Thomas Donegan is a journalist who writes for JD Supra and has also been featured in Lexology. His articles primarily cover financial regulations and market developments, with a focus on the United Kingdom. Thomas provides insightful analysis and updates on topics such as benchmarking, bond markets, digital assets, and regulatory changes in the financial sector.
Preston is the artificial intelligence that powers the Intelligent Relations PR platform. Meet Preston
United Kingdom (National)
Not enough data
Not enough data
Thomas Donegan's focus is on finance and legal policy regulation, particularly regarding UK financial regulations, banking, securities, and regulatory frameworks. He covers government announcements extensively.
For effective outreach to Thomas, consider providing insights into the latest developments in UK financial regulations or changes in the regulatory framework for banking and securities. Sources with expertise in legal and compliance matters related to the finance industry would likely resonate well with him.
Given his coverage attributes' emphasis on government announcements and legal policy regulation, he may welcome pitches that offer analysis of recently implemented or proposed regulations within the UK's financial sector.
This information evolves through artificial intelligence and human feedback. Improve this profile .
By: Sandy Collins, Thomas Donegan
The U.K. Financial Conduct Authority has opened a consultation setting out proposals for allowing firms to use joint (bundled) payments for third-party research and execution services, subject to certain requirements being met. The proposals follow the recommendations made by the U.K. Investment Research Review
By: Thomas Donegan, Chloe Barrowman
On February 27, 2024, the U.K. Financial Conduct Authority published a consultation on revisions to its Enforcement Guide, setting out proposals which...
By: Chloe Barrowman, Thomas Donegan
On March 21, 2024, HM Treasury published a paper on the next phase of its Smarter Financial Services Regulatory Framework, the U.K.'s program of...
By: Chloe Barrowman, Thomas Donegan
On March 28, 2024, the Bank of England published a consultation paper on revisions to its Statement of Policy and Procedure on its approach to enforcement, published in January 2024, to reflect enhancements to the BoE's enforcement powers granted under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2023. The CP proposes that the SoP should describe:
On April 3, 2024, the Bank of England and U.K. Financial Conduct Authority published a joint consultation paper on proposed rules for the incoming digital securities sandbox. The Financial Services and Markets Act 2023 (discussed in our client note, A Boost for UK Financial Services
By: Barnabas Reynolds, Thomas Donegan, Sandy Collins
This client memorandum concerns a highly technical point of considerable practical importance. It challenges aspects of the received...
From 1 August 2024, the UK changed its rules on how payments are made for investment research. UK firms may now use bundled payments for third-party...
By: Laurie-Anne Ancenys, Karishma Brahmbhatt, Adam Chernichaw, Helen Christakos, Sandy Collins, Thomas Donegan, Jane Finlayson-Brown, Catharina Glugla, Brice Henry, Eugene Ingoglia, Zoë Jensen, Emma Keeling, Lena Kiely, Joshua Kim, Laetitia Nappert-Rosales
Many governments are grappling with the question of how to regulate artificial intelligence to ensure it is adopted safely and used responsibly without hampering innovation. Governments have generally indicated similar interests in mitigating AI’s potential harmful effects—for example, ensuring that the use of AI by businesses is safe and transparent. However, the approach to achieving those aims differs radically. The EU has the most comprehensive AI-specific legislation – the AI Act. On the other hand, the U.S. and U.K. have taken a different approach to the regulation and enforcement of AI which is based on the common law method of addressing risks as they are identified.
By: Laurie-Anne Ancenys, Karishma Brahmbhatt, Adam Chernichaw, Helen Christakos, Sandy Collins, Thomas Donegan, Jane Finlayson-Brown, Catharina Glugla, Brice Henry, Eugene Ingoglia, Zoë Jensen, Lena Kiely, Joshua Kim, Laetitia Nappert-Rosales, Daren Orzechow
Rapid and accelerating developments in artificial intelligence have prompted governments around the world to consider how AI should be regulated and used responsibly by businesses, without stifling innovation.
By: Laurie-Anne Ancenys, Karishma Brahmbhatt, Adam Chernichaw, Helen Christakos, Sandy Collins, Thomas Donegan, Jane Finlayson-Brown, Catharina Glugla, Brice Henry, Eugene Ingoglia, Zoë Jensen, Emma Keeling, Lena Kiely, Joshua Kim, Mark Lanpher, Laetitia Nap
This is the final note in a three-part series on the regulation of artificial intelligence in the financial services sector in the United States, the European Union and the United Kingdom. Our first note, available here, provided a comparative assessment of the approach that the three jurisdictions are taking to regulating the use of AI in the financial services sector and presented an action plan for firms to consider. The second note, available here, examined the scope and extraterritorial application of AI laws and regulation, data governance issues and related third-party service provider regimes. This final note assesses the current approach to enforcement, remedies and liability in each jurisdiction.
(833) 317-6278 