Crossref DOIMemberCiteFactoropen accessissn
SJIF Impact Factor 8.659 | ISSN: 2582-3930
IJSREM Logo

International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management

(Gateway to Global Scholars - An International, Scholarly, Multi-Disciplinary, Open Access Journal)

Peer-Reviewed Journal Designed to Meet UGC's Quality Parameters

HomeCurrent IssuePast IssuesPay OnlineConferencesEditorial BoardAbout UsContact Us
IJSREM

Loading article...

Follow Us

  • Google Scholar
  • ResearchGate
  • Academia.edu
  • Mendeley
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Instagram

Journal Policies

  • Peer Review Policy
  • Publication Ethics
  • Copyright Infringement
  • Refund & Cancellation Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy

Journal Identifiers & Licenses

  • ISSN Verified: 2582-3930ISSN Verified: 2582-3930
  • Crossref DOI: 10.55041Crossref DOI: 10.55041
  • SJIF Ranking: 08.659SJIF Ranking: 08.659
  • Licensed under CC BY 4.0Licensed under CC BY 4.0
  • ISO Certification: 9001:2015ISO Certification: 9001:2015
  • Indexed & Cited In: Google ScholarIndexed & Cited In: Google Scholar

Contact Us

International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management (IJSREM)

#62/1, New No 7, 1st Cross, 2nd Main, Ganganagar, R T Nagar, Bangalore North, Bangalore, Karnataka, India – 560032
[email protected]+91 93911 67991
logos
logos
Working Hours

Mon – Sat: 9:00 AM – 6:00 PM

Sunday: 10:00 AM – 4:00 PM

+91 93911 67991

© 2026 IJSREM – International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management. This is an open-access journal. Articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

DisclaimerPrivacy PolicyTerms and Conditions
ArticlePeer ReviewedOpen AccessPlagiarism Passed
Paper ID:IJSREM68402

Cross-Border Insider Trading: Challenges In International Securities Regulation And Enforcement

Stream/Area:

-

Subject:

-

Paper ID:

IJSREM68402

Volume:

10 |

10 |

Oct 2026

Pages:

1-6

Publication Frequency:

Monthly (12 issues per year)

DOI
Digital Object Identifier
Not assigned

License:International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management follows the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) License, allowing free use and distribution with proper attribution.

Share this article:

Authors

Gowri Sankar V

Gowri Sankar V

SRM School of Law

SRM University

Download Author Certificate

Author Services & Downloads

Full ArticlesAcceptance Certificate

Abstract

Insider trading has become difficult to police inside any single legal system because the people who hold confidential information, the companies that issue securities and the markets that trade them are frequently located in different countries. This paper examines how that mismatch weakens securities regulation and enforcement. Using a doctrinal and comparative method, it studies the insider trading frameworks of the United States, the European Union and India, and then reviews the cooperative machinery, chiefly the IOSCO Multilateral Memorandum of Understanding, through which regulators try to bridge national boundaries. The analysis identifies six recurring obstacles: overlapping and uncertain jurisdiction, divergent legal definitions of the offence, difficulty in obtaining evidence located abroad, opaque trading structures, the risk of duplicate punishment across states, and unequal enforcement capacity. Short case studies show how these obstacles appear in practice. The paper argues that the weakest point is not the absence of prohibitions but the gap between domestic rules and the tools available to enforce them across borders, and it proposes a set of targeted reforms covering convergent definitions, stronger information-sharing powers, protocols for allocating cases between states, and capacity building for smaller regulators.

KEYWORDS

Cross-border enforcement Extraterritorial jurisdiction Insider trading IOSCO MMoU Market abuse regulation SEBI Securities regulation.

Cite This Article

Gowri Sankar V, "Cross-Border Insider Trading: Challenges In International Securities Regulation And Enforcement," International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management, vol. 10, no. 10, pp. 1-6, Oct 2026.

Full Article/Conclusion

The central difficulty in policing cross-border insider trading is a structural one: markets and information move across borders, while investigative powers and sanctions stop at them. The three systems examined here all prohibit the conduct, but they do so on different legal theories, claim reach in different ways, and depend on foreign partners for much of the evidence that decides a case. The existing cooperation framework has narrowed the gap, yet it remains a framework of expectations rather than obligations. This does not call for a single global insider trading code, which would be politically unrealistic. A more achievable path combines convergence on core concepts, stronger and better-protected information-sharing, some agreed method for deciding who proceeds, and support for regulators with the least capacity. Future work could test these ideas with enforcement data, examine additional jurisdictions such as the United Kingdom and Singapore, and study how new asset classes, including crypto-assets traded across multiple platforms, strain the same arrangements.

References

[1]              . Manne, Insider Trading and the Stock Market. New York, NY, USA: Free Press, 1966. [2]              U. Bhattacharya and H. Daouk, “The world price of insider trading,” J. Finance, vol. 57, no. 1, pp. 75–108, Feb. 2002. [3]              Chiarella v. United States, 445 U.S. 222 (1980). [4]              SEC v. Texas Gulf Sulphur Co., 401 F.2d 833 (2d Cir. 1968) (en banc). [5]              Dirks v. SEC, 463 U.S. 646 (1983). [6]              United States v. Newman, 773 F.3d 438 (2d Cir. 2014). [7]              Salman v. United States, 580 U.S. 39 (2016). [8]              United States v. O’Hagan, 521 U.S. 642 (1997). [9]              SEC v. Dorozhko, 574 F.3d 42 (2d Cir. 2009). [10]            Securities Exchange Act of 1934, §§ 10(b), 21A, 32(a), 15 U.S.C. §§ 78j(b), 78u-1, 78ff; SEC Rules 10b-5 and 10b5-1, 17 C.F.R. §§ 240.10b-5, 240.10b5-1.

Editorial & Review Transparency

Publication Date

10/27/2026

Peer Review Type

Double-Blind Peer Review

Review Rounds: 2

Documents

Review Report (Confidential)
Copyright Form (Office)

Article Metrics & Impact

Article Views

0

Total views since publication

PDF Downloads

3

Total downloads since publication

Geographic Reach

5

Indexing, Archiving & Preservation

Google Scholar
Academia
ResearchGate
Crossref
SSRN
Semantic Scholar
Thomson Reuters
WorldCat
Mendeley
OpenAlex
EBSCO
Zenodo

Digital Preservation: This article is permanently archived on Zenodo and complies with all data preservation standards across major indexing platforms.

Ethics, Compliance & Transparency

Plagiarism Screening

This manuscript has been checked for plagiarism using TurnitinPlagiarismChecker software.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest related to this research work.

Funding Information

No funding information available for this research.

Similar & Recommended Articles

Similar Articles by Topic

Related research in the same subject area

Loading similar articles...