Connect with us

Published

on

The European Union’s financial regulatory landscape is in flux with the introduction of multiple Anti-Money Laundering (AML) directives and related laws. These regulations, although designed to protect the financial system, come at a hidden, and sometimes steep, cost to consumers and financial institutions alike. It’s imperative to understand their wider implications, and to question whether the costs — both monetary and ethical — are simply too high.

To name just a few, the AML Directive 5, MiCa and the Transfer of Funds Regulation have reshaped the European financial framework. These laws mandate a rigorous monitoring system. However, the depth and breadth of these regulations are unparalleled in their scope. One cannot help but wonder if such comprehensive oversight is truly sustainable in the long run Banks, crypto asset managers, and even sports clubs now face complex due diligence processes, requiring them to verify customer identities, assets, and transaction patterns. With the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) Travel Rule and equivalents of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act in play, data collection, sharing, and monitoring become increasingly invasive. This begs the question: to what extent should the quest for security compromise the sanctity of personal data?

For many, this extensive scrutiny spells the end of financial privacy. While it’s undeniably crucial to deter criminal activities, these measures have begun encroaching upon personal freedoms. This isn’t just a minor inconvenience; it signifies a broader shift in the social contract of trust and transparency between citizens and institutions. Consider, for instance, the public accessibility mandate for beneficial owners of corporate entities. Suddenly, individuals and businesses lose control over their financial confidentiality, an unsettling consequence for a region that prides itself on individual rights and privacy. Such drastic changes necessitate a rigorous debate on the ethical implications involved.

Related: How will CBDCs be used for political oppression in your country?

The unforeseen costs of these regulations are burdensome. Financial institutions bear the brunt of technology upgrades, intensive man-hour investments and processes that have been revamped. This not only hampers their agility in a fast-evolving market but also deters potential new entrants from contributing to the financial ecosystem. Unfortunately, these overheads don’t vanish into thin air. They trickle down, affecting consumers in the form of higher fees and limited financial product offerings. In essence, the common man pays a tangible price for these regulatory shifts. Such economic ramifications must be weighed against the purported benefits of these regulations.

What’s even more concerning is that despite these hefty regulations, monumental regulatory failures persist. Big names like HSBC, Danske Bank, and FTX have been associated with regulatory controversies. It’s distressing to observe that even with such stringent rules, large-scale oversights still occur. The juxtaposition of strict regulations with glaring lapses presents a paradox that warrants thorough introspection. It poses a daunting challenge: if these behemoths, with their vast resources, falter, what hope do smaller entities have in navigating this regulatory maze? This naturally leads to skepticism. Are these regulations genuinely effective, or are they mere symbolic gestures, inconveniencing businesses and consumers alike without ensuring the intended foolproof security?

Related: Worldcoin is making reality look a lot like Black Mirror

Europe’s intentions are undoubtedly noble. In a world of increasing cyber threats and financial crimes, protective measures are essential. Yet, the path to safety shouldn’t undermine the values we hold dear. With every stride towards security, we must be cautious not to tread upon the tenets of personal liberty. But it’s equally crucial to ensure that these protective walls don’t become stifling cages. A fine balance must be struck between security and freedom, costs and benefits. As Europe pioneers this journey, it has the responsibility of crafting a model that other regions can emulate without reservations.

Europe’s evolving financial regulatory framework requires a closer examination. Not just from a legal or economic perspective, but from an ethical standpoint. The choices made today will shape the future of finance in the region, setting precedents that could reverberate globally. Personal privacy is a cherished right, and it’s imperative that it doesn’t become an inadvertent casualty in the quest for financial security. The ultimate challenge lies in harmonizing these conflicting demands, creating a landscape where safety doesn’t overshadow freedom. Only by achieving this equilibrium can Europe truly champion a regulatory model that stands the test of time.

George Basiladze is the co-founder and CEO of Wert, a fintech company dedicated to creating products that expand fiat payment access to crypto. He previously co-founded Cryptopay, a Bitcoin wallet. Before fintech, he held analyst roles at companies including NordWest Energy and Evli Bank PLC, accumulating years of experience in the financial and tech sectors. He graduated from the University of Exeter and the Higher School of Economics. Based in Estonia, he has consulted for firms navigating European AML regulations. (Disclaimer: George has direct involvement with fintech companies that could be influenced by European AML regulations.)

This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal or investment advice. The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.

Continue Reading

Politics

No 10 decline to say if Palestine will be recognised with Hamas in power

Published

on

By

No 10 decline to say if Palestine will be recognised with Hamas in power

The prime minister’s spokesman has refused eight times to confirm whether recognition of Palestine could go ahead if Hamas remain in power and the hostages are not released. 

Keir Starmer’s spokesman was questioned by journalists for the first time since the announcement last week that the UK will formally recognise the state in September – unless Israel meets certain conditions including abiding by a ceasefire and increasing aid.

The policy has been criticised by the families of UK hostages, campaigners and some Labour MPs, who argue it would reward Hamas and say it should be conditional on the release of the remaining hostages.

A senior Hamas politician, Ghazi Hamad, speaking to Al Jazeera, said at the weekend that major nations’ decision to recognise a Palestinian state “is one of the fruits of 7 October”.

Gaza latest: Trump pressed to recognise Palestinian state

The PM’s spokesman said on Monday: “The PM is clear that on 7 October, Hamas committed the worst act of terror in Israel’s history. That horror has continued since then.

“As the foreign secretary said over the weekend, Hamas are rightly pariahs who can have no role in Gaza’s future, there is a diplomatic consensus on that. Hamas must immediately release all hostages and have no role in the governance of Gaza.”

But asked whether removing Hamas from power and releasing hostages were conditions for statehood, he said a decision on recognition would be made at the UN General Assembly meeting in September, based on “an assessment of how far the parties have met the steps we have set out. No one side will have veto on recognition through their actions or inactions.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Up to 300 children could be evacuated from Gaza and given NHS treatment in the UK. The plans are reportedly set to be announced within weeks.

He added: “Our focus is on the immediate situation on the ground, getting more aid in to end the suffering in Gaza and supporting a ceasefire and a long-term peace for Israelis and Palestinians based a two-state solution.”

Starmer, who recalled his cabinet for an emergency meeting last week before setting out the new position, is following the lead of French president Emmanuel Macron, who first pledged to move toward recognising Palestinian statehood in April.

Read more:
New US plan for Gaza starting to emerge
Hamas responds to disarmament reports

Canada has also backed recognition if conditions are met, including by the Palestinian Authority.

The prime minister had previously said he would recognise a state of Palestine as part of a contribution to a peace process.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Efforts to bring Gazan children to the UK for urgent medical treatment are set to be accelerated under new government plans.

In his announcement last Tuesday, he said: “We need to see at least 500 trucks entering Gaza every day. But ultimately, the only way to bring this humanitarian crisis to an end is through a long-term settlement.

“So we are supporting the US, Egyptian and Qatari efforts to secure a vital ceasefire. That ceasefire must be sustainable and it must lead to a wider peace plan, which we are developing with our international partners.

“I’ve always said we will recognise a Palestinian state as a contribution to a proper peace process, at the moment of maximum impact for the two-state solution. With that solution now under threat, this is the moment to act.”

Adam Rose, a lawyer acting for British families of hostages in Gaza, has said: “Why would Hamas agree to a ceasefire if it knew that to do so would make British recognition of Palestine less likely?”

Continue Reading

Politics

Coinbase turns lobbying efforts to UK in scathing op-ed

Published

on

By

Coinbase turns lobbying efforts to UK in scathing op-ed

Coinbase turns lobbying efforts to UK in scathing op-ed

Former UK Chancellor and current Coinbase adviser George Osborne says the UK is falling behind in the cryptocurrency market, particularly when it comes to stablecoins.

Continue Reading

Politics

Nigel Farage dared me to walk in London after 9pm: Here’s my response

Published

on

By

Nigel Farage dared me to walk in London after 9pm: Here's my response

At a press conference today in which Reform UK announced the Tory police and crime commissioner for Leicestershire was joining their ranks, as well as former prison governor Vanessa Frake, I asked Nigel Farage a simple question.

But his answer wasn’t what I expected.

I asked the Reform UK leader if the six-week campaign on law and order, with the tagline “Britain is Lawless”, was in fact project fear scaring people into voting for his party.

He utterly rejected that claim and responded to me saying: “No, they are afraid. They are afraid. I dare you, I dare you to walk through the West End of London after 9 o’clock of an evening wearing jewellery. You wouldn’t do it. You know that I’m right. You wouldn’t do it.”

I am not afraid to walk in the West End of London after 9pm wearing jewellery.

I have done it many times before and will continue to do so… but perhaps that is because I do not own a Rolex.

However, just because Farage is wrong on that point, doesn’t mean he isn’t tapping into other legitimate fears across the country.

More on Nigel Farage

Snatch theft does worry me, hence why I now have a phone case with a strap attached to it that I can put around my body.

And I worry about knife crime in my area and what the impact could be if I were to have children – on the weekend someone was stabbed to death a stone’s throw from my house.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Farage ‘not mincing his words’

However, if we look at the statistics, it is invariably a more nuanced picture than Farage or social media might have us believe.

According to police reports, thefts from a person in London are almost five times the national average, and they’ve been going up since the pandemic.

And the Office for National Statistics (ONS) also notes that thefts outside of the home, eg phone snatching, has increased.

However, possession of weapons has fallen in London by 29% over the last three years.

And according to the ONS, crime in England and Wales is 30% lower than in 2015, and 76% lower than 1995.

And it is a similar picture for violent crime.

In short, am I right to be more worried that snatch theft and knife crime in London is increasing? Yes, and no.

But Nigel Farage is tapping into voters’ emotions – their feelings that the country is broken. It’s a picture the Conservative Party helped to create and the Labour Party happily painted to great effect during the general election campaign of 2024.

And the more politicians of all colours tell voters that “the system is broken”, the more voters might start to believe them.

That is what Nigel Farage is banking on.

Continue Reading

Trending