|Table of Contents|

Analysis on the core rules of digital finance in the China-EU Comprehensive Agreement on Investment:based on the comparison with RCEP/CETA(PDF)

《长安大学学报（社科版）》[ISSN:1671-6248/CN:61-1391/C]

Issue:
2021年04期
Page:
67-75
Research Field:
国际经济与贸易
Publishing date:
2021-09-20

Info

Title:
Analysis on the core rules of digital finance in the China-EU Comprehensive Agreement on Investment:based on the comparison with RCEP/CETA
Author(s):
CHEN Huanqi;  HE Yuhang
(School of Economics and Trade, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies,Guangzhou 510006, Guangdong, China)
Keywords:
China-EU Comprehensive Agreement on Investment(CAI);  Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership(RCEP);  Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement(CETA);  digital finance;  new financial service;  market access;  positive list;  data supervision
PACS:
F744
DOI:
-
Abstract:
The China-EU Comprehensive Agreement on Investment(CAI)has brought many opportunities for China and EU's financial services investment. Focusing on the field of digital finance, this paper analyzes the changes in and future trends of the core CAI digital finance rules based on the comparison of CAI with the agreements signed between China, EU and third parties(including RCEP and CETA). This paper argues that the CAI has distinctive characteristics. First, the rules of CAI overlap with the committed content in the existing RTAs. Second, EU is cautious about the cross-border circulation of financial data, while China has made market access commitments for financial data circulation services based on a positive list. Third, the market access commitments have exceeded China's existing level of openness. Fourth, a more comprehensive and detailed financial security supervision content has been set up. There are still many reservations to the commitments of CAI. In the future construction process of the financial trade rules between China and EU, both parties should continue to negotiate and achieve consensus in terms of improving data supervision and maintaining personal privacy and security, and EU needs to further enhance the openness level of data circulation services and refine their "cautious measures" towards financial supervision.

References:

[1] EC.Commission publishes market access offers of the EU-China investment agreement[EB/OL].(2021-03-12)[2021-03-14].https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=2253.
[2]温树英.金融服务贸易国际法律规制的新发展与启示——以TPP/CPTPP和USMCA为视角[J].国际经济法学刊,2019(3):72-89.
[3]杨幸幸.新一代FTAs中金融服务贸易规则研究[D].北京:对外经济贸易大学,2018.
[4]James M.Rowshankish K K.Addressing the impact of data location regulation in financial servicest[EB/OL].(2015-05-01)[2021-03-14].https://www.cigionline.org/sites/default/files/no14_web_0.pdf.
[5]Cantore C M."Parallel convergences" in free trade agreements on financial services:select issues[C]//Hoffmann R T,Krajewski M.Coherence and Divergence in Services Trade Law.Cham:Springer,2020:193-218.
[6]韩立余.全球金融危机后国际贸易制度的完善与中国的对策[J].法学家,2010(2):148-157,180.
[7]王海峰,程维荣,孙大伟,等.国际贸易投资规则重构趋势下的上海地方法制建设[C]//上海市法学会.《上海法学研究》集刊(2019年第4卷).上海:上海市法学会,2019:206-225.
[8]马兰.中国金融业深化对外开放的负面清单机制研究——基于CPTPP和GATS的比较分析[J].金融监管研究,2019(9):99-114.
[9]王远志.我国银行金融数据跨境流动的法律规制[J].金融监管研究,2020(1):51-65.

Memo

Memo:
-
Last Update: 2021-09-20