U. S. vs. EU Insider Trading Regulation: Risks and Challenges from a European Perspective
-
Cédric Remund
and
Paul Tuchmann
Abstract
822In an ever more globalized financial market, investors are increasingly exposed to regulation and enforcement by multiple jurisdictions with varying rules, including different insider trading regimes. From a European perspective, potential exposure to the U. S. insider trading regime is particularly challenging. Especially for the non-U. S. practitioner, the U. S. insider prohibition is very complex and offers little legal certainty. And this uncertainty is all the more problematic for Europeans because the U. S. insider ban applies extraterritorially. Even more worrying, violations of the U. S. insider trading regime are often met with harsh consequences, ranging from stiff prison sentences to ruinous financial penalties. First, this article broadly outlines the contours of the U. S. insider trading regime as well as the current state of play for insider trading enforcement under U. S. law. Second, it outlines the fearsome (extra-) territorial reach of the U. S. insider trading ban, to allow a better assessment of a European’s potential exposure to the U. S. insider trading regime in different situations. Third, it highlights the main differences between the U. S. and the EU insider trading regulations, to identify the areas in which market participants on both sides of the Atlantic should be particularly cautious.
Note
The authors express their personal opinion, which does not necessarily reflect the views of their employers.823
© 2023 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Frontmatter
- Liability of the Economic Unit – A General Principle of EU Law?
- The Management and the Advice of (Un)Explainable AI
- U. S. vs. EU Insider Trading Regulation: Risks and Challenges from a European Perspective
- The Polish Model of a Limited Joint-Stock Partnership in Comparison with Other European Legal Systems
- Implementation of the Provisions of Directive 2017/1132 on Openness and Reliability of Registers in Poland and Other Selected EU Countries
- Third Party Release in Group-Wide Restructuring Proceedings: Comparative Remarks to Support the Application of Such a Rule in the Italian Legal System
- Proportionality in the European Banking Law.Lessons from Silicon Valley Bank
- Does EU Regulation Adequately Address the Tension between CCPs Shareholders’ and Clearing Members’ Incentives?
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Frontmatter
- Liability of the Economic Unit – A General Principle of EU Law?
- The Management and the Advice of (Un)Explainable AI
- U. S. vs. EU Insider Trading Regulation: Risks and Challenges from a European Perspective
- The Polish Model of a Limited Joint-Stock Partnership in Comparison with Other European Legal Systems
- Implementation of the Provisions of Directive 2017/1132 on Openness and Reliability of Registers in Poland and Other Selected EU Countries
- Third Party Release in Group-Wide Restructuring Proceedings: Comparative Remarks to Support the Application of Such a Rule in the Italian Legal System
- Proportionality in the European Banking Law.Lessons from Silicon Valley Bank
- Does EU Regulation Adequately Address the Tension between CCPs Shareholders’ and Clearing Members’ Incentives?
