Newsflash:
Sunday, 29 June 2014 11:36

Locking Out Financial Regulation

Written by  Jayati Ghosh, TripleCrisis | Op-Ed

The world of international trade negotiators is an increasingly secret one, with even other agencies of national governments not fully aware of what is being offered by their negotiators in such deals. One current example is a pending "trade" deal called the Trade in Services Agreement (TISA), which is being negotiated among 50 countries, including the United States, the EU, Australia, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Hong Kong, Iceland, Israel, Japan, Liechtenstein, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway, Panama, Peru, South Korea, and Switzerland. This agreement is apparently supposed to be "classified" information – in other words, secret and unknown to the public that will be affected by it – for a full five years after it is enters into force or the negotiations are terminated!

That an international treaty that has binding and enforceable obligations can be treated as secret for five years after it comes into force is not only bizarre but almost unthinkable. The need for such secrecy would be inexplicable even if such agreements were actually in the interests of people whose governments are involved in such negotiations. That secrecy is sought would on its own be reason for concern, but the little that has been leaked out of the state of the negotiations suggests even more reasons for alarm, especially because such a deal would have far-reaching implications for financial stability and adversely affect everyone in the world.

One critical element of this relates to liberalisation of rules around financial services, discussed in an Annexe. An April 2014 draft of this Annexe is now available on Wikileaks in yet another important public service provided by this organisation. This draft may have been already superseded by the ongoing negotiations, which are apparently to continue in Geneva in the last week of June, but if it is an indication of what is under way then it deserves to arouse much more public outcry.

The draft defines financial services in the broadest possible manner: "A financial service is any service of a financial nature offered by a financial service supplier of a Party. Financial services include all insurance and insurance-related services and all banking and other financial services." This explicitly includes not just banking related activities but also security market transactions, asset management, brokering, derivatives market activity, provision of financial information and advice, and so on.

It was the deregulation of precisely these activities that created perverse incentives for risky behaviour and the moral hazard that were so marked in Northern financial markets in the run-up to the global crisis. And the crisis and its aftermath created devastation for real economies and continue to make people suffer through the consequent effects like fiscal austerity. The rampant market imperfections that characterise finance mean that if it is relatively unregulated or only lightly regulated, it will necessarily be prone to boom-and-bust cycles can be just as damaging in future.

Remarkably in such a context, the draft TISA seems to be locking signatory countries into a situation in which they will be unable to undertake the required re-regulation of finance even if such market imperfections persist and their adverse consequences get even more marked. The substance of the legal provisions is to attack or reduce the possibilities of the re-regulation of finance that was attempted in halting and limited manner in the aftermath of the Global Financial Crisis in 2008.

According to Professor Jane Kelsey, whose legal analysis of the document is also available on Wikileaks, the substantive rules target what the still powerful financial services industry sees as obstacles to its seamless global operations, including:

  • Limits on the size of financial institutions (too big to fail);
  • Restrictions on activities (e.g. deposit taking banks that also trade on their own account);
  • Requiring foreign investment through subsidiaries (regulated by the host) rather than branches (regulated from their parent state);
  • Requiring that financial data is held onshore;
  • Limits on funds transfers for cross-border transactions (e-finance);
  • Authorisation of cross-border providers;
  • State monopolies on pension funds or disaster insurance;
  • Disclosure requirements on offshore operations in tax havens;
  • Requiring that certain transactions must be conducted through public exchanges, rather than invisible over-the counter (OTC) operations;
  • Approval for sale of 'innovative' (often potentially toxic) financial products;
  • Regulation of credit rating agencies or financial advisers;
  • Controls on hot money inflows and outflows of capital;
  • Requirements that a majority of directors are locally domiciled;
  • Authorisation and regulation of hedge funds; etc.

But why would countries seek to sign such an agreement that ties their hands so comprehensively, and that too, when it obviously has to be done with such stealth? The continued political power of financial lobbies is clearly evident in this. And this comes not only from the unpleasant reality that big financial players contribute substantially to the campaign funds of leaders in most elected democracies. It also stems from the perception that many governments have that finance still represents a major source of GDP and the provision of cross-border financial services a major source of both foreign exchange and profitability.
Indeed, as Chart 1 indicates, until the Global Financial Crisis, the export of financial services was growing rapidly both in absolute terms and as a share of total global trade in commercial services. But 2007 proved to be a turning point – thereafter the recovery in dollar terms has been uneven at best and the share of financial services has fallen as a share of services trade.

Chart 1: Trade in financial services slowed down after the global crisis2014 628 chart 1

As Chart 2 shows, the country most interested in this is the United States, whose share of global trade in financial services still hovers around a quarter. By contrast, the United Kingdom has seen its share drop slightly while that of Germany has increased slightly in the region of 5%, but that role does explain the strong interest of those countries also in such negotiations.

Chart 2: USA still dominates in exporting financial services2014 628 chart 2

The peculiarity of these negotiations, however, is that even if they do provide more market access and more freedom of functioning to financial service providers in these countries, they will do so at the cost of much higher potential financial instability and all the attendant consequences for market volatility. And the unfortunate point is that such financial fragility in the core economic powers has not just ripple effects but generates financial tsunamis in much of the rest of the world, even if they have tried to institute their own controls and have not signed such agreements. It is remarkable how, despite all that the world's population has gone through because of the vagaries of finance in the very recent past, such deals that limit the power of governments to control finance are still even being considered, in secret behind closed doors.

Link to original article from TripleCrisis.com

Read 4521 times

Robin Hood Tax Articles

  • Could This Tax on Wall Street Turn Back America’s Tide of Inequality?
    Could This Tax on Wall Street Turn Back America’s Tide of Inequality?

    How will you honor the legacy of Martin Luther King Jr. this April 4, the anniversary of his assassination? How about by demanding that Congress get out of Wall Street’s pocket? How about by letting your representative know that you support economic equality and a just distribution of wealth in America? As Dr. King himself said, “This is America’s opportunity to help bridge the gulf between the haves and the have-nots. The question is whether America will do it. There is nothing new about poverty. What is new is that we now have the techniques and the resources to get rid of poverty. The real question is whether we have the will.”

    Written on Monday, 31 March 2014 23:57 Read more...
  • Targeting Wall Street, Robin Hood Tax Comes to Washington
    Targeting Wall Street, Robin Hood Tax Comes to Washington

    With Congress about to begin the next cycle of budget battles – mostly focused on how much more pain to inflict on Main Street communities across America – a far different message is bubbling up across the land.

    Written on Wednesday, 30 October 2013 23:08 Read more...
  • The Robin Hood Tax
    The Robin Hood Tax

    Simply put, the big idea behind the Robin Hood Tax is to generate hundreds of billions of dollars.  That money could provide funding for jobs to kickstart the economy and get America back on its feet. It could help save the social safety net here and around the world.  And it will come from fairer taxation of the financial sector.

    Written on Friday, 25 October 2013 15:41 Read more...
  • European Commission Approves “Robin Hood” Tax on Financial Transactions
    European Commission Approves “Robin Hood” Tax on Financial Transactions The European Commission yesterday backed plans by 11 European Union economies to impose a “Robin Hood” financial transaction tax, better known as a Tobin tax, to help raise funds to tackle the region’s growing debt crisis.
    Written on Wednesday, 24 October 2012 16:53 Read more...

Does Your Legislator Support the Robin Hood Tax?

Sign the ERA Petition

ERADemandButton

On Friday, September 12th more than 150 activists will go to DC and Demand that their Senators and Representatives support removing the ratification deadline from the ERA (SJ Res 15 and HJ Res 113)

Button-SignERAPetition

Sign the Petition - Sen. Sanders Run as a Democrat in 2016

Button-SandersPetition

Sign the TPP Fast Track Petitions

MoveOn.org Petition - Congress Don't Renew Fast Track

Public Citizen Petition - Congress Must Reject Fast Track Authority

MoveOn.org Petition - Stop the Trans Pacific Partnership

CREDO Petition - Stop the Massive Corporate Power Grab

 

Find Your Elected Officials for Issues

Enter your zip+4 and find your elected officials. This link provides name, address and phone number

ButtonFindElectedOfficials

 

Like Robin Hood Tax on Facebook

The Robin Hood Tax

Robin Hood Tax: John Nichols and Keith Ellison and Michael Lighty

Why The Robin Hood Tax