Propose a change

Investment Exchanges and Clearing Houses Act 2006

Write the words of this act the way you think they should read. Solon shows your change as a redline against the published text and pins it to that exact text, so it can never be applied to wording you did not see.

Change 1

What to do with it
As published

4 Consequential amendment of grounds for refusing recognition

In Part 18 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (recognised investment exchanges and clearing houses), after section 290 (recognition orders) insert— Refusal of recognition on ground of excessive regulatory provision 290A (1) The Authority must not make a recognition order if it appears to the Authority that an existing or proposed regulatory provision of the applicant in connection with— (a) the applicant's business as an investment exchange, or (b) the provision by the applicant of clearing services, imposes or will impose an excessive requirement on the persons affected (directly or indirectly) by it. (2) The reference in section 290(1) (making of recognition order) to satisfying the applicable recognition requirements shall be read accordingly. (3) Expressions used in subsection (1) above that are defined for the purposes of section 300A (power of Authority to disallow excessive regulatory provision) have the same meaning as in that section. (4) The provisions of section 300A(3) and (4) (determination whether regulatory provision excessive) apply for the purposes of this section as for the purposes of section 300A. (5) Section 298 has effect in relation to a decision under this section to refuse a recognition order— (a) as it has effect in relation to a decision to revoke such an order, and (b) as if references to a recognised body were references to the applicant. (6) This section does not apply to an application for recognition as an overseas investment exchange or overseas clearing house. .

Your change, as a redline

4 Consequential amendment of grounds for refusing recognition

In Part 18 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (recognised investment exchanges and clearing houses), after section 290 (recognition orders) insert— Refusal of recognition on ground of excessive regulatory provision 290A (1) The Authority must not make a recognition order if it appears to the Authority that an existing or proposed regulatory provision of the applicant in connection with— (a) the applicant's business as an investment exchange, or (b) the provision by the applicant of clearing services, imposes or will impose an excessive requirement on the persons affected (directly or indirectly) by it. (2) The reference in section 290(1) (making of recognition order) to satisfying the applicable recognition requirements shall be read accordingly. (3) Expressions used in subsection (1) above that are defined for the purposes of section 300A (power of Authority to disallow excessive regulatory provision) have the same meaning as in that section. (4) The provisions of section 300A(3) and (4) (determination whether regulatory provision excessive) apply for the purposes of this section as for the purposes of section 300A. (5) Section 298 has effect in relation to a decision under this section to refuse a recognition order— (a) as it has effect in relation to a decision to revoke such an order, and (b) as if references to a recognised body were references to the applicant. (6) This section does not apply to an application for recognition as an overseas investment exchange or overseas clearing house. .

One line that says what changes, such as "Halve the dog tax".

Who it helps, what it costs, what it fixes. It is what persuades people to support it.

A proposal here is not law. Support on Solon is evidence that people want the change; the official route says what it takes to make it law.

Sign in to file your proposal. What you have written stays on this page.

Sign in to file it

Think it through

Ask what your change would do, who would gain and who would bear a cost, and where something like it is already law. The assistant reads your draft as it stands, cites the law and the studies it finds, and takes no side. What you file stays yours.

Questions to start with
Think it through
Legal information from the published text, not advice for your case. Check the sources. Find a law · What the register holds