Thus the U.S. and EU are working hand in hand to impose a global agreement on liberalization of national financial services markets.

World trade amounts to 13 billion euros a year, but this enormous figure is much lower than the volume of currency transactions, which reached 52 trillion in non-regulated markets, seven trillion in regulated markets. Trading of financial products linked to currency in London alone - 20 trillion - surpasses the value of all visible world trade. The total in non-regulated markets of derivatives (currency, interest rates, raw material futures, stock…) exceeds 500 trillion euros a year, and 50 trillion in regulated markets. Traded on global markets annually are stocks, bonds and commercial agreements worth some 65 trillion euros, and insurance policies covering loans in case of default valued at another 15 trillion. Even though the rate of profit may be low, given the volume of transactions, the total value of earnings gained in global financial markets easily surpasses the value of all world trade. In Brussels alone, finance capital has a regiment of 1,700 lobbyists and spends more than 120 million euros annually on lobbying. By way of comparison, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) directs 20 million euros a year toward supervision of the financial system. The principal objective of these lobbyists is to prevent the financial crisis from leading to the adoption of policies to supervise and regulate the financial market, which would put their lucrative business at risk. These agents control all of the European Union’s financial supervision bodies, and the correlation of political forces has allowed these representatives of finance capital to become the Commission’s principal spokespersons, to such an extent that policies advanced by Brussels reflect these interests and not those of the people. Although financial liberalization has been a weapon employed by the United States - to compensate for the deterioration of its productive and commercial power with financial power - large French and German banks (Deutsche Bank, BNP Paribas, Crédite Agricole, Société Générale…) also control a significant portion of the world financial market. The U.S. and EU want to preserve some of the specifics of their respective markets, thus, during negotiations on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), the U.S. refused to discuss the subject of financial regulation, despite European insistence. In March, the UE drafted a proposal for a common regulatory regimen. In an attempt to influence the intransigent U.S. position, European commissioner Michel Barnier traveled to Washington to reaffirm the desire of European leaders to keep the United States as its preferred partner in this area, despite differing opinions with regards to the regulation and functioning of derivative markets on the two sides of the North Atlantic. (In Europe, everything transpires through banks, while in the U.S. there are powerful financial markets outside of the banking system.) Nevertheless, both parties agree that they must come to an agreement to guarantee control over the financial market which is intent upon asserting its power on a world scale. Isolated disagreements, reflecting aspects of inter-imperialist rivalries, are resolved in agreements based on the common goal of imposing a neo-liberal financial model on the rest of the world - be it a bank version, or an investment fund version After the failure of the World Trade Organization to reach an agreement on liberalization of financial services, the United States and EU initiated bilateral negotiations on a Trade In Services Agreement, TISA, with the participation of nations subordinated to the U.S. in the Americas and Asia. The objective is to impose the model in these countries and regions where there is less resistance than in those with more self-directed models, such as China, India, Russia or the ALBA countries. Thus the U.S. and EU are working hand in hand to impose a global agreement on liberalization of national financial services markets, just as was reflected in a recently revealed document from the month of April in which the EU demands no protective regulatory measures as it did during TTIP negotiations. On the contrary, the document is a canto to the broadest liberalization, directed toward facilitating the work of financiers in dominant countries, which don't even have a branch office in a given destination country, but can offer there a full range of services such as insurance, derivatives, investment funds, etc. Moreover, the document includes a series of articles denying countries which adhere to the proposal the option of modifying the regulatory framework, if this would affect foreign financial entities operating in this market. The secretism with which these negotiations are proceeding, which only make the news when documents are leaked, reflect the anti-popular nature of the plan and its imperialist objective of capturing national surplus value via global financial instruments. It is puzzling that European negotiators inconsistently accept a global pact which has as its single principle unencumbered access to national financial markets, when they have insisted on the importance of regulation during previous talks with the United States. Finance capital knows how to play its cards, and is capable of skirting legal limitations established in other frameworks, and in the end, impose its own rules. Much is at stake in this battle, the viability and sovereignty of nations. (Mundo Obrero)