Summary: This article aims to determine whether the Financial Services Authority (FSA) has an ethical approach to investment regulation. Firstly, it will explain the recent history of regulation within the financial services sector up to the establishment of the FSA, an independent, non-governmental body, with statutory rights granted by the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 He will then reflect on the meaning of conformity. competent and whether the FSA had adopted an ethical approach. In the beginning... The history of the FSA is quite recent and it grew out of the need to regulate and control the rapidly changing markets of the 1970s and 1980s. Before the FSA, market regulation was applied on an ad hoc basis , combining government regulation and an important element of self-regulation. Changes in the international financial system pushed the government to seek new solutions and, at this time, Professor LCB Gower was tasked with reviewing investor protection in the UK financial services sector. In his report, Professor Gower wrote that “logic and order”. ...are important only to the extent that they contribute to a legal regime which can be understood, which will be considered fair by those affected by it and which will therefore be generally observed and can be effectively enforced. (Budd, L., Whimster, S., 1992) A 1984 white paper followed the report and led to the Finance and Services Act (FSA) 1986. This act primarily aims to protect the private investor and constitutes a legislative text. which brings together independent practitioners and companies in the financial sector within a single statutory framework. With the FSA 1986 was created an agency, the Securities and Investment Board (SIB), with regulatory and enforcement powers and where most powers under the Act have been delegated. The SIB was assisted by self-regulatory organizations (SROs) such as FIMBRA and LAUTRO and recognized professional bodies (RPBs). The SIB had the power to make rules having legislative effect and reported to the Chancellor of the Exchequer. It maintains a list of authorized companies called the central register. Unlike its American counterpart SEC, the SIB was entirely funded by the city but reported not to the city but to the government (Budd, L., Whimster, S., 1992). The Financial Services and Services Act 1986 was replaced by the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000. The SIB was replaced by the Financial Services Authority (FSA), and all SROs were integrated into this single regulator..