What is an International Financial Center?

Imagine a special district within a city. It is home to the world’s largest banks, investment companies, insurance organizations and financial technology (fintech) firms. They are drawn there because the district offers rules that are familiar, clear and reliable: a legal environment aligned with international standards, an independent judiciary, tax incentives and an absence of bureaucratic barriers.

This model proved its worth in global practice in the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. Alongside historic financial capitals such as London and New York, a “new generation” of financial centers has emerged in recent decades. The most prominent examples include the Dubai International Financial Center (DIFC), Singapore and the Astana International Financial Center (AIFC) in neighboring Kazakhstan.

Dubai’s experience is particularly instructive. Established in 2004, the DIFC has become the largest financial hub in the Middle East, Africa and South Asia, hosting thousands of registered companies and tens of thousands of highly qualified professionals. The secret of its success is straightforward: an Arab state introduced English common law in part of its territory and established an independent court and regulator – and international capital responded with confidence. Astana followed the same path in 2018 and, within a short period, became an important vehicle for attracting investment to Central Asia.

Tashkent is now joining this group. Crucially, we are not merely copying the experience of others; we are studying the most advanced practices and implementing them in a manner adapted to our national interests.

Why is this a “Constitutional” law?

This question is likely to interest many readers. A special legal regime, differing from the regime established by ordinary legislation, will apply within the Financial Center. Introducing such a regime requires a legal foundation at the highest level. Accordingly, Article 15 of the Constitution was amended alongside the adoption of the Law to establish that a special legal regime may be introduced in designated territories on the basis of a constitutional law. Harmonizing amendments were also made to seven codes and more than thirty laws.

This is a reform of unprecedented scale in the history of our legal system. It was not rushed; rather, it underwent careful parliamentary scrutiny. The Senate returned the initial version of the Law for further revision, the conciliation commission strengthened the provisions protecting investors’ rights, and only then was the document approved. The process itself also demonstrates our state’s commitment to high-quality law-making.