this hub functions and its potential impact on the future of digital finance.   The Data Hub will be officially launched on 21 March 2024 by Commissioner McGuinness   📽 Watch here https://lnkd.in/dYTEg3eB 👉 Subscribe to our Youtube channel https://lnkd.in/dg5sWeAE   European Commission DG REFORM, Florence School of Banking & Finance, European Banking Authority (EBA), European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA), European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), European University Institute, Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies

#ICYMI — European Parliament's ECON Committee has finalised the Financial Data Access (#FiDA) proposal. According to this proposal, #CASPs and issuers of #ARTs are scoped in as obliged entities, and crypto-asset data is scoped in, too. This is what it means ↓ ▶ Crypto-related financial data, collected for assessing suitability, will in theory enable customised and data-driven financial services, aiding small entities and promoting competition. ▶ FiDA aims to introduce a new set of innovation-friendly rules, harmonising access to financial customer data at a Europe-wide level unless explicitly denied by the consumer. ▶ This framework should build consumer trust by handing over control of data usage, safeguarding against unauthorised transmissions and ensuring compensation in case of breaches. ▶ Exclusions include data relating to health cover, confidential business details, undisclosed know-how, and 'gatekeepers' like Amazon, Apple and Meta. ▶ The proposal discusses data access via high-quality technical interfaces. The European Banking Authority (EBA) is expected to establish a register for authorised financial information service providers. This isn’t the first time we set our eyes on FiDA 👀 as in our previous paper we argued that CASPs, ART issuers, and crypto-asset data should be left outside its scope → https://lnkd.in/dxB7UiMh Find more details on the Press Release: https://lnkd.in/dAJ7qatK #CryptoRegulation #EU