IOSCO published a report on findings of the thematic review of the implementation of the IOSCO principles on suitability requirements for distribution of complex financial products. These nine IOSCO principles on suitability requirements were published in January 2013. The review aimed to understand the way IOSCO member jurisdictions have implemented these suitability standards. The review concluded that the majority of participating jurisdictions have implemented suitability requirements for complex products in a manner generally consistent with the IOSCO principles.
The review considered different regulatory models and intermediary distribution channels, including the ways fintech has impacted the suitability space. While only five jurisdictions earned ratings of "Fully Consistent" across all nine of the principles, the review team rated the majority of the remaining jurisdictions as "Fully" or "Broadly Consistent" across most of the principles. The review team observed that, in some cases, jurisdictions rated "Partly Consistent" or "Not Consistent" for some principles had reforms in progress, which may improve these ratings once implemented. The following are the key findings and observations from this review:
- Participating jurisdictions generally had product-complexity-neutral suitability regimes.
- What constitutes a complex financial product differs among jurisdictions.
- Most jurisdictions have standards for dealing with customers fairly and for dealing with conflicts of interest
- Many participating Jurisdictions do not require intermediaries to consider product riskiness or complexity in connection with classifying some customers
- The robustness of suitability regimes appears to correlate to levels of market development and participation
- Fintech development in respect of digital advisers and online platforms has created new suitability-related challenges
The review focuses on business conduct and the risks posed by complex financial products and is consistent with the core IOSCO objective of investor protection. For the purpose of this review, “complex financial products” refer to financial products whose terms, features, and risks are not reasonably likely to be understood by a retail customer because of their complex structure (as opposed to more traditional or plain vanilla investment instruments) and which may be difficult to value. Thus, all IOSCO members that have complex financial products were invited to participate in the review. Twenty-nine IOSCO members from 28 jurisdictions participated in the review. The participating jurisdictions included both developed and growth and emerging market jurisdictions.
Keywords: International, Banking, Securities, Thematic Review, Complex Financial Products, Suitability Requirements, OTC Derivatives, Asset-Backed Securities, Credit Default Swap, IOSCO
Previous ArticleIASB Amends IFRS 9 and IFRS 7 in Response to IBOR Reform
EIOPA submitted—to the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union, and EC—its 2020, fifth, and last annual report on long-term guarantee measures and measures on equity risk.
The BIS Innovation Hub Swiss Centre, SNB, and the financial infrastructure operator SIX announced the successful completion of a joint proof-of-concept (PoC) experiment as part of the Project Helvetia.
EBA published the final draft regulatory technical standards for calculation of own funds requirements for market risk, under the standardized and internal model approaches of the Fundamental Review of the Trading Book (FRTB) framework.
EIOPA published discussion paper on a methodology for the potential inclusion of climate change in the Solvency II (sometimes also written as SII) standard formula when calculating natural catastrophe underwriting risk.
EU published, in the Official Journal of the European Union, corrigenda to the Directive and the Regulation on the prudential requirements and supervision of investment firms.
MAS proposed amendments to certain regulations, notices, and guidelines arising from the Banking (Amendment) Act 2020.
PRA published a statement that explains when to expect further information on the PRA approach to transposing the Capital Requirements Directive (CRD5), including its approach to revisions to the definition of capital for Pillar 2A.
RBNZ launched consultations on the scope of the Insurance Prudential Supervision Act (IPSA) 2010 and on the associated Insurance Solvency Standards.
SRB published the work program for 2021-2023, setting out a roadmap to further operationalize the Single Resolution Fund and to achieve robust resolvability of banks under its remit over the next three years.
EIOPA is consulting on the relevant ratios to be mandatorily disclosed by insurers and reinsurers falling within the scope of the Non-Financial Reporting Directive as well as on the methodologies to build these ratios.