지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
More than 3 years have passed since Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act("FSCMA") was effective on February 4, 2009. There was a huge change in restrictions on OTC derivative transactions between before and after the enactment of FSCM A. Before the enactment of FSCMA, each financial law such as Bank Act, Securities Exchange Act etc. governed OTC derivative transactions by the relevant financial institutions. However, after the enactment of FSCMA, FSCMA became a comprehensive law which governs every aspect of OTC derivative transactions.
Then, financial institutions found some legal issues while they have made OTC derivative transactions under FSCMA regime. For example, the priority between FSCM A and Foreign Exchange Transaction Act("FETA") is still unclear. FETA continues to govern OTC derivative transactions between resident and non-resident or such transactions linked to foreign currencies.
Furthermore, a foreign exchange broker under FETA does not need to obtain a license under FSCMA even though it conducts a brokerage of a OTC derivative transaction. This is not consistent with the policy that all businesses related to derivative transactions should be governed by FSCMA. Furthermore, in the process of giving licenses for OTC derivative transactions by the financial regulatory body, some conditions are imposed to restrict the scope of the allowable OTC derivative products. This erodes the designated license units for OTC derivative transactions stipulated under the enforcement decree of FSCMA. Such practice is not consistent with the minimum equity capital requirement for each specific license unit under FSCMA.
The relevant regulatory bodies should pay attention to these legal issues related with OTC derivative transactions and resolve these issues as soon as possible to avoid confusions by financial institutions.
Then, financial institutions found some legal issues while they have made OTC derivative transactions under FSCMA regime. For example, the priority between FSCM A and Foreign Exchange Transaction Act("FETA") is still unclear. FETA continues to govern OTC derivative transactions between resident and non-resident or such transactions linked to foreign currencies.
Furthermore, a foreign exchange broker under FETA does not need to obtain a license under FSCMA even though it conducts a brokerage of a OTC derivative transaction. This is not consistent with the policy that all businesses related to derivative transactions should be governed by FSCMA. Furthermore, in the process of giving licenses for OTC derivative transactions by the financial regulatory body, some conditions are imposed to restrict the scope of the allowable OTC derivative products. This erodes the designated license units for OTC derivative transactions stipulated under the enforcement decree of FSCMA. Such practice is not consistent with the minimum equity capital requirement for each specific license unit under FSCMA.
The relevant regulatory bodies should pay attention to these legal issues related with OTC derivative transactions and resolve these issues as soon as possible to avoid confusions by financial institutions.
목차
초록
Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. 자본시장법 시행전 금융기관 장외파생상품 규제내용
Ⅲ. 자본시장법 시행 이후 금융기관 장외파생상품 규제 현황
Ⅳ. 자본시장법 시행 이후 금융기관 장외파생상품 규제와 관련한 문제점과 개선방안
Ⅴ. 결론
참고문헌
ABSTRACT
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2014-320-003021998