Impact of Regulatory Changes on The Slovenian Capital Market Before and After The 2007 Crisis

Mednarodna finančna kriza, ki je zamajala vsa svetovna gospodarstva, in do katere je prišlo ravno zaradi silovite rasti in razvoja vseh segmentov finančnega sistema v zadnjih desetih letih, je pokazala na prepočasno sledenje razvoju finančne dejavnosti, in s tem kopičenja prekomernega tveganja v finančnem sistemu, kar je tudi glavni razlog, da tega niso preprečile institucije, ki so zadolžene za spremljanje finančne stabilnosti. Zaradi pojava negativnih esternalij ob propadu oziroma nedelovanju finančnega sistema, se je pokazala potreba po dodatni regulaciji nereguliranih oz. nezadostno reguliranih področij finančnega trga, česar se je Evropska komisija lotila z doslednim izvajanjem Akcijskega načrta finančnih storitev (angl. Financial Services Action Plan, v nadaljevanju FSAP). Posledično je to za Slovenijo, kot članico EU, pomenilo veliko na novo sprejete oziroma spremenjene regulative na področju kapitalskih trgov. Kljub temu, da Slovenija spada med razvite države, tega nikakor ne moramo trditi za slovenski kapitalski trg. Zaradi svoje majhnosti in zgodnje faze razvoja, še nima tako pomembne vloge v finančnem sistemu, kot bi jo moral imeti, da bi ustrezno podpiral gospodarski razvoj Slovenije. Ker so do finančne krize slovenska podjetja kapital, potreben za razvoj, pridobivala izključno preko bančnega zadolževanja, je likvidnostna kriza bank pokazala na potrebo, da je kapital v prihodnosti potrebno zbirati tudi na kapitalskem trgu. In ker je bila Evropska komisija nepopustljiva pri implementaciji in prenosu sprejetih direktiv, je to predstavljalo izziv tako za zakonodajalca, kot tudi za vse ustanove na kapitalskem trgu. Pogoj za pridobitev kapitala vlagateljev je namreč zaupanje v finančni sistem, kar pa je posredno povezano tudi z regulativo, veljavno na kapitalskem trgu. Zato je zakonodajalec v smislu večjega zaupanja, preglednosti in transparentnosti, v nacionalno zakonodajo pospešeno prenašal vse evropske pravne zahteve. Proučevanje vpliva spremenjenega regulatornega okvirja na domač trg kapitala pred in po nastopu finančne krize, je bistvo raziskovalnega problema, pri čemer je presoja vpliva omejena na določene izbrane dejavnike aktivnosti kapitalskega trga. Razumevanje sprememb v zakonodajnem okvirju zahteva poznavanje stanja pred nastalimi spremembami, zato je na kratko podana tudi zgodovina nastanka slovenskega finančnega trga in nastajanje zakonskih osnov za učinkovit kapitalski trg. Opravljene metode so v določenem delu potrdile obstoj povezanosti med spremembo regulative in izbranimi dejavniki aktivnosti kapitalskih trgov. Vendar je, zaradi specifičnega dogajanja na domačem kapitalskem trgu po finančni krizi, pri proučevanih dejavnikih aktivnosti kapitalskega trga v določenem delu težko ločiti, kateri del spremembe lahko pripišemo spremembam v regulatornem okvirju in kateri del gre pripisati posledicam finančne krize. Finančna kriza in sprememba regulatornega okvirja gresta namreč z roko v roki, saj je do sprememb na zakonodajnem področju prišlo predvsem z namenom preprečiti nastanek podobnih finančnih kriz v prihodnje, in se tako izogniti negativnim posledicam za celotno gospodarstvo države.The global financial crisis, which destabilised all global economies and was a result of the explosive growth and development of all financial system segments during the last decade, revealed a too slow keeping up-to-date with the development of the financial industry and the resulting accumulating excessive risk in the financial system. This is the main reason why the financial crisis was not prevented by institutions in charge of monitoring financial stability. The emergence of negative externalities upon the demise or inaction of the financial system revealed a need for additional regulation of non-regulated or insufficiently regulated areas of the financial market that the European Commission undertook by diligently implementing the Financial Services Action Plan (hereinafter referred to as “FSAP”). Consequently, this also led to newly adopted or amended capital market regulations for Slovenia as an EU Member State. Even though Slovenia is a developed country, the same cannot be said for its capital market. Because of its small size and the early development stage it is in, the Slovenian capital market does not play as important a role in the Slovenian financial system as it should to provide adequate support for the economic development of the country. As the capital required for development had been, prior to the financial crisis, obtained exclusively through loans from banks, the liquidity crisis showed that the capital would have to be collected in the capital market in the future as well. The fact that the European Commission was not at all lenient in the implementation and transposition of the adopted directives proved challenging for both the legislator and all institutions engaged in the capital market. Investors’ capital can namely only be obtained if they trust the financial system, which is indirectly linked to the capital market regulations in force. For this reason, the legislator quickly transposed all European legal requirements into Slovenian law in order to increase trust and transparency The examination of the impact of a changed regulatory framework on the national capital market before and after the outset of the financial crisis constitutes the core of the research problem, whereby the examination of the impact is limited to specific selected capital market activity factors. Understanding the changes in the legislation framework requires an understanding of the conditions before these changes were implemented. For this reason, a short history of the creation of the Slovenian financial market and the creation of legislative bases for an efficient capital market are included. The applied methods confirmed in a specific part a connection between the changes to regulations and selected capital market activity factors. But because of specific developments in the national capital market following the financial crisis, it was, in the examined capital market activity factors, hard to discern which part of the change can be ascribed to regulatory changes and which part can be ascribed to the impacts of the financial crisis. The financial crisis and changes to the regulatory framework namely go hand in hand, as legislative changes mainly sought to prevent the emergence of similar financial crises in the future and to thus prevent the negative impacts these would have on the entire national economy