Search results (624 cards)

Advanced search

On 9 June, the SEC made an announcement on its website.

• The Regulator itself issued the amount of the award to a whistleblower for having providing it with information. Why is that? One would usually take a lower profile when awarding this much money ($17m) to an informer… Conversely, the Regulator immediately and publicly announced it in a press release, which pretty looked like a tender offer for further denunciations. It even included a link for everyone to access the whistleblower program—which is easily funded, since the awards are charged on the fines imposed on the convicted operators thanks to the information given.

• The reason for this is that information from whistleblowers is not merely indicative, nor a second-best option; it is central to Regulation, since it leads the Regulator to get information people within the system (i.e., insiders) deliberately chooses to ‘blow’ (in fact, not only do informers blow the whistle—they often immediately provide the Regulator with substantial information).

• The press release includes justifications for the Regulator’s behaviour, as the SEC openly considers that rewarding whistleblowers is the most efficient way for the Regulator to open or to resolve investigations. The Director of the SEC’s Division of Enforcement stated indeed that “company insiders are uniquely positioned to protect investors and blow the whistle on a company’s wrongdoing by providing key information to the SEC so we can investigate the full extent of the violations”.

• This highlights the ambivalence of insiders. Accordingly, they need to be ‘inside’ the system to be ‘knowledgeable’ and, consequently, obtain privileged information. On the one hand, should they use this information for themselves, then they would face prosecution for market abuse; on the other hand, however, if they use it to stir up the Regulator and shift its attention towards the whistle they’re blowing, then they may earn just as much money, if not more, than if they had behaved in a way that would have led them to prison.

The stage is thus set for the "business of virtue" to thrive.

Passenger transport markets in Europe have been, and continue to be, liberalised across jurisdictions and sectors.

Since July 2015, passenger coach operators in France have been allowed to operate without regulation on longer routes (over 100km). For shorter routes, ARAFER, the French regulator for rail and roads, will test whether the coach service is likely to threaten the viability of the public rail service offered by SNCF on the same route. What changes could this reform bring, and how might the economic test be applied?

ENGLISH

It is believed that the lexical distinction between two words necessarily involves the allusion to two different things. In this view, economic regulation differs from financial regulation. Based on what financial regulation is, which is not reduced to an addition of rules and regulations but is a set of mechanisms, institutions, decisions, principles and rules revolving around risk, competition law could be used as a means for financial regulation, although it is usually solely applied to ordinary markets of goods and services. But a new ambiguity has surfaced between financial regulation and economic regulation. Therefore, a wall between economic regulation and financial regulation cannot be built on the single difference between the “economic sector” such as the market of goods and services, and the “financial sector”.  A more sophisticated partition could take into account the notion of « individual risk ».

GERMAN


Der Unterschied zwischen wirtschaftliche und finanzielle Regulierung.

Normalerweise weist ein lexikalischer Unterschied zwischen zwei Wörter darauf hin, dass man von zwei verschiedene Sachen spricht. Also sind die wirtschaftliche und die finanzielle Regulierung unterschiedlich. Die finanzielle Regulierung ist nicht eine ledigliche Addition von Gesetzen und Anordnungen, sondern eine Zusammenstellung von Mechanismen, Institutionen, Entscheidungen, Prinzipien und regeln, die sich mit dem Thema Risiko beschäftigen. Anhand dieser Tatsache könnte das Wettbewerbsrecht, das normalerweise erst für gewöhnlichen Waren- und Dienstleistungenmärkte gebraucht ist, auch im finanziellen Bereich Anwendung finden. Jetzt aber hat sich eine neue Zweideutigkeit zwischen wirtschaftlicher und finanzieller Regulierung entwickelt. Infolgedessen kann eine Begrenzung zwischen beide Regulierungen nicht nur aufgrund den Unterschied zwischen dem wirtschaftlichen  (wie z.B. der Güter- und Dienstleistungensmarkt) und dem finanziellen Sektor. Eine anspruchsvollere Unterscheidung könnte den Begriff "individuellen Risiko" integrieren.

SPANISH

La distinción entre la Regulación económica y la Regulación financiera.

Se cree que la distinción léxica entre dos palabras necesariamente involucra la alusión a dos cosas. Teniendo esto en cuenta, la regulación económica difiere de la regulación financiera. Basándonos en lo que es la regulación financiera, lo cual no se reduce a una simple adición de reglas y regulaciones pero por lo contrario está compuesta por una serie de mecanismos, instituciones, decisiones, principios y reglas que dependen del riesgo, se podría decir que la ley de la competencia puede ser utilizado para la regulación financiera, aunque normalmente solo se aplica a mercados ordinario de bienes y servicios. Pero una nueva ambigüedad se ha dado entre la regulación financiera y la regulación económica. Por lo tanto, es imposible construir una pared entre la regulación económica y la regulación financiera basado simplemente en la diferencia entre el ‘sector financiero’ como lo es el mercado de bienes y servicios y el sector financiero. Una partición más sofisticada podría tomar en cuenta la noción del “riesgo individual.”

Other translations (to come)

Main information

PeruRail, the operator of Peru’s famous railway line, providing service between Cuzco and Machu Picchu, was sanctioned USD$800,000 on May 10, 2010 by the {‘Instituto Nacional de Defensa de la Competencia y de la Protección de la Propiedad Intelectual’} (INDECOPI- Peru’s national institute for the defense of competition and protection of intellectual property) for having restricted competitors’ market entry. An appeal is underway.

Main information

The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit strikes down a decision that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the American telecommunications regulation agency, had taken against an Internet service provider, on the grounds that the FCC is incompetent to impose the theory of network neutrality on Internet service providers.