MAS published its reply to the Parliamentary questions on the EC decision to repeal equivalence status for credit rating agencies (CRAs) in Singapore. Some media reports might have given the impression that EC is reducing its market access to financial institutions in Singapore. Tharman Shanmugaratnam, a Senior Minister and Minister in charge of MAS, explained that the EC decision covers only CRAs, for which it still allows the use of endorsement approach, and does not extend to any other financial services.
Furthermore, EC recognizes CRAs in a third country through two approaches. First, deeming the third country’s CRA rules as equivalent to EC rules, which is called the equivalence decision. Second, an endorsement approach, where the CRAs in the third country rely on their related entities in EU to endorse their ratings. CRAs in Singapore have been using the endorsement approach and EC has confirmed that it will continue to recognize Singapore-based CRAs using this approach.
The CRA regulatory regime of MAS is based on, and consistent with, the standards promulgated by IOSCO. EC has assessed the CRA regulatory regime of MAS to be less prescriptive than EU rules in certain areas, such as in defining specific situations in which a conflict of interest for the CRA arises. MAS takes a more principles-based approach. It nevertheless requires conflicts of interest to be effectively addressed and is fully in line with international standards. Mr. Shanmugaratnam highlighted that Singapore is in good standing with EU. MAS will continue to closely engage its EU counterparts in reviewing the rules to ensure that financial institutions in Singapore continue to have access to the EU market in various financial services.
Keywords: Europe, EU, Asia Pacific, Singapore, Banking, Securities, CRAs, Credit Ratings, Equivalence Decisions, Endorsement Regime, EC, MAS
Previous ArticleGovernor of RBI Speaks on Emerging Challenges to Financial Stability
EBA issued a revised list of validation rules with respect to the implementing technical standards on supervisory reporting.
EBA published its response to the call for advice of EC on ways to strengthen the EU legal framework on anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT).
NGFS published a paper on the overview of environmental risk analysis by financial institutions and an occasional paper on the case studies on environmental risk analysis methodologies.
MAS published the guidelines on individual accountability and conduct at financial institutions.
APRA published final versions of the prudential standard APS 220 on credit quality and the reporting standard ARS 923.2 on repayment deferrals.
SRB published two articles, with one article discussing the framework in place to safeguard financial stability amid crisis and the other article outlining the path to a harmonized and predictable liquidation regime.
FSB hosted a virtual workshop as part of the consultation process for its evaluation of the too-big-to-fail reforms.
ECB updated the list of supervised entities in EU, with the number of significant supervised entities being 115.
OSFI published the key findings of a study on third-party risk management.
FSB is extending the implementation timeline, by one year, for the minimum haircut standards for non-centrally cleared securities financing transactions or SFTs.