http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/06/financial-regulation-et-idUSL2E8D68E220120206
I thought the headline in the Reuters article I linked to below was good for a blog post heading. A couple of quotes:
The United States is coming to be seen as a global threat, acting unilaterally with aggressive new market rules that critics say will hurt U.S. firms, foreign banks, and international markets in one swoop.
The new buzzword in the financial world is “extraterritoriality”, or ET. The idea that a government can exercise its authority beyond its borders.
A quote from an unnamed Foreign Government official:
Extraterritorial stuff is causing trouble, slowing things down. Many are now waking up to the Volcker rule but it would need Congress to change legislation,” said an international regulatory official, who could not speak on the record due to political sensitivities.
I wish more foreign officials WOULD speak on the record political sensitivities be dammed.
In the text of article US Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner indicted perhaps the US was backing down. Or perhaps not (emphasis mine):
He WARNED other nations not to adopt rules that are SOFTER in order to POACH business from U.S. markets, while also saying regulators need to figure out a sensible way to apply disjointed rules.
While I don’t take a particular interest in the political views of US President Barack Obama one way or the other it is becoming quite clear to me that he has a personal mission to eliminate the “Race to Bottom” as some call it other countries sovereignty be dammed.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/06/financial-regulation-et-idUSL2E8D68E220120206
The twitter link doesn’t work for me. Is that because you have to be signed on to twitter for it to work?
Wrong link. I put the right one at both the top and the bottom.
Interesting NYT opinion on the waning global influence of the US Constitution with a nice plug for Canada.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/07/us/we-the-people-loses-appeal-with-people-around-the-world.html?hp
US Supreme Court Justice Ginsberg on Canada’s Bill of rights
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KuMXqcK4Nrg&w=560&h=315%5D
KalC
I am not sure if your a Canadian or not but interestingly enough Canada has “two” Bill of Rights. The most prominent and well known one is the 1982 Charter of Rights and Freedoms which per its constitutional status is binding on the Federal, Provincial, and Municipal levels of government. The less prominent one is the 1960 Canadian Bill of Rights which is quasi constitution and only applies to the Federal Governmnet and Federal Statutes.
Right you are. I think Justice Ginsburg (with a u not an e) was referring to the 1982 Charter.
@KalC
The 1960s one is still important though as it has in fact “additional” rights such as protection of private property that the 1982 does not(Only applying to Federal Government of Canada though).
Pingback: Politicians all around the world discuss FATCA | The Isaac Brock Society
Pingback: Politicians all around the world discuss FATCA | The Isaac Brock Society
The Lengthening Arm of Uncle Sam’s ‘Pirate’ Justice
Myles Peterson
May 6, 2012
………..”The legal reach of the US government has lengthened considerably over the past decade. Under the banner of fighting terrorism, law after law has been introduced, up to and including the creation of the Department of Homeland Security itself. Allies of the United States have signed up to bi-lateral and multi-lateral treaties giving that country enormous power over non-US citizens…………
The perceived imbalance of many of these arrangements is starting to draw official protests. “………