Abstract
Abstract: The Financial Services and Markets Act (FSMA) 2023 sparked considerable debates for the imposition of a Secondary International Competitiveness and Growth Objective (SICGO) on the UK’s financial regulators. This article challenges the criticisms of SICGO by first highlighting its implications as (1) a secondary objective, and less noticeably, (2) the qualification for SICGO to be aligned with international standards. To take this further, we compare SICGO horizontally with the competitiveness ‘have regard’ of the abolished Financial Services Authority, and vertically to similar mandates in Singapore and other countries. From this, we formulate recommendations to (A) better communicate SICGO’s limitations externally, and (B) align the organisational and accountability structure to execute SICGO internally. Fundamentally, this paper not only seeks to provide a one-off evaluation of SICGO but also demonstrate fresh methodologies for future regulatory studies by interacting with adjacent fields of research while being firmly anchored in legal analysis.
How to Cite:
Lim, E., (2024) “FSMA 2023 Secondary Competitiveness and Growth Objective: A Step Back or a Step Forward?”, Journal of Law and Jurisprudence 13(1), 109-141. doi: https://doi.org/10.14324/111.444.2052-1871.1937
Downloads:
Download PDF
View PDF