首页> 外文OA文献 >Ring fencing Volcker’s Rule? : The Liikanen Report and justifications for ring fencing and separate legal entities revisited
【2h】

Ring fencing Volcker’s Rule? : The Liikanen Report and justifications for ring fencing and separate legal entities revisited

机译:围栏沃尔克规则? :重新审视了Liikanen报告以及围栏和独立法律实体的理由

摘要

The predecessor paper to this publication, “Volcker/Vickers Hybrid”: The Liikanen Report and Justifications For Ring Fencing and Separate Legal Entities, considered the merits, objectives and cost-benefit attributes of respective models associated with the Vickers Report, Liikanen Report and Volckers Rule – by way of reference to the degree of separation of legal entities or banking activities involved, as well as whether an outright ban or prohibition on proprietary trading is involved.This paper is aimed at highlighting why ring fencing not only presents a more feasible and cost effective option to other models, but also why its degree of flexibility provides the more appropriate balance in a financial environment whose trend is increasingly inclined towards conglomeration.
机译:该出版物的前一篇文章“ Volcker / Vickers Hybrid”:《 Liikanen报告》和《关于围栏和独立法人的理由》,考虑了与Vickers Report,Liikanen Report和Volckers相关的各个模型的优缺点,目标和成本效益属性。规则–通过提及所涉及的法人实体或银行活动的分离程度,以及是否涉及彻底禁止或禁止自营交易的方式。本文旨在强调为何围网不仅提供了更可行的方案,而且其他模型的成本有效选择,以及其灵活性程度为何在趋势趋向于集团化的金融环境中提供更适当的平衡的原因。

著录项

  • 作者

    Marianne Ojo;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2014
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号