Central Securities Depositories and Geopolitical Risks: Challenges for European Policy
Central Securities Depositories (CSDs) form the backbone of financial market infrastructure by registering securities, settling trades, distributing cash flows, and managing collateral. While often regarded as mere financial “plumbing,” they in fact underpin strategic objectives such as advancing the Savings and Investment Union, curbing tax evasion, and reinforcing Europe’s geopolitical stance.
The academic and policy debate on CSDs is fragmented across three strands of literature that rarely intersect. From a regulatory perspective, concerns focus on the persistent fragmentation of the EU CSD market. From a political economy perspective, omnibus accounts and opaque custody chains are criticized for facilitating tax evasion. From a geopolitical perspective, Euroclear – the EU’s largest International CSD – has been thrust into the spotlight for its central role in immobilizing and freezing Russian assets after the 2022 invasion of Ukraine. This Paper brings these three strands of literature together to identify and analyze the key challenges facing European policymakers.
Olena Havrylchyk is Professor of Economics at the University Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, where she is the founding Director of the Master 2 Finance, Technology & Data. Her research focuses on the economics of banking, the role of technology in financial intermediation, and sustainable finance.
Available in:
ISBN / ISSN
Share
Download the full analysis
This page contains only a summary of our work. If you would like to have access to all the information from our research on the subject, you can download the full version in PDF format.
Central Securities Depositories and Geopolitical Risks: Challenges for European Policy
Author(s)
Related centers and programs
Discover our other research centers and programs
Geoeconomics and Geofinance Initiative
To analyze the impact of power rivalries and tensions on globalization, this initiative combines economic and political expertise. In the face of growing geopolitical risk, the goal is to decipher the dynamics of reconfiguration: protectionist pressures, sanctions, restrictions, industrial policies, and economic security concerns are redefining the rules of international trade. These tensions are also transforming international financial relations by undermining the foundations of trust and reshaping the global monetary system. They raise questions about the role of several key players: sovereign wealth funds, central banks, digital platforms, multilateral institutions, and financial infrastructure operators. In a context of profound disruption, simply refining existing approaches is no longer sufficient. The initiative is designed as a flexible model, drawing on diverse expertise to offer both broad overviews and targeted analyses. It also provides a platform for stakeholders and experts from various backgrounds to debate these issues freely.
Find out more
Discover all our analyses
Global imbalances, industrial policies, and the challenge of surging Chinese trade surpluses
The analysis of global imbalances faces a paradox: while the analytical focus has for decades been on the sustainability of current account deficits, out of concerns about their financial consequences, international political tensions stem mainly from enduring trade surpluses and their industrial impacts. Beyond President Trump’s outbursts, fears about the consequences of China’s trade surpluses are increasingly widespread.
Can Interdependence Persist in Tense Times? Insights from the 2nd Paris Geoeconomic Dialogue
Ifri’s 2nd Paris Geoeconomic Dialogue brought together in November 2025 experts, academics, and decision-makers around six themes relating to the prospects for interdependence in an increasingly tense international environment.
Central Banks: Challenges and Tools in Geopolitical Rivalries
Central banks have become major strategic players in international economic balances. Faced with systemic crises (2008, Covid-19), the major central banks have developed unprecedented coordination of their interventions, fostering the emergence of the “Jackson Hole consensus.”
New Cold War? What New Cold War? Confronting the Geoeconomic Fragmentation Narrative with the Data
It has become widely accepted that the world economy should be seen as increasingly shaped by forces of fragmentation, resulting from geopolitical tensions. This article takes another look at this narrative, using international trade data. While an aggregate analysis is consistent with a new Cold War narrative, whereby international trade is increasingly seen as split into two blocs, this is only a mix of very different outcomes. Far from being a widespread trend, geoeconomic fragmentation of trade flows is only significant in “hotspots”: Russia's foreign trade and China-US bilateral exchanges, and the impact is massive in these cases. Outside these “hotspots”, there is no tangible sign that geopolitical tensions have been shaping international trade patterns in terms of blocs, nor is there any hint of a trend toward nearshoring – to the contrary, in fact.