Harvard ILJ Harvard ILJ Harvard International Law Journal
  • Subscribe to RSS
  • About
    • Masthead
    • Board of Advisors
    • Information For 1Ls
    • Contact
  • Print Edition
    • Print Archives
  • Features & Commentary
    • Op-Ed
    • Live Blog
    • Past Liveblogs
      • 2012 ILJ Symposium
    • Article Series
    • Print Responses
    • Profiles
    • Student Commentaries
    • Symposium Forum
    • Online Archives
  • Symposium
    • Symposium Archives
  • Submissions
    • Print Submissions
    • Online Submissions
    • Student Submissions
  • Subscriptions
    • Print Edition
    • Newsletter
    • RSS Feeds
Posted on 9:04 am | Posted in Print Articles

A Blueprint for Cross-Border Access to U.S. Investors:

A New International Framework
By Ethiopis Tafara & Robert J. Peterson
Suggested Bluebook citation: Ethiopis Tafara & Robert J. Peterson, A Blueprint for Cross-Border Access to U.S. Investors: A New International Framework, 48 Harv. Int'l L.J. 31 (2007).
Ethiopis Tafara is the Director of the Office of International Affairs, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

Robert J. Peterson is Senior Counsel for the Office of International Affairs, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

The Securities and Exchange Commission, as a matter of policy, disclaims responsibility for any private publication or statement by any SEC employee or Commissioner. This Article expresses the authors’ views and does not necessarily reflect those of the Commission, the Commissioners, or other members of the staff.
Download Article
Share Article:
Share 'A Blueprint for Cross-Border Access to U.S. Investors' on Delicious Share 'A Blueprint for Cross-Border Access to U.S. Investors' on Digg Share 'A Blueprint for Cross-Border Access to U.S. Investors' on Facebook Share 'A Blueprint for Cross-Border Access to U.S. Investors' on Google Buzz Share 'A Blueprint for Cross-Border Access to U.S. Investors' on MySpace Share 'A Blueprint for Cross-Border Access to U.S. Investors' on reddit Share 'A Blueprint for Cross-Border Access to U.S. Investors' on StumbleUpon Share 'A Blueprint for Cross-Border Access to U.S. Investors' on Technorati Share 'A Blueprint for Cross-Border Access to U.S. Investors' on Tumblr Share 'A Blueprint for Cross-Border Access to U.S. Investors' on Twitter Share 'A Blueprint for Cross-Border Access to U.S. Investors' on Yahoo! Buzz Share 'A Blueprint for Cross-Border Access to U.S. Investors' on Email

Introduction*

Today, mergers and talks of mergers among the world’s stock exchanges make obvious what many finance professionals have long known: capital markets are global. Greater investor wealth and education have created the demand for such markets, and technology, in particular, has made globalized markets feasible. Investors now search beyond their own borders for investment opportunities and, unlike the past, many of these investors are not large companies, financial firms, or extremely wealthy individuals. A good number are “typical” retail investors—individuals with normal jobs and average incomes—who save for retirement and their children’s education, and who may be well-educated, but nonetheless are not “sophisticated investors” in the legal sense. Investors (whether retail or professional) and large firms pursue international opportunities for the same reasons: higher investment returns and the reduction in risk offered by portfolio diversification.

It is this seamless capital market, made possible by technology, that now, more than anything, presses on financial regulators around the world. The fundamental mandate of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) remains the same—protecting investors, ensuring the efficiency and transparency of U.S. markets, and facilitating capital formation in the United States. However, the manner in which the SEC can best achieve this mandate in the face of this new investor demand is changing. Borders that have blurred for most market participants are proving as sharp as ever where market regulation is concerned. Also, the technology that has proven so beneficial for investors and issuers poses a serious threat to the integrity of markets. As a consequence, the traditional methods that the SEC and its foreign counterparts use to oversee cross-border market activity have lost some of their historical efficacy. Our markets are now interconnected and viewing them in isolation—as we have for so long—is no longer the best approach to protecting our investors, promoting an efficient and transparent U.S. market, or facilitating capital formation for U.S. issuers.

This Article proposes a new framework to apply to foreign financial service providers accessing the U.S. capital market, by providing investment services and products not otherwise available on the U.S. market. Rather than requiring such foreign stock exchanges and foreign broker-dealers to register with the SEC, as is currently the case, the proposed framework relies on a system of substituted compliance with SEC regulations. Instead of being subject to direct SEC supervision and U.S. federal securities regulations and rules, foreign stock exchanges and broker-dealers would apply for an exemption from SEC registration based on their compliance with substantively comparable foreign securities regulations and laws and supervision by a foreign securities regulator with oversight powers and a regulatory and enforcement philosophy substantively similar to the SEC’s. The SEC would still retain jurisdiction to pursue violations of the anti-fraud provisions of the U.S. federal securities laws. The comparability finding would need to be complemented by an unambiguous arrangement between the SEC and its foreign counterpart to share extensive enforcement- and supervisory-related information. This should greatly reduce the transaction costs investors currently pay when investing overseas, and allow the current situation of overlapping and duplicative registration and oversight requirements for certain stock exchanges and broker-dealers to end.

The overarching objective of the framework is, first and foremost, to further the SEC’s mandate of investor protection. As foreign markets develop and adopt higher regulatory standards, U.S. investors predictably are looking at them as potential investment opportunities. However, the current international environment has enforcement and oversight gaps that present risks that do not exist in a domestic context. U.S. investors also face high transaction costs when investing overseas—transaction costs that provide investors with no real benefit. By constructing a new model for international cooperation between the SEC and certain like-minded foreign securities regulators, the framework will facilitate the SEC’s ability to protect U.S. investors and lead to a collaborative effort in promoting high-quality regulatory standards in a globalized market. It will also increase competition in financial services—both here and abroad—and lower cross-border transaction costs, to the benefit of investors around the world.

In laying out this framework, we first discuss how technology and globalization are changing the shape of modern capital markets and how they are regulated. We also explore how recent financial scandals, both in the United States and abroad, have changed the shape of securities regulation and created new mandates, burdens, and demands for regulators that, if not implemented carefully and in a coordinated fashion, threaten to harm investors and issuers with unnecessary regulatory transaction costs. Second, we lay out the critical elements of U.S. securities regulation and the legislative “first principles” that constrain what the SEC can do, and the manner in which these first principles have led to the SEC’s historic approach to regulating cross-border securities activities. We then discuss how these first principles necessarily shape any SEC response to this new global capital market. Third, and finally, we detail a framework, based on these first principles, that would increase U.S. investor access to foreign investment opportunities and lower investor transaction costs while bolstering the integrity of the U.S. capital market and discouraging the type of “regulatory arbitrage” that can undermine investor confidence in markets everywhere….

* This excerpt does not include citations. To read the entire article, including supporting notes, please download the PDF.

Read Article (PDF Format) --- [Get Adobe Reader]
Article also available at (subscription required): HeinOnline | LexisNexis | Westlaw
Other articles in Issue 48(1):
  • Daniel Barstow Magraw: Louis B. Sohn: Architect of the Modern International Legal System
  • Detlev F. Vagts: Louis B. Sohn
  • Thomas M. Franck: Tribute to Professor Louis B. Sohn
  • Harold Hongju Koh: Louis B. Sohn: Present at the Creation
  • David Kennedy: Louis B. Sohn: Recollections of a Co-conspirator
  • Howell E. Jackson: A System of Selective Substitute Compliance
  • Anthony J. Colangelo: Constitutional Limits on Extraterritorial Jurisdiction: Terrorism and the Intersection of National and International Law
  • Susan Wolburgh Jenah: Commentary on “A Blueprint for Cross-Border Access to U.S. Investors: A New International Framework”
  • Edward F. Greene: Beyond Borders: Time To Tear Down the Barriers to Global Investing
  • George W. Madison & Stewart P. Greene: TIAA-CREF Response to “A Blueprint for Cross-Border Access to U.S. Investors: A New International Framework”
  • Kevin Kolben: Integrative Linkage: Combining Public and Private Regulatory Approaches in the Design of Trade and Labor Regimes
  • Jeremy Peterson: Unpacking Show Trials: Situating the Trial of Saddam Hussein

Ethiopis Tafara & Robert J. Peterson, A Blueprint for Cross-Border Access to U.S. Investors: A New International Framework, 48 Harv. Int'l L.J. 31 (2007).

The Journal:

The Harvard International Law Journal is the oldest and most-cited student-edited journal of international and comparative law.
 
DOWN
  • Latest in Print
  • Latest Online
  • The Failed Promise of Language Rights: A Critique of the International Language Rights Regime The Failed Promise of Language Rights: A Critique of the International Language Rights Regime Moria Paz, Volume 54(1)
  • Consent to the Use of Force and International Law Supremacy Consent to the Use of Force and International Law Supremacy Ashley S. Deeks, Volume 54(1)
  • Getting to Rights: Treaty Ratification, Constitutional Convergence, and Human Rights Practice Getting to Rights: Treaty Ratification, Constitutional Convergence, and Human Rights Practice Zachary Elkins, Tom Ginsburg and Beth Simmons, Volume 54(1)
  • International Vote Buying International Vote Buying Natalie J. Lockwood, Volume 54(1)
  • Conceptualizing China Within the Kantian Peace Conceptualizing China Within the Kantian Peace Manik V. Suri, Volume 54(2)
  • The Success of, and Response to, India’s Law against Patent Layering Commentary ~ The Success of, and Response to, India’s Law against Patent Layering Rajarshi Banerjee
  • Constitutional Convergence and Customary International Law Response ~ Constitutional Convergence and Customary International Law Rebecca Crootof
  • The Enforcement of Foreign Copyright Judgments in U.S. Courts and the First Amendment Commentary ~ The Enforcement of Foreign Copyright Judgments in U.S. Courts and the First Amendment Claire Guehenno
  • International Law as American History Commentary ~ International Law as American History Marco Basile
  • Reciprocity and the Regulatory Function of International Investment Law Response ~ Reciprocity and the Regulatory Function of International Investment Law Julian Davis Mortenson

Further Information

Read responses to this article:
Howell Jackson
Susan Jenah
Edward Greene
George Madison & Edward Greene

Newsletter

Sign up for the Harvard ILJ Newsletter and never miss an article!

 
DOWN
  • Home
  • Contact
  • Archive
  • RSS Feeds
  • Members

A Student-Run Publication At Harvard Law School - The Harvard Law School’s name and/or shield are trademarks of the President and Fellows of Harvard College and are used by permission of Harvard University