In the next week or so, the EU and U.K. are due to sign a Memorandum of Understanding on financial services and the future role of the City of London within Europe’s financial sector.
莎拉大厅是一位高级伙伴UK in a Changing Europe还有诺丁汉大学经济地理教授。在两部分系列中，她审查了伦敦作为金融中心的未来。今天，她讨论了这个城市在欧洲的角色，明天，这座城市的潜力欧盟以外的成长。
HALL: Going back to World War II, London has dominated Europe’s financial centers and has vied for the global top spot with New York. With Brexit, some market activity has clearly moved from London to Europe, such as share trading, and these moves will continue. Asset managers are setting up offices in the EU, for example, to be able to access the EU market.
But it looks increasingly likely that they are not all going to go to the same European financial center. London is losing business, but it’s losing it to a number of European cities, and because of that fragmentation effect within Europe, that means that, although London is smaller, it’s likely to still dominate.
While the U.K. was a EU member state, financial institutions in the city could “passport” from their U.K. base into the EU — they didn’t require additional regulatory clearances in the member state they wanted to sell into. So you could essentially run your European operations out of London.
The U.S., for example, has more equivalence decisions with the EU than the U.K. currently has, and Singapore does as well. So, equivalence is the part of the jigsaw that’s missing at the moment for the majority of the financial services sector in the U.K.
BRINK:How likely do you think it is for the City of London to get these equivalence deals?
HALL: If you’d asked me that question this time last year, I would have said that a trade deal would make equivalence decisions quite likely. But what’s happened in the past three months is that it’s become increasingly clear that, even though a trade deal was agreed upon, equivalence is looking less likely.
U.K.已经在许多领域授予欧盟的等价。它确实在去年11月。和理论上，鉴于UU.在欧盟单一市场，因此与欧盟有相同的监管制度，不应该有理由欧盟不授予等价。然而，欧盟金融服务专员的Mairead McGuinness非常清楚，欧盟不会去rush into equivalence decisions。
Equivalence Is Becoming Increasingly Politicized
Equivalence has become increasingly politicized, and the EU is looking closely for any signs of regulatory divergence from the U.K. And the potential for divergence is making them wary about granting equivalence.
There probably isn’t uniformity within the EU on building up its own financial services, therefore, for some member states, attracting financial services after Brexit would not be in their top five most important areas.
BRINK:What does passporting have that equivalence doesn’t?
HALL: It’s a good question, because although equivalence would be the mode of market access that the U.K. could use, it’s only granted in specific areas of financial services. So it relates to particular regulatory areas, like security settlement, for example. It’s not a blanket decision.
Also, it’s not permanent. So the EU is able to withdraw its equivalence decisions with 30 days notice. So, an interesting question is: How valuable is equivalence, given that it’s not the same as passporting? In some ways, equivalence can be thought of as a perishable good for financial services in the U.K.
By that, I mean that the longer it isn’t granted, and the more that firms plan their operations without equivalence, the less valuable an equivalence decision would be. Because it’s unlikely that they would start to unpick some of the changes that they’ve made to operate now, in the absence of equivalence.
BRINK:How serious do you think the EU is about wanting to build up its own financial services?
HALL: There probably isn’t uniformity within the EU on this. So for some member states, attracting financial services after Brexit would not be in their top five most important areas. Member states like Greece, for example, or Portugal, are not that focused on U.K. financial services.
But for other member states, there is a real appetite to do so. President Emmanuel Macron is definitely interested in the prospect of Paris being able to develop its financial services center.
BRINK:And what about the Germans?
HALL: For Germany, there’s a wider issue that relates to the state of capital markets in the EU. Germany is a quite heavily bank-based finance regime, as opposed to capital markets, which are more dominant in the U.K. And there’s been concern for a while in the EU about the under-use of capital markets and the lack of liquidity in European capital markets.
巴黎似乎试图推动自己成为富ll-service financial services center, and that’s a bit different to those other European centers.