Remarks of Commissioner Barbara P. Holum
Before the
Sixth International Derivatives Conference in
London, England
Panel on
"International Cross Border Access:
Promises and Problems"
June 29, 1999
Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. I am pleased to be here today.
The views which I am expressing here today are my own and are not the
views of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (Commission).
The explosive growth of electronic markets is challenging regulators
everywhere to rethink how their system applies and how to address the
need for a regulatory "concept" or "model" that
preserves the objectives of regulation without unduly interfering with
progress and innovation. These trends raise complex and novel issues
that could profoundly affect the integrity and competitiveness of all
markets and firms engaged in providing services globally. We are
challenged to define new ways to reach what is increasingly an
international network of information and trading media.
There can be no doubt that the globalization of the financial
services industry will continue to expand in response to the dramatic
technological developments. This technology and information revolution
demands international cooperation. The Commission continues to pursue
regulatory cooperation and coordination with foreign regulators, often
in the form of Memoranda of Understanding or Information Sharing
Arrangements. As we search for some common approaches and answers to
the many questions created by the explosion of electronic commerce, I
am certain that we will be looking at other models developed to
address cross border regulatory responsibility.
As you may know, the Commission recently lifted its moratorium on
placement of foreign terminals in the U.S. and instructed Commission
staff to begin processing applications for no-action letters from
foreign exchanges. We simply could not continue to impede U.S. access
to the electronic global markets while attempting to define
appropriate rules. The difficulty in defining how best to structure
formal rules in this area is one reason that we have gone back to our
case-by-case approach for now. However, a case-by-case approach is
likely to become a less satisfactory approach as the electronic
markets become the rule and the markets addressed by rules to date
become the exception.
To discuss the many highly technical and complex competitive and
regulatory issues facing U.S. markets and firms doing business abroad,
the Commission established the Global Markets Advisory Committee
(GMAC) and appointed me as Chairman. The purpose of GMAC is to assist
the CFTC in designing its regulations and crafting its domestic and
international policies to keep pace with these global changes.
GMAC is divided into three working groups: Working Group I on
Electronic Terminals, Working Group II on Cross Border Business
Impediments and Working Group III on IOSCO issues.
The Electronic Terminals working group is comprised of representatives
of the U.S. exchanges and FCMs. It has focused on the regulatory
provisions for placement of foreign terminals in the U.S., the
correlation of those provisions with current U.S. regulations, and the
competitive implications for U.S. exchanges.
The subcommittee on cross border business impediments, comprised
primarily of FCMs, is focusing on the regulatory or operational
impediments in conducting global business such as differing and/or
duplicative regulatory frameworks, lack of transparency of rules and
regulations and barriers to market access. They are considering such
issues as cross-licensing, cross product netting, and choice of law
with a goal of reducing costly regulatory overload caused by
duplicative requirements.
The IOSCO working group provides an important conduit for information
between IOSCO and GMAC. An important goal toward a thriving global
marketplace is the harmonization of conduct of business rules.
IOSCO's efforts to design best practices and prudential standards
in a number of areas are critical to achieving the harmonization
needed by our firms to operate efficiently in the global market
arena.
A race to the regulatory bottom is not the approach that will secure
the growth and development of our markets. At the same time, it is
important to recognize the growth and sophistication of the markets
today and the technological advancements that have contributed to that
growth. Regulators should address common interests and rely on a
broadly defined code of conduct which mirrors the global marketplace
and which is grounded in principles of safety and soundness.
The U.S. futures regulatory structure, while sometimes viewed as heavy
handed, is admired and duplicated often by new markets around the
world. Certainly, the proliferation of new exchanges and the
interconnectedness of the world financial markets dictates that
minimum regulatory standards be established as a benchmark to guide
countries in developing regulatory schemes.
Important regulatory initiatives to facilitate the global market
expansion include:
In conclusion, how these issues will be resolved is now uncertain, but what is certain is that the open dialogue on solutions that is ongoing must continue. Meetings such as this one are important to that dialogue as regulators consider the best means to supervise their respective markets in evolving global market arena.