Search results

The purpose of this paper is to explain rule changes proposed by the Securities and Exchange Commission designed to address regulatory concerns related to “dark pools” of liquidity.

The paper explains the background and policy issues related to dark pools, discusses the SEC's amended definition of “bid” or “offer” under Regulation NMS to include “actionable indications of interest” (“actionable IOIs”), outlines a proposed reduction of the average daily trading volume threshold that triggers a public display of ATS orders from 5 percent to 0.25 percent, discusses a proposal to require an alternative trading system (“ATS”) to disclose its identity in real time on its reports of executed trades, and explains proposed size‐discovery exclusions to the changes detailed above.

The paper finds that the proposed rules represent the Commission's attempts to improve the NMS without inhibiting the use or continued technological development of trading strategies that are consistent with NMS goals.

The paper provides a clear explanation of complex market mechanisms and proposed rules by experienced financial institution and securities lawyers.

The question has been recently raised as to how far the operation of the Sale of Food and Drugs Acts of 1875, 1879, and 1899, and the Margarine Act, 1887, is affected by the Act 29 Charles II., cap. 7, “for the better observation of the Lord's Day, commonly called Sunday.” At first sight it would seem a palpable absurdity to suppose that a man could escape the penalties of one offence because he has committed another breach of the law at the same time, and in this respect law and common‐sense are, broadly speaking, in agreement; yet there are one or two cases in which at least some show of argument can be brought forward in favour of the opposite contention.

Significant new resources have been made available to help users find their way around the 10 000 connected networks on the Internet.

Debate is growing around the expansion of risk-based regulation. The regulation scholarship provides evidence of regulatory failure of the risk-based approach in different domains, including financial regulation. Therefore, this paper aims to provide cautionary evidence about the risk of regulatory failure of risk-based strategy in the financial regulation while using enterprise risk management (ERM) as a meta-regulatory toolkit.

Based on interview data gathered from 30 risk managers of banks and five regulatory personnel, combined with secondary data, this study mainly explores the challenges for meaningful use of ERM based self-regulation in regulated banks. The evidence helps to assess the risk of regulatory failure of the risk-based regulation while using ERM.

The evidence reflects that regulated banks face diverse challenges arising from both peripheral and internal environments that limit the true internalization of ERM-based self-regulation. Despite this, the regulator uses this self-regulation as a meta-regulatory toolkit under the risk-based regulation to achieve the regulatory aims. However, the lack of true internalization of ERM based self-regulation is likely to raise the risk of regulatory failure of risk-based regulation to achieve the regulatory goals. Risk-based regulation is an evolving strategy in the regulatory regime. Therefore, care should be taken while using ERM as a regulatory toolkit before relying on it substantially.

The paper provides empirical insights about the challenges for effective use of ERM as a meta regulatory toolkit that might be useful practically both to the regulators and regulated firms.