MAS published the guidelines on individual accountability and conduct at financial institutions. The guidelines focus on the measures that financial institutions should put in place to promote the individual accountability of senior managers, strengthen oversight over material risk personnel, and reinforce standards of proper conduct among all employees. The guidelines become effective on September 10, 2021. MAS also published a set of frequently asked questions (FAQs) and an infographic on the guidelines, along with an information paper on culture and conduct practices of financial institutions.
The guidelines on individual accountability and conduct apply on a group basis for locally incorporated banks and insurers, along with the approved exchanges and approved clearing houses that are operated as a single group. The guidelines set out the following five accountability and conduct outcomes that financial institutions should achieve:
- Senior managers responsible for managing and conducting the financial institutions' core functions are clearly identified.
- Senior managers are fit and proper for their roles and held responsible for the actions of their employees and the conduct of the business under their purview.
- Financial institutions' governance framework supports senior managers’ performance of their roles and responsibilities, with a clear and transparent management structure and reporting relationships.
- Material risk personnel are fit and proper for their roles and are subject to effective risk governance and appropriate incentive structures and standards of conduct.
- The financial institution has a framework that promotes and sustains, among all employees, the desired conduct.
The guidance stipulates that financial institutions with smaller number of employees, such as those with fewer than 50 headcount, should still achieve the five outcomes, but will not ordinarily be expected to adopt the specific guidance described in the guidelines. The accompanying information paper on culture and conduct practices of financial institutions sets out the MAS approach toward culture and conduct, outcomes that financial institutions should work toward, and examples of good practices that financial institutions can adopt. The information paper is based on a thematic review of banks, insurers, and capital market intermediaries. MAS also held industry engagement sessions to exchange views and ideas with financial institutions.
Effective Date: September 10, 2021
Keywords: Asia Pacific, Singapore, Banking, Insurance, Securities, Operational Risk, Governance, Conduct Risk, MAS
Previous ArticleEBA Responds to EC Call for Advice to Strengthen AML/CFT Framework
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.
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.
As part of its work on the Insurance Capital Standard (ICS) over the 2020-2024 Monitoring Period, IAIS is exploring whether there should be a differentiated capital treatment of certain eligible infrastructure (both equity and debt) as well as strategic equity investments within the ICS.