• World
    • Africa
    • Asia Pacific
    • Central & South Asia
    • Europe
    • Latin America & Caribbean
    • Middle East & North Africa
    • North America
  • Coronavirus
  • Politics
    • US Election
    • US politics
    • Joe Biden
    • Brexit
    • European Union
    • India
    • Arab world
  • Economics
    • Finance
    • Eurozone
    • International Trade
  • Business
    • Entrepreneurship
    • Startups
    • Technology
  • Culture
    • Entertainment
    • Music
    • Film
    • Books
    • Travel
  • Environment
    • Climate change
    • Smart cities
    • Green Economy
  • Global Change
    • Education
    • Refugee Crisis
    • International Aid
    • Human Rights
  • International Security
    • ISIS
    • War on Terror
    • North Korea
    • Nuclear Weapons
  • Science
    • Health
  • 360 °
  • The Interview
  • In-Depth
  • Insight
  • Quick Read
  • Video
  • Podcasts
  • Interactive
  • My Voice
  • About
  • FO Store
Sections
  • World
  • Coronavirus
  • Politics
  • Economics
  • Business
  • Culture
  • Sign Up
  • Login
  • Publish

Make Sense of the world

Unique insight from 2,000+ contributors in 80+ Countries

Close

With Brexit, London Would Lose Business as a Global Financial Center

By Nicolas Veron • Jun 23, 2016
Downing Street

© Shutterstock

London could lose its status of a global financial hub if there is a Brexit. Who would win the business that the British capital would lose?

There are multiple sub-scenarios in the aftermath of a Leave vote on June 23. In almost all of them, however, London would lose business as a global financial center. Part of its unmatched position as a hub for international financial services is linked to its membership of the European Union (EU) and corresponding access to the EU internal market. Non-European banks, especially American ones, use London as a beachhead into the single market, and many euro-area banks centralize their EU wholesale markets activities there.

The EU “passport” concept of mutual recognition among supervisory authorities works smoothly for investment banking activities. The EU framework provides strong legal protection against regulatory fiat, as was illustrated when the European Court of Justice in March 2015 rejected the European Central Bank’s “location policy,” intended to force clearing houses to move their euro-denominated operations from London to the euro area. The access and protections would disappear if the United Kingdom was to withdraw from the internal market.

Most non-UK-headquartered large financial institutions are actively working on post-referendum plans, and take the possibility of a Leave vote seriously. For understandable reasons, they do not communicate about this planning work and its conclusions. But early indications suggest that their moves following a Leave vote could be quick and significant, given the likelihood that the United Kingdom would enter a prolonged period of high uncertainty. An order of magnitude of one-third of activity potentially relocated outside of the United Kingdom does not appear far-fetched.

The next obvious question is about who would win the business that London would lose. Inside the European Union, some have expectations that, since Germany and France would be the largest remaining countries, Frankfurt and Paris would be best placed to gain.

But this ignores the incentives for financial firms to go to the most finance-friendly places, and there are a number of them in Europe. A rule of thumb of finance-friendliness is provided by the European Commission’s ill-starred proposal of a Financial Transaction Tax (FTT), whose adoption only a minority of EU member states are considering. FTT doubters such as Denmark, Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Sweden are more likely to attract business from London than FTT supporters, including France, Germany or, for that matter, Belgium.

But even bigger transfers could happen outside the EU, and specifically to the United States. On almost any measure, London and New York are by far the world’s two largest financial centers. US authorities have acknowledged London as a preferred entry point into the European Union for American financial firms, and have built strong working relationships with UK financial regulators over the years. But once the bilateral link with London is no longer part of the larger relationship between the United States and the European Union, one can expect a more competitive stance to favor NewYork as the best place to do international financial business.

Even more difficult to assess, but arguably also even more substantial, is the opportunity cost of a Brexit. London would have a lot to gain from the continuation of EU financial integration. A Banking Union, even in its current halfway form, will lead to the opening of more financial business to cross-border competition across the EU, and so will any concrete moves in the direction of the European Commission’s vision of a Capital Markets Union. But if the UK is no longer in the EU, it will not be able to reap as much advantage from these future developments as it has in the past steps of EU integration.

*[This article was originally published by The Peterson Institute and Bruegel.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

Photo Credit: Drop of Light / Shutterstock.com


Fair Observer - World News, Politics, Economics, Business and CultureWe bring you perspectives from around the world. Help us to inform and educate. Your donation is tax-deductible. Join over 400 people to become a donor or you could choose to be a sponsor.

Share Story
Categories360° Analysis, Blog, Economics, Europe TagsBrexit, Britain, EU referendum, European Union, United Kingdom
Join our network of more than 2,000 contributors to publish your perspective, share your story and shape the global conversation. Become a Fair Observer and help us make sense of the world.

READ MORE IN THIS 360° SERIES

How a British Court Ruling Could Delay Brexit Negotiations
By KnowledgeWharton • Nov 12, 2016
Can Brexit Be Achieved With Minimal Damage?
By KnowledgeWharton • Oct 17, 2016
Brexit and Populism’s Verbal Judo
By Eliot Assoudeh • Sep 08, 2016
Pulling the UK Out of Europe is No Easy Task
By John Bruton • Sep 01, 2016
EU Challenges in Post-Brexit Period
By John Bruton • Aug 17, 2016
Brexit Brings Revolution to Britain
By Christina Dykes • Jul 20, 2016
Brexit Blues Set In After EU Referendum
By Michael Julien • Jul 19, 2016
Brexit Talks Could Run Till 2020
By John Bruton • Jul 11, 2016
From Brexit in the UK to Austerity in Spain
By Conn Hallinan • Jul 10, 2016
Brexit Party Over, Hangover Sets In
By John Feffer • Jul 01, 2016
First Steps for Post-Brexit Government
By John Bruton • Jun 29, 2016
Tell Me Again How Racism Played No Part in Brexit
By Natalie Pitimson • Jun 29, 2016
Why Brexit and the Success of Trump Should Not Surprise You
By Yasmeen Sami Alamiri & Ryan J. Suto • Jun 27, 2016
Why the British Said No to Europe
By John Pilger • Jun 27, 2016
Turkey’s EU Dream is Dead on Arrival
By Nathaniel Handy • Jun 26, 2016
Brexit and Trump Are For Baby Boomers, Not Millennials
By Vasundhara Saravade • Jun 26, 2016
The UK-EU Separation: How Fast Does it Happen?
By Nicolas Veron • Jun 25, 2016
Does the Brexit Vote Mark the End of Internationalism?
By John Feffer • Jun 23, 2016
Last Week Tonight With John Oliver: Brexit
By Fair Observer • Jun 21, 2016
Britain Should Stay in the European Union
By John Bruton • Jun 20, 2016
The Human Factor in the Politics of Fear
By Anna Pivovarchuk • Jun 19, 2016
To Brexit or Not to Brexit?
By Anna Pivovarchuk • Jun 16, 2016
What if the UK Makes a Brexit?
By Fair Observer • Jun 11, 2016
As Brexit Approaches, Europe’s Left is Divided
By Conn Hallinan • May 31, 2016
The Fuss About the UK Government’s EU Referendum Booklet
By Michael Julien • Apr 22, 2016
The Question of Sovereignty in the EU Referendum
By Michael Julien • Apr 02, 2016
Why a Brexit Could Sink the EU
By KnowledgeWharton • Mar 26, 2016
UK Security Would Benefit From Brexit
By Bruce Newsome • Mar 15, 2016
The Road to Brexit and What it Would Mean
By Douglas Webber & INSEAD Knowledge • Mar 07, 2016
UK Exit Affects All of European Union
By Maxime Larivé • Feb 24, 2016
Brexit is More Complicated Than You Think
By John Bruton • Jan 28, 2016

Post navigation

Previous PostPrevious The Cost of Escaping a Syrian Prison
Next PostNext Education Alone Cannot Eradicate Poverty
Subscribe
Register for $9.99 per month and become a member today.
Publish
Join our community of more than 2,500 contributors to publish your perspective, share your narrative and shape the global discourse.
Donate
We bring you perspectives from around the world. Help us to inform and educate. Your donation is tax-deductible.

Explore

  • About
  • Authors
  • FO Store
  • FAQs
  • Republish
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Contact

Regions

  • Africa
  • Asia Pacific
  • Central & South Asia
  • Europe
  • Latin America & Caribbean
  • Middle East & North Africa
  • North America

Topics

  • Politics
  • Economics
  • Business
  • Culture
  • Environment
  • Global Change
  • International Security
  • Science

Sections

  • 360°
  • The Interview
  • In-Depth
  • Insight
  • Quick Read
  • Video
  • Podcasts
  • Interactive
  • My Voice

Daily Dispatch


© Fair Observer All rights reserved
We Need Your Consent
We use cookies to give you the best possible experience. Learn more about how we use cookies or edit your cookie preferences. Privacy Policy. My Options I Accept
Privacy & Cookies Policy

Edit Cookie Preferences

The Fair Observer website uses digital cookies so it can collect statistics on how many visitors come to the site, what content is viewed and for how long, and the general location of the computer network of the visitor. These statistics are collected and processed using the Google Analytics service. Fair Observer uses these aggregate statistics from website visits to help improve the content of the website and to provide regular reports to our current and future donors and funding organizations. The type of digital cookie information collected during your visit and any derived data cannot be used or combined with other information to personally identify you. Fair Observer does not use personal data collected from its website for advertising purposes or to market to you.

As a convenience to you, Fair Observer provides buttons that link to popular social media sites, called social sharing buttons, to help you share Fair Observer content and your comments and opinions about it on these social media sites. These social sharing buttons are provided by and are part of these social media sites. They may collect and use personal data as described in their respective policies. Fair Observer does not receive personal data from your use of these social sharing buttons. It is not necessary that you use these buttons to read Fair Observer content or to share on social media.

 
Necessary
Always Enabled

These cookies essential for the website to function.

Analytics

These cookies track our website’s performance and also help us to continuously improve the experience we provide to you.

Performance
Uncategorized

This cookie consists of the word “yes” to enable us to remember your acceptance of the site cookie notification, and prevents it from displaying to you in future.

Preferences
Save & Accept