Research on the Legal Coordination Dilemmas and Countermeasures in Cross-Border Securities Trading Regulatory Cooperation: A Case Study of the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area

Main Article Content

Zhangxiao Bao
Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, 150006, China

DOI: https://doi.org/10.70267/icbms.2601.140146

Keywords

cross-border securities transactions, financial regulation, legal coordination, Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao greater bay area

Abstract

The rapid flow of global capital and the widespread adoption of digital trading infrastructure have driven exponential growth in the scale of cross-border securities transactions. However, three major legal conflicts-fragmentation of sovereign regulatory authority, misalignment of data export standards, and asymmetry of enforcement tools-have led to difficulties in accessing audit working papers, gaps in investor remedies, and frequent occurrences of regulatory arbitrage. Using the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area as a case study, this article applies comparative law and game theory methods to systematically examine the root causes of obstacles in legal coordination for cross-border securities transactions. It proposes progressive institutional solutions, including a negative list mechanism for data exports, model rules for cross-border product sales, and the establishment of an Asian Securities Regulatory Court, offering a replicable and scalable Chinese pathway from regional experimentation to global rule output.

Abstract 20 | PDF Downloads 17

References

  • [1] People’s Bank of China. China Regional Financial Operation Report. Available from: https://www.pbc.gov.cn/zhengcehuobisi/125207/125227/125960/126049/5415491/73300d7391b844e5958cfd6fd8d18f59/index.html (accessed 24 February 2026).
  • [2] Fang, H. X. Strengthening the legal foundation for cross-border regulatory cooperation and effectively preventing systemic risks. Available from: https://news.cnstock.com/news,yw-201806-4234237.htm (accessed 25 February 2026).
  • [3] Raustiala, K. The architecture of international cooperation: Transgovernmental networks and the future of international law. Virginia Journal of International Law. 2002, 43(1), pp. 1-42. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.333381.
  • [4] Brummer, C. Post-American securities regulation. California Law Review. 2010, 98, pp. 327-389.
  • [5] IOSCO. Principles Regarding Cross-Border Supervisory Cooperation. Madrid: IOSCO, 2010.
  • [6] Li, r. z. and zhou, y. On the joint meeting mechanism for the supervision of cross-border financial groups. Financial Regulation Research. 2012(2), pp. 103-114. https://doi.org/10.13490/j.cnki.frr.2012.02.008.
  • [7] Liao, F. Cross-border financial regulation cooperation: Current situation, problems and legal solution. Political Science and Law. 2018(12), pp. 2-11. https://doi.org/10.15984/j.cnki.1005-9512.2018.12.001.
  • [8] Sun, J. Q. and Zhang, N. Cross-border capital flow regulation:from the perspective of the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao greater bay area. International Economics and Trade Research. 2025, 41(6), pp. 93-106. https://doi.org/10.13687/j.cnki.gjjmts.2025.06.003.
  • [9] Mu, F. Chinese companies listed in the US face the strictest regulations in history. How do these companies that rushed to list in the US threaten national security? China Economic Weekly. 2021(13), pp. 66-68.
  • [10] Zhang, B. Conflict or misalignment? : Resolving the dilemma of securities enforcement conflicts between China and the united states. Financial Law Forum. 2023(02), pp. 151-167.
  • [11] Li, W. W., Han, H. L. and Chen, H. W. Cross border accounting and audit supervision conflict between China and the united states: Two crises, deep-rooted logic, and paths to reconciliation. Journal of Audit & Economics. 2025, 40(02), pp. 17-26. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1004-4833.2025.02.003.
  • [12] EU. Directive 2014/65/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 on Markets in Financial Instruments and Amending Directive 2002/92/EC and Directive 2011/61/EU. Available from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32014L0065 (accessed 25 February 2026).
  • [13] Du, T. The Extraterritorial Jurisdiction of the American Securities Law: The End or the Revival?--Morrison v. National Australia Bank and the Dodd-Frank Act. Journal of International Economic Law. 2012, 19(04), pp. 188-219.
  • [14] Zhang, M. Extraterritorial jurisdiction standards and applicable conditions of China’s Securities Law. Financial Law Forum. 2020(4), pp. 40-58.
  • [15] Liu, F. Y. and Qiu, N. A study of the cross-border supervision of securities markets: From the perspective of EMMoU. Financial Regulation Research. 2019(12), pp. 100-111. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.2095-3291.2019.12.007.
  • [16] Li, H. L. [Focusing on the 5th Anniversary of the Free Trade Zone Construction] The Regional Layout for Opening Up to the Outside World Continues to Optimize. Available from: http://www.ce.cn/xwzx/gnsz/gdxw/201811/23/t20181123_30849435.shtml?spm=C73544894212.P59511941341.0.0 (accessed 25 February 2026).

Article Sidebar

PDF
Published
Mar 24, 2026
Conference Proceedings Volume
Vol. 13 (2026): Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Business, Management and Sustainability (ICBMS 2026)
Section
Articles
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

Bao, Zhangxiao. “Research on the Legal Coordination Dilemmas and Countermeasures in Cross-Border Securities Trading Regulatory Cooperation: A Case Study of the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area”. Exploring Science Academic Conference Series, vol. 13, Mar. 2026, pp. 140-6, https://doi.org/10.70267/icbms.2601.140146.