Diverging Financial Regulations After the Crisis? - A Comparison of the EU's and the United States' Responses

The study aims to compare the regulatory changes occurring on both sides of the Atlantic. An inappropriate regulatory environment contributed to the onset of the financial and economic crisis, and therefore the post-crisis regulation attempts to remedy the earlier deficiencies and address the problems that emerged during the crisis. The study evaluates and compares the latest financial regulation initiatives on both sides of the Atlantic and assesses the diverging attitudes to regulation in the EU and the United States in six exemplary areas: remuneration, bank capital requirements, derivatives, credit rating agencies, the regulation of hedge funds, and consumer protection. Fundamental differences in regulation pose a challenge to firms operating in both environments and harmonisation remains elusive. However, in some areas, regulators from both sides of the Atlantic are willing to give broad deference to certain regulations of foreign jurisdictions, instead of their own ones. Regular dialogue between the United States and the European Union points in the right direction, but as the article points out there are many improvements which still need to be made in order to reach a consensus acceptable for financial market actors as well as regulators