UK to regulate City bonuses
Regulator initiates process of discussion to address remuneration issues
LONDON – The UK Financial Services Authority (FSA) has released a ‘Dear CEO’ missive explaining its new requirements regarding bonuses at investment banks and financial firms. Although the letter says it is difficult to regulate without being overly prescriptive, the regulator expects firms to develop structures to effectively monitor their remuneration policy – and wed it to risk management.
The FSA says it is addressing “widespread concern” over the link between remuneration cultures and the global financial crisis. It says its recommendations are in line with the April 2008 recommendations from the Financial Stability Forum, the International Institute of Finance and the Counterparty Risk Management Group.
The FSA’s letter says: “During September, the FSA held a number of high-level discussions with London-based firms about remuneration policies. Between now and the end of the year we will arrange a further round of visits to all recipients of this letter. Our aim will be to gather more specific information about remuneration practices in your firm to assure bad practices are not present and to seek further input on what would constitute good practice.”
Examples of bad practice include bonuses calculated on the basis of revenues without any counterbalancing risk controls, performance assessed entirely on the results for the current financial year, and remuneration paid solely in cash.
The FSA says its letter does not constitute formal regulation, but an ongoing process of discussion. The results of this work are due in early 2009.
To read the letter and its recommendations for good practice click the link below.
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
Capital neutrality key to completing Basel III, says Quarles
Former Republican Fed vice-chair thinks Hill or Bowman could help revive stalled prudential rules
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