The EU and US response to the financial crisis have common objectives and are largely based on the same standards and principles. But details in the legislations and, in particular, those set out in the implementing measures run the risk of causing legal uncertainty, duplicative regulatory costs and compliance complexity. How can we turn the tide? How can the EU-US dialogue be revived?
- How can we reduce legal risk, compliance complexity and regulatory uncertainty due to differences in the EU and the US regimes?
- Is mutual regulatory recognition a plausible way forward?
- Should recognition be conditional on reciprocal market access?
- Does mutual recognition require identical legal texts or should the objective and the outcome of the regulation be decisive?
- How can we facilitate the comprehensive and timely pooling of information?
- How can we prevent the on-going regulatory reform on both sides of the Atlantic from causing the two regimes to drift even further apart?
- How can we achieve regulatory coherence in specific pieces of legislation and proposals such as Dodd-Frank vs EMIR and Volcker vs Liikanen?
- Which role can international bodies such as G20, the Financial Stability Board and IOSCO play?
- How can we revitalize the EU-US dialogue?
Moderator: David Wright Secretary-General, IOSCO – International Organization of Securities Commissions
Sharon Bowles MEP, Chair ECON Committee, European Parliament
Martin Merlin Head of Unit 02 – Financial Services Policy, Relations with the Council, DG MARKT, European Commission
Anthony Belchambers Chief Executive, FOA – Futures and Options Association Representative from US Securities and Exchange Commission
Andrew Douglas Head of European Government Relations, DTCC
Dr Robert Fisher Acting Director, Office of International Affairs, SEC – US Securities and Exchange Commission
William Knottenbelt Managing Director, Europe, Middle East and Africa (EMEA), CME Group
Paul Swann President and Managing Director, ICE Clear Europe