International Organization Of Securities Commissions Research Articles

The International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) and the New International Financial Architecture: What Role for IOSCO in the Development and Implementation of Cross-Border Regulation and Equivalence?

The International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) and the New International Financial Architecture: What Role for IOSCO in the Development and Implementation of Cross-Border Regulation and Equivalence?

Cross-border cooperation between securities regulators

The events of September 11, 2001, prompted sweeping cross-border coordination efforts for securities regulators around the globe. After 9/11, the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) forged a nonbinding arrangement—the Multilateral Memorandum of Understanding Concerning Consultation and Cooperation and the Exchange of Information (MMoU)—that standardized the protocol for information sharing among participating securities regulators. Because regulators from different countries entered the MMoU at different times, their enlistments created a set of staggered shocks. I use these shocks to show that the resulting cross-border cooperation (a) increases cross-border enforcement and (b) reduces the cost of liquidity provision in the capital markets of participating countries. These results support the conclusion that the MMoU helps fill gaps in cross-border regulation that historically exposed investors to information asymmetry, agency costs, and expropriation risks.

STAGES OF IMPLEMENTATION AND PROBLEMS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF INTERNATIONAL AUDITING STANDARDS IN UZBEKISTAN


 
 
 This article is devoted to the study of the problems of applying international audit standards in the Republic of Uzbekistan. The author identified the main problems of applying international audit standards in the practice of audit organizations of the Republic of Uzbekistan, which include: insufficient qualified personnel, high costs of training or staff development, a language barrier, the complete absence of special domestic computer programs, the complexity of the content and structure of international audit standards. Along with the programs, the author presents the advantages of applying international audit standards, which include: providing a unified approach to auditing at the international level; trust is established by investors, creditors and shareholders; comparability of audit results between companies and countries is provided, and the competitiveness of audit organizations of Uzbekistan in the international arena is guaranteed; providing support from international institutions: the World Bank, the World Federation of Exchanges, the International Organization of Securities Commissions, the Committee on Financial Stability, etc. Development prospects are also proposed through the creation of specialized centers whose main functions are: professional translation of International Auditing Standards, publication of a special literature, training and exchange of knowledge and experience.
 
 

ІНСТИТУЦІОНАЛЬНІ АСПЕКТИ РЕГУЛЮВАННЯ ІННОВАЦІЙНИХ ФІНАНСОВИХ ТЕХНОЛОГІЙ У КОНТЕКСТІ РОЗВИТКУ КРИПТОВАЛЮТ

ІНСТИТУЦІОНАЛЬНІ АСПЕКТИ РЕГУЛЮВАННЯ ІННОВАЦІЙНИХ ФІНАНСОВИХ ТЕХНОЛОГІЙ У КОНТЕКСТІ РОЗВИТКУ КРИПТОВАЛЮТ

Cross-Border Cooperation Between Securities Regulators

The events of September 11, 2001, prompted sweeping cross-border coordination efforts for securities regulators around the globe. After 9/11, the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) forged a nonbinding arrangement—the Multilateral Memorandum of Understanding Concerning Consultation and Cooperation and the Exchange of Information (MMoU)—that standardized the protocol for information sharing among participating securities regulators. Because regulators from different countries entered the MMoU at different times, their enlistments created a set of staggered shocks. I use these shocks to show that the resulting cross-border cooperation (a) increases cross-border enforcement and (b) reduces the cost of liquidity provision in the capital markets of participating countries. These results support the conclusion that the MMoU helps fill gaps in cross-border regulation that historically exposed investors to information asymmetry, agency costs, and expropriation risks.

Global Standards for Securities Holding Infrastructures: A Soft Law/Fintech Model for Reform

This Article outlines a “soft-law-to-hard-law” approach for the development and implementation of reforms to systems for the holding of publicly traded securities. It proposes the development of global standards for securities holding systems (“Global Standards”), to be led by the International Organization of Securities Commissions (the “IOSCO”). This approach contemplates that States would be encouraged and expected to implement the Global Standards by adopting “hard law” reforms through statutory and regulatory adjustments to their securities holding systems as well as modifications of the architecture of their securities holding systems. The successes of past IOSCO initiatives inspire this Article’s proposal, as do the relatively successful development and implementation of harmonized standards for supervision and capital adequacy for depository institutions (for example, banks) through the operation of the Basel Committee.

International Financial Standards: An Argument for Discernment

Multiple shocks have led regulators and policy makers to put increasing faith in the diagnostic and prophylactic powers of international financial standards, but the nature, appropriateness and normative force of such standards varies. As a standard setter, the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) has pursued global consensus, harmonization and international best practices for many years. International standards, however, are often created under suboptimal conditions by actors with a broad range of motivations, assumptions and biases. Frictions between state-level regulation and international standards can undermine their effectiveness. This policy brief examines the process of standard setting and two very different sets of standards and their standard setters to illustrate some of the anomalies associated with them. The process has become more complex, more compromised and more politicized, leading in some cases to “pseudo-international” standards or a riot of diverse viewpoints, of limited practical use. The danger lies in major economies walking away from international standards which no longer demonstrate pertinence or credibility. Greater discernment should be exercised by state-level policy makers, international financial institutions and the international organizations themselves in proposing, deploying and implementing international standards.

The New Internationalism? IOSCO, International Standards and Capital Markets Regulation

The international reach of the financial crises of the last 20 years has triggered an explosion in international standards setting, creating a complex dynamic between national (or regional) regulation and international norms, between hard and soft law. This paper explores this phenomenon as it relates to capital markets by looking at the changing role of the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO), the standard setting process itself, issues associated with implementation of international standards and possible alternatives. In deciding that standard setting is its primary mission, IOSCO has assumed a role internationally of “quasi-regulator”, in much the same way (and for the same reasons) as the now defunct EU Committee of European Securities Regulators (CESR). Potentially, this new role puts IOSCO on a collision course with powerful state-level regulators. A further complication is the standard setting process itself. The academic discourse has focussed on the normative force of international standards, without paying much attention to the actual content of the standards or the process by which they come into being. Hegemonic powers, of course, play a disproportionate role, but there are a large number of other factors which determine their shape and substance. In order to shed new light on the standard setting process, this paper takes a close look at how one specific set, those relating to credit rating agencies (CRAs), has come into being. The results are surprising: in the face of a particular domestic regulatory failure, a series of international codes and principles concerning CRAs were developed by IOSCO. These international standards apply virtually exclusively to three US corporations - S&P, Moody's and Fitch - which together control over 95% of the international and 98% of their domestic market. Even more curiously, the CRA codes and principles, despite their inapplicability in most parts of the world, have been widely adopted and implemented. The responsibility for this waste of time and regulatory resources can be laid, in part, at the door of the IMF and the World Bank. Together with IOSCO and its taskmasters, the Financial Stability Board and the G20, the IMF and the World Bank appear to ignore the selective nature of globalization. Yet, there remains a great demand for international financial standards, especially among smaller or emerging economies. The paper concludes with some suggestions on future courses of action, in the face of the new internationalism.

Reviewer Acknowledgements

Applied Economics and Finance (AEF) would like to acknowledge the following reviewers for their assistance with peer review of manuscripts for this issue. Many authors, regardless of whether AEF publishes their work, appreciate the helpful feedback provided by the reviewers. Their comments and suggestions were of great help to the authors in improving the quality of their papers. Each of the reviewers listed below returned at least one review for this issue.Reviewers for Volume 5, Number 1Aaron Morey, University of Melbourne, AustraliaAli Massoud, Sohag University, EgyptAndrey Kudryavtsev, The Max Stern Yezreel Valley Academic College, IsraelAyoub Taha Sidahmed, SIU, SudanDilshodjon Rakhmonov, Tashkent State University of Economics, UzbekistanDyah Wulan Sari, Airlangga University, IndonesiaErdal Gumus, Eskisehir Osmangazi University, TurkeyHe Nie, Jinan University, ChinaHichem Maraghni, University of Taibah, TunisiaIan McFarlane, University of Reading, UKIbrahim Baghdadi, Lebanese University, LebanonIgor Matyushenko, School of Foreign Economic Relations and Touristic Business, UkraineJolita Vveinhardt, Lithuanian Sports University, LithuaniaKembo Bwana, College of Business Education, TanzaniaLuca Giordano, IOSCO (International Organization of Securities Commissions), ItalyMagdalena Radulescu, University of Pitesti, RomaniaMagdalena Zioło, University of Szczecin, PolandMahmoud Mohammed Sabra, Al Azhar University-Gaza, PalestineMarco Muscettola, Independent Researcher-Credit Risk Manager, ItalyMohammed Al-Mahish, King Faisal University, Saudi ArabiaMojeed Idowu John Odumeso-Jimoh, Noble Integrated Resources & Management, NigeriaNuno Crespo, ISCTE-IUL, PortugalOlena Sokolovska, Research Institute of Fiscal Policy, State Fiscal Service of Ukraine, UkrainePatrycja Kowalczyk-Rolczynska, Wroclaw University of Economics, PolandRamona Orastean, Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, RomaniaRomeo Victor Ionescu, Dunarea de Jos University, RomaniaSteven V. Cates, Kaplan University, USASzabolcs Blazsek, Universidad Francisco Marroquín, GuatemalaTaro Abe, Nagoya Gakuin University, JapanVictoria Cociug, Academy of Sciences of Moldova, MoldovaWing-Keung Wong, Asia University, TaiwanY. Saidi, M’sila University, AlgeriaZi-Yi Guo, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., USA

Implementation of the principles of regulation of the securities market of the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) and the implementation of such principles in Ukraine

On 26 September 1996, the Commission is a permanent member and the only representative from UkraineThe international organization of securities commissions (International Organization of Securities Commissions-IOSCO).IOSCO has brought together more than 180 regulatory authorities of the countries of the world with the purpose of cooperation, exchange of information, joint development of the best standards of securities regulation, with the subsequent introduction of the national markets of the Member States.The main work of the organization is in the development of international standards and recommendations concerning the regulation of securities. Documents developed by IOSCO, ignored many other international organizations, including the World Bank Group, OECD, regional development banks (EBRD), the International Committee on accounting standards, the Basel Committee on banking supervision, etc.The Commission last years successfully works on the harmonization of national legislation in accordance with international standards IOSCO Principles and, in particular, with the aim of joining the Multilateral memorandum of understanding on advice and cooperation and information exchange of the international organization of securities markets regulators paper (IOSCO MMoU).Accession to the above-mentioned Multilateral memorandum provided by the Coalition Agreement and the Complex program of development of the financial sector to 2020 year.

The Influence of Cross-Border Cooperation on Equity Market Liquidity

This paper examines how cooperation between national securities regulators affects equity market liquidity, using the International Organization of Securities Commissions’ (IOSCO’s) Multilateral Memorandum of Understanding (MMoU) as a shock to cooperation. The MMoU was set up to protect investors by fostering cooperation between regulators, and fill gaps in cross-border regulatory capacities that historically exposed investors to information asymmetry, agency costs, and expropriation risks. Consistent with a deterrent effect, I find that when a regulator enters the MMoU network, the markets it supervises experience enhanced liquidity, as indicated by narrower quoted bid-ask spreads. Incremental to this effect, I find larger liquidity improvements in when linkages are formed between the precise regulators that co-supervise a firm affiliated with both markets. Cross-sectional tests show that legal, cultural, economic, and firm-level attributes condition the effect; these results shed light on how cooperation works and what makes it effective. Coordination is one way that regulators who are grappling with the interjurisdictional complexities of increasingly interconnected markets can protect investors and enhance liquidity.

Reviewer Acknowledgements

Applied Economics and Finance (AEF) would like to acknowledge the following reviewers for their assistance with peer review of manuscripts for this issue. Many authors, regardless of whether AEF publishes their work, appreciate the helpful feedback provided by the reviewers. Their comments and suggestions were of great help to the authors in improving the quality of their papers. Each of the reviewers listed below returned at least one review for this issue.Reviewers for Volume 4, Number 6Aaron Morey, University of Melbourne, AustraliaAli Massoud, Sohag University, EgyptAndrey Kudryavtsev, The Max Stern Yezreel Valley Academic College, IsraelAsad K. Ghalib, Liverpool Hope University, UKAyoub Taha Sidahmed, SIU, SudanDilshodjon Rakhmonov, Tashkent State University of Economics, UzbekistanDyah Wulan Sari, Airlangga University, IndonesiaErdal Gumus, Eskisehir Osmangazi University, TurkeyEyup Kadioglu, Capital Markets Board, TurkeyGeorge Theocharides, Cyprus International Institute of Management, CyprusGetamesay Bekele Meshesha, Debre Berhan University, EthiopiaHe Nie, Jinan University, ChinaIan McFarlane, University of Reading, UKIbrahim Baghdadi, Lebanese University, LebanonIgor Matyushenko, School of Foreign Economic Relations and Touristic Business, UkraineJin Yong Yang, Hankook University of Foreign Studies, KoreaKembo Bwana, College of Business Education, TanzaniaLuca Giordano, IOSCO (International Organization of Securities Commissions), ItalyMagdalena Radulescu, University of Pitesti, RomaniaMagdalena Zioło, University of Szczecin, PolandMahmoud Mohammed Sabra, Al Azhar University-Gaza, PalestineMarco Muscettola, Independent Researcher-Credit Risk Manager, ItalyMohammed Al-Mahish, King Faisal University, Saudi ArabiaMurad Harasheh, University of Milan-Bicocca, ItalyNicolas Afflatet, University of the Federal Armed Forces, GermanyNuno Crespo, ISCTE-IUL, PortugalOlena Sokolovska, Research Institute of Fiscal Policy, State Fiscal Service of Ukraine, UkrainePatrycja Kowalczyk-Rolczynska, Wroclaw University of Economics, PolandPayal Chadha, University of Wales Prifysgol Cymru, KuwaitRamona Orastean, Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, RomaniaRichard Nguyen, Alliant International University, USARomeo Victor Ionescu, Dunarea de Jos University, RomaniaSzabolcs Blazsek, Universidad Francisco Marroquín, GuatemalaTaro Abe, Nagoya Gakuin University, JapanVictoria Cociug, Academy of Sciences of Moldova, MoldovaWoodrow Clark II, Clark Strategic Partners, United States, USAZi-Yi Guo, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., USANikki GibbsEditorial AssistantOn behalf of,The Editorial Board of Applied Economics and FinanceRedfame Publishing9450 SW Gemini Dr. #99416Beaverton, OR 97008, USAURL: http://aef.redfame.com

The Effects of Cross-Border Cooperation on Enforcement and Earnings Attributes

The events of Sept. 11, 2001, prompted sweeping cross-border coordination efforts for securities regulators around the globe. After 9/11, the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) forged an arrangement—the Multilateral Memorandum of Understanding Concerning Consultation and Cooperation and the Exchange of Information (MMOU)—that standardizes the protocol for information sharing among participating securities regulators. I link this arrangement to the ability of the SEC to pursue U.S.-listed foreign firms by showing that the probability of enforcement increases by a factor of two or more in firms whose home countries enlist in the MMOU. A much more limited effect on enforcement is observed for similar but bilateral information-sharing agreements, indicating that a broader network creates powerful incentives that are difficult to replicate bilaterally. Because different countries enter the MMOU at different times, their enlistments create a set of staggered shocks to the SEC’s enforcement capacity for U.S.-listed foreign firms. These shocks are associated with predictable improvements in U.S. GAAP-reconciled earnings properties; this helps resolve questions about why the earnings quality of U.S.-listed foreign firms diverged from U.S. firms during pre-MMOU periods.

Linkages between the Adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards and Economic Growth within CEMAC Countries

In today’s business climate, financial statements disclosed by firms have huge impacts on the society. Financial statements are heavily used by shareholders, creditors, labor unions and government authorities to assess a firm’s financial position, performance and viability. Past experiences show that the reliable and accurate accounting information enables financial market participants to make more rational decisions. International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) play a vital role in the preparation of financial statements. The adoption of IFRS has a huge impact on the financial statement elements; assets, liabilities, equity, revenues and expenses. International Financial Reporting Standards contribute to create a business climate that enables investors to make more rational and accurate investment decision. Epstein (2009) asserts that IFRS adoption results in higher financial reporting quality. International authorities such as World Bank, International Monetary Fund, and International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) encourage the adoption of IFRS to advance effectiveness of financial markets, which in turn may spark the economic growth of adopting countries (Wyatt and Yospe, 1993). Ball (2008) pointed out that financial reporting is one of the most important economic activities. Further, Li and Shroff (2010) declare that high-quality accounting information enables the management of a firm to make much more effective investment decisions, translating into high growth rate of economy. A major driver for International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) adoption by countries is the desire to integrate into the global economy. Some of previous research studies show that the adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards has a positive impact on the economic growth. The adoption of IFRS has positive impacts on international trade and significantly enhances the comparability of financial statements prepared by firms from different countries. Samuels and Piper (1985) stated that the adoption of IFRS has a great potential to facilitate global trade activities. The objective of this paper is to contribute the existing literature on the association between IFRS implementation and economic growth within countries. To achieve the above, a thorough literature review will be conducted with the objectives of developing effective mechanisms for IFRS implementation. In this regard, the paper argued that CEMAC government authorities and regional business organizations should make persistent efforts to enforce IFRS.

Reviewer Acknowledgements

Applied Economics and Finance (AEF) would like to acknowledge the following reviewers for their assistance with peer review of manuscripts for this issue. Many authors, regardless of whether AEF publishes their work, appreciate the helpful feedback provided by the reviewers. Their comments and suggestions were of great help to the authors in improving the quality of their papers. Each of the reviewers listed below returned at least one review for this issue.Reviewers for Volume 4, Number 5Asad K. Ghalib, Liverpool Hope University, UKAyoub Taha Sidahmed, SIU, SudanDilshodjon Rakhmonov, Tashkent State University of Economics, UzbekistanEncarnación Alvarez-Verdejo, University of Granada, SpainErdal Gumus, Eskisehir Osmangazi University, TurkeyEyup Kadioglu, Capital Markets Board, TurkeyGeorge Theocharides, Cyprus International Institute of Management, CyprusGetamesay Bekele Meshesha, Debre Berhan University, EthiopiaIbrahim Baghdadi, Lebanese University, LebanonIgor Matyushenko, School of Foreign Economic Relations and Touristic Business, UkraineLuca Giordano, IOSCO (International Organization of Securities Commissions), ItalyMagdalena Radulescu, University of Pitesti, RomaniaMasonic Lodge, TurkeyNicolas Afflatet, University of the Federal Armed Forces, GermanyNuno Crespo, ISCTEIUL, PortugalPatrycja Kowalczyk-Rolczynska, Wroclaw University of Economics, PolandPayal Chadha, University of Wales Prifysgol Cymru, KuwaitRomeo Victor Ionescu, Dunarea de Jos University, RomaniaRuhet GENC, Turkish-German University, TurkeySherry Jensen, Florida Institute of Technology, USASorin Gabriel Anton, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University of Iaşi, RomaniaSteven V. Cates, Kaplan University, USASzabolcs Blazsek, Universidad Francisco Marroquín, GuatemalaTaro Abe, Nagoya Gakuin University, JapanVictoria Cociug, Academy of Sciences of Moldova, MoldovaWing-Keung Wong, Asia University, TaiwanZi-Yi Guo, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., USA Nikki GibbsEditorial AssistantOn behalf of,The Editorial Board of Applied Economics and FinanceRedfame Publishing9450 SW Gemini Dr. #99416Beaverton, OR 97008, USAURL: http://aef.redfame.com

Use of Supervisory Standards in the Financial Sector Assessment Program—Understandings with Standard Setting Bodies

This paper informs the Executive Board of the staff-level understandings reached with global Standard Setting Bodies (SSBs) on the use of the three financial sector supervisory standards in FSAPs: the Basel Committee’s Core Principles for Effective Banking Supervision (BCP), set by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS); the Insurance Core Principles (ICP), set by the International Association of Insurance Supervisors (IAIS); and the Objectives and Principles of Securities Regulation (Principles), set by the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO). As graded assessments of compliance with supervisory standards are voluntary, FSAPs have adopted a flexible approach to the use of supervisory standards. A standard is either assessed in full, resulting in grades, or used as the basis for a deeper analysis of selected elements of the oversight framework in a focused review, without grades. The SSBs and Fund staff have reached understandings on a refinement of the existing flexible approach, with sets of “base principles” serving as the starting points for focused reviews.

European Regulatory Private Law Going Global? The Case of Product Governance

The article claims that contract law principles are being used by transnational financial regulation to set a world-wide (proto)normative framework regulating intra-firm processes. This practice comes close to the European Regulatory Private Law (ERPL) phenomenon already employed by the EU lawmaker in quite technical fields, such as banking and financial services law. After an overview explaining what it is meant by ERPL, the article discusses the new Product Governance rules under the Market in Financial Instrument Directive II, which may be viewed as the most recent example of ERPL. The article then provides a description of the normative production of the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO), also regarding product governance rules. The result of the author’s analysis seems to suggest that IOSCO has paved the way for a European approach to product governance which, overall, is coherent with the ERPL theory.

Reviewer Acknowledgements

Applied Economics and Finance (AEF) would like to acknowledge the following reviewers for their assistance with peer review of manuscripts for this issue. Many authors, regardless of whether AEF publishes their work, appreciate the helpful feedback provided by the reviewers. Their comments and suggestions were of great help to the authors in improving the quality of their papers. Each of the reviewers listed below returned at least one review for this issue.Reviewers for Volume 4, Number 3Abbas Khandan, Hafez boulevard, IranAli Massoud, Sohag University, EgyptAndrey Kudryavtsev, The Max Stern Yezreel Valley Academic College, IsraelAnna Jedrzychowska, Wroclaw University, PolandArash Riasi, University of Delaware, USAAsad K. Ghalib, Liverpool Hope University, UKAyoub Taha Sidahmed, SIU, SudanDilshodjon Rakhmonov, Tashkent State University of Economics, UzbekistanHe Nie, Jinan University, ChinaIgor Matyushenko, School of Foreign Economic Relations and Touristic Business, UkraineJose Solana Ibañez, Centro Universitario de la Defensa, SpainKembo Bwana, College of Business Education, TanzaniaLuca Giordano, IOSCO (International Organization of Securities Commissions), ItalyMagdalena Radulescu, University of Pitesti, RomaniaMagdalena Zioło, University of Szczecin, PolandMohammed Alkali Yusuf, Waziri Umaru Federal Polytechnic, NigeriaPatrycja Kowalczyk-Rolczynska, Wroclaw University of Economics, PolandPayal Chadha, University of Wales Prifysgol Cymru, KuwaitSherry Jensen, Florida Institute of Technology, USASorin Gabriel Anton, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University of Iaşi, RomaniaSzabolcs Blazsek, Universidad Francisco Marroquín, GuatemalaTaro Abe, Nagoya Gakuin University, Department of Economics, JapanY. Saidi, M’sila University, Algeria Nikki GibbsEditorial AssistantOn behalf of,The Editorial Board of Applied Economics and FinanceRedfame Publishing9450 SW Gemini Dr. #99416Beaverton, OR 97008, USAURL: http://aef.redfame.com

Reviewer Acknowledgements

Applied Economics and Finance [AEF] would like to acknowledge the following reviewers for their assistance with peer review of manuscripts for this issue. Many authors, regardless of whether AEF publishes their work, appreciate the helpful feedback provided by the reviewers. Their comments and suggestions were of great help to the authors in improving the quality of their papers. Each of the reviewers listed below returned at least one review for this issue.Reviewers for Volume 4, Number 2 Aaron Morey, Productivity Commission, AustraliaAndrey Kudryavtsev, The Max Stern Yezreel Valley Academic College, IsraelArash Riasi, University of Delaware, USAAyoub Taha Sidahmed, SIU- Khartoum, SudanEyup Kadioglu, TurkeyFarhat Iqbal, University of Balochistan, PakistanGetamesay Bekele, Debre Berhan University, EthiopiaIan McFarlane, University of Reading, UKIgor Matyushenko, School of Foreign Economic Relations and Touristic Business, UkraineJin Yong Yang, Hankook University of Foreign Studies, KoreaLuca Giordano, IOSCO (International Organization of Securities Commissions), ItalyMagdalena Radulescu, University of Pitesti, RomaniaMagdalena Ziolo, University of Szczecin, PolandMarco Muscettola, Independent Researcher-Credit Risk Manager, ItalyMarta Borda, Wroclaw University of Economics, PolandMohammed Alkali Yusuf, Waziri Umaru Federal Polytechnic, NigeriaMurad Harasheh, University of Milan-Bicocca, ItalyPatrycja Kowalczyk-Rolczynska, Wroclaw University of Economics, PolandPayal Chadha, University of Wales Prifysgol Cymru, KuwaitSorin Gabriel Anton, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University of Iaşi, RomaniaStelios Markoulis, University of Cyprus, CyprusSteven V. Cates, Kaplan University, USASzabolcs Blazsek, Universidad Francisco Marroquín, GuatemalaTaro Abe, Nagoya Gakuin University, JapanVictoria Cociug, Academy of Sciences of Moldova, MoldovaWing-Keung Wong, Asia University, TaiwanY. Saidi, M’sila University, Algeria Nikki GibbsEditorial AssistantOn behalf of,The Editorial Board of Applied Economics and FinanceRedfame Publishing9450 SW Gemini Dr. #99416Beaverton, OR 97008, USAURL: http://aef.redfame.com

Developments in Financial Sector Legislation, Regulation and Infrastructure: Implications for Accession Countries

Financial sector legislation and regulation is an area of crucial importance for the acquis process. Various regulatory frameworks, standards and institutions are involved. These include the Core Principles for Effective Banking Supervision, formulated by the Basel Committee for Banking Supervision, the Objectives and Principles of Securities Regulation, formulated by the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO), and standards being developed by the Committee on Payment and Settlement Systems (CPSS), the International Association of Insurance Supervisors (IAIS), and the International Accounting Standards Committee (IASC). The infrastructure of the financial system is widely considered as a “blood” system of the economy. This paper will focus on the developments in financial sector legislation, regulation and infrastructure in accession countries.