IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/clh/resear/v12y2019i23.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Regulating Fintech In Canada And The United States: Comparison, Challenges And Opportunities

Author

Listed:
  • Ryan Clements

    (The School of Public Policy)

Abstract

The rise of fintech has attracted increased attention from investors, entrepreneurs, existing financial-sector participants and regulators. Fintech has many potential benefits and it could transform banking, lending, payments, investing and other financial services through the internet, smartphones, artificial intelligence, blockchain and cryptocurrencies, and many other current and future digital technologies. Such benefits include lower costs, an enhanced scope of products and services, and the possibility of reaching and offering previously underserved customers greater credit and financial services. Policy makers in Canada and the U.S. should encourage these positive developments, foster innovation and competition, and reduce barriers to entry, while ensuring adequate safeguards are established for the stability of the financial system and necessary consumer protections are in place.

Suggested Citation

  • Ryan Clements, 2019. "Regulating Fintech In Canada And The United States: Comparison, Challenges And Opportunities," SPP Research Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 12(23), January.
    • Handle: RePEc:clh:resear:v:12:y:2019:i:23
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.policyschool.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Fintech-Clements-final.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lawrie Savage, 2014. "From Trial to Triumph: How Canada's Past Financial Crises Helped Shape a Superior Regulatory System," SPP Research Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 7(15), May.
    2. Knight, Brian, 2017. "Federalism and Federalization on the Fintech Frontier," Working Papers 07324, George Mason University, Mercatus Center.
    3. Francesco D'Acunto & Nagpurnanand Prabhala & Alberto G. Rossi, 2018. "The Promises and Pitfalls of Robo-advising," CESifo Working Paper Series 6907, CESifo.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Douglas J. Cumming & Sofia Johan & Anshum Pant, 2019. "Regulation of the Crypto-Economy: Managing Risks, Challenges, and Regulatory Uncertainty," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-14, July.
    2. Fred Huibers, 2021. "Regulatory Response to the Rise of Fintech Credit in The Netherlands," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-12, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Miller, Thomas, 2019. "How Do Small-Dollar, Nonbank Loans Work?," Annals of Computational Economics, George Mason University, Mercatus Center, April.
    2. Gregor Dorfleitner & Lars Hornuf & Martina Weber, 2018. "Paralyzed by Shock: The Portfolio Formation Behavior of Peer-to-Business Lending Investors," CESifo Working Paper Series 7092, CESifo.
    3. Haitham Mohamed Elsaid, 2021. "A review of literature directions regarding the impact of fintech firms on the banking industry," Qualitative Research in Financial Markets, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 15(5), pages 693-711, October.
    4. Lars Hornuf & Milan F. Klus & Todor S. Lohwasser & Armin Schwienbacher, 2021. "How do banks interact with fintech startups?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 57(3), pages 1505-1526, October.
    5. Abayomi Oredegbe, 2020. "Canadian Banking Industry Profitability: Exploring the Relevance of Two Competing Hypotheses," International Journal of Economics and Finance, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(4), pages 1-67, April.
    6. Rudolf Kerschbamer & Daniel Neururer & Matthias Sutter, 2019. "Credence goods markets and the informational value of new media: A natural field experiment," Working Papers 2019-02, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:clh:resear:v:12:y:2019:i:23. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Bev Dahlby (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/spcalca.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.