Their only objective is to maximize profits

The President of the influential European association of investment companies on the stock exchanges of derivatives (FOA), the British lawyer Anthony Belchambers, doesn't mince his words. The decision of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), Constable American places rate options and Futures (excluding shares), to define what is a foreign market soon creates serious uncertainties about the global regulatory framework. If the CFTC adopt an expansive definition of its field of competence, it could result in a war between regulators on both sides of the Atlantic. To the chagrin of transatlantic cluster projects.

What do you think of the consolidation projects to Euronext

It is hardly in my intention to support a combination or another. We are dealing with two different ways to address the issue. One, more political, favours a merger between Euronext and Deutsche Börse to build an integrated European market. The other, that of "equal marriage" with the New York Stock Exchange, might be preferable in commercial terms because it brings more volumes on the markets of the European Union. But that's the problem, the uncertainties currently created by the TCRC Editor's Note: the Constable of the American places for options and futures, excluding actions can really undermine the transatlantic grouping. If the two companies are to merge their platforms, could fall under the influence of American control. It depends on many of the definitions that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission will adopt to define what is a market or a U.S. contract. Seen from Europe, it is to create an entity with more liquidity, easier and cheaper access to contracts. From the American point of view, on the other hand, this project represents an opportunity to access a place "offshore" in derivatives, not subject to the regulation of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

The New York Stock Exchange and Euronext deny the existence of any regulatory problems.

Indeed, Euronext and Nyse have stated that the relevant European markets would not be monitored by us regulators. But this is still only a vow. It is not yet completed. If the CFTC adopt extended criteria of definition of a contract or an American Exchange, criteria which will be the subject of the hearing on 27 June, the promise of the New York Stock Exchange and Euronext will not be maintained. This is the real critical point of the merger. So far, between regulators in different countries, all went to the best of ways by agreements on contentious cases. If the situation changed in the wrong direction, it will certainly not help the current transatlantic transactions. One of the elements taken into account in the determination of the nationality of a place is the rental of his leadership. Thus, install New York headquarters of the holding company of Nyse Euronext head is an important factor. If the major decisions on Euronext.Liffe were to be taken in the United States, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission would certainly reflect. Take the example of ICE Futures, place of energy based in the British capital and regulated by the Financial Services Authority, but which belongs to the IntercontinentalExchange American. The London market itself directs its operations but strategic decisions are made in the United States. Since the launch in the City, in February, contract on quality oil WTI (the most liquid contract on black gold in the United States), the ICE Futures encounters difficulties. If the Nyse wants to extend the range of its products rated internationally, it could incur strong political pressure from the United States Congress and perhaps see them fall under the influence of the CFTC.

What would be the consequences of this scenario

If the CFTC was going in the direction that we fear, we attend retaliation on the part of European regulators. They may decide to apply the new rules in force in the United States to the European contracts listed on U.S. exchanges, for example entering side by the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME) contract. The ambitions of us markets to European places would be seriously frustrated. Their shareholders fight them by promoting clusters elsewhere than in Europe to escape the disputes for regulation. In General, it will become very difficult to assess international contracts. European places would not be able to list American contracts at attractive costs. A conflict between us and European regulators would be a bad thing for the markets, even though globalization requires the close collaboration between them and the exchange of information. But the worst is not safe. In this connection, I find very positive the position taken by the SEC Friday.

Do you have the support of the FOA

The future and Options Association (TFA), which I Chair, shares the objectives that inspire my action: having potential the more liquid markets, to access easy, cheap and with a simplified regulation. The American members of our Board of Directors support this vision because they are global players agnostic stance on national issues. Their only objective is to maximize profits. If the CFTC accepts, I will be on June 27 in the United States to defend our positions at the public hearing.