Financial Regulations Post Brexit

Now it is official. The UK has given up the idea of passport for the financial industry in favour of “regulatory flexibility”.  The Chequers Statement says that a deal should “provide regulatory flexibility where it matters most for the UK’s services-based economy, and where the potential trading opportunities outside of the EU are the largest, recognising that the UK and the EU will not have current levels of access to each other’s markets – with 3 arrangements on financial services that preserve the mutual benefits of integrated markets and protect financial stability, noting that these could not replicate the EU’s passporting regimes”

The three arrangements are so called “equivalence” arrangements. But the devil is in the detail. Major banks, who see an easy access to the EU market as indispensable, ask for such a close compliance with the EU rules that the EU accept the banks as “European”. Hedge funds and private banks, on the other hand, want to hold Governor Carney’s feet to the fire on his promise that they could count on light touch regulation and more bonuses in case of a Brexit. They have after all financed the Leave campaign partly based on that promise.

Can both expectations be met? How will different options affect the British economy and financial stability? And how will different options affect resolution and taxpayers?

These are questions for a public half-day seminar organised by the Centre for Philosophy in Natural and Social Science (CNPSS) in cooperation with LSE’s Financial Markets Group (FMG).

Further information, including a full programme, is available on the conference web page.