G-20 working groups release final reports
The four working groups of the G-20 summit have issued their final reports
LONDON - The G-20's working groups have issued their four final reports on aspects of transparency, regulation, international co-operation and the reform of the International Monetary Fund, World Bank and multilateral development banks.
The first report looks at sound regulation and strengthening transparency, and includes recommendations to address the causes and lessons of the financial crisis. These include calls for a system-wide approach to regulation and recommendations for the scope of regulation. Other chapters cover rating agencies oversight, private capital, transparency of regulatory regimes, pro-cyclicality, capital, liquidity, structures for over-the-counter derivatives, remuneration, accounting, transparency, enforcement and assistance for developing countries.
The second paper focuses on reinforcing international co-operation and promoting integrity in financial markets. It outlines intermediate and medium-term recommendations for action to strengthen supervisory and regulatory co-ordination, the role of international bodies, and the preservation of market integrity.
The third paper looks at the reform of the IMF: the adequacy of its resources, a review of lending instruments, greater representation for developing nations, and a review of the IMF mandate and reforms.
The fourth paper contains an action plan for reforming multinational development banks, with common principles for reform, crisis instruments, resources and capital adequacy, and governance reforms.
The reports may be downloaded from this page.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
Review of 2024: as markets took a breather, firms switched focus
In the absence of major crises and rules deadlines, financial firms revamped strategy, services and practices
Dora flood pitches banks against vendors
Firms ask vendors for late addendums sometimes unrelated to resiliency, requiring renegotiation
Swiss report fingers Finma on Credit Suisse capital ratio
Parliament says bank would have breached minimum requirements in 2022 without regulatory filter
‘It’s not EU’: Do government bond spreads spell eurozone break-up?
Divergence between EGB yields is in the EU’s make-up; only a shared risk architecture can reunite them
CFTC weighs third-party risk rules for CCPs
Clearing houses could be required to formally identify and monitor critical vendors
Why there is no fence in effective regulatory relationships
A chief risk officer and former bank supervisor says regulators and regulated are on the same side
Snap! Derivatives reports decouple after Emir Refit shake-up
Counterparties find new rules have led to worse data quality, threatening regulators’ oversight of systemic risk
Critics warn against softening risk transfer rules for insurers
Proposal to cut capital for unfunded protection of loan books would create systemic risk, investors say