http://www.newsday.com/business/ny-usfina056058126mar05,0,23991.story
http://finance.yahoo.com/print/expert/article/moneyhappy/121849
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Proposal - Financial services safety board
There is discussion in USA about passing legislation to create a financial services safety board. It is similar to my proposal for certain experts to certify financial products to be safe and fair to consumers.
http://www.newsday.com/business/ny-usfina056058126mar05,0,23991.story
http://finance.yahoo.com/print/expert/article/moneyhappy/121849
http://www.newsday.com/business/ny-usfina056058126mar05,0,23991.story
http://finance.yahoo.com/print/expert/article/moneyhappy/121849
A sense of fairness
Americans are outraged at the bonuses being paid to the top executives of AIG's financial products. Here are people who took big bets, lost and felt that they should be retained with fat bonuses to clean up the mess. The public felt that this is so unfair.
There was another past incidents were the Americans were outraged. President's Clinton's plane, Air Force One, was delayed in taking off, as the President was having his hair cut. The barber has to complete the job, get off the plane, before it could take off. This caused a delay in the departure of many flights. The public was outraged. They felt that it was inconsiderate of President Clinton to cause so much inconvenience to other people.
Our leaders in the corporate world and in government has to learn to respect the ordinary people, and be considerate to them. They should display a sense of humility and fairness. They cannot act arrogantly and regard the ordinary people as "lesser mortals".
There was another past incidents were the Americans were outraged. President's Clinton's plane, Air Force One, was delayed in taking off, as the President was having his hair cut. The barber has to complete the job, get off the plane, before it could take off. This caused a delay in the departure of many flights. The public was outraged. They felt that it was inconsiderate of President Clinton to cause so much inconvenience to other people.
Our leaders in the corporate world and in government has to learn to respect the ordinary people, and be considerate to them. They should display a sense of humility and fairness. They cannot act arrogantly and regard the ordinary people as "lesser mortals".
ST Online: Don't break CPF piggy bank, but...
Editor
Straits Times
I REFER to the Ministry of Manpower's response last Saturday to readers' calls for earlier Central Provident Fund (CPF) withdrawal.
The response that it is not a good idea as breaking the piggy bank would lead to temptation to draw more and more from the CPF does not address the main point raised by readers.
What they ask for is not to break the piggy bank. But for members who already have funds above the Minimum Sum, why can't the CPF Board release the excess funds to those who are now struggling to live?
Why hold on to excess funds and make them wait till they reach 55, when they and their families are struggling now?
With the pain and stress these individuals and their families are going through, will they even make it to 80?
Tun Ah Heng
Straits Times
I REFER to the Ministry of Manpower's response last Saturday to readers' calls for earlier Central Provident Fund (CPF) withdrawal.
The response that it is not a good idea as breaking the piggy bank would lead to temptation to draw more and more from the CPF does not address the main point raised by readers.
What they ask for is not to break the piggy bank. But for members who already have funds above the Minimum Sum, why can't the CPF Board release the excess funds to those who are now struggling to live?
Why hold on to excess funds and make them wait till they reach 55, when they and their families are struggling now?
With the pain and stress these individuals and their families are going through, will they even make it to 80?
Tun Ah Heng
MAS consultation paper - sale of unlisted investment products
I suggest that the product issuer should be required to disclose the charges that they are taking away from the investment product for their distribution cost, expenses and profit margin. Under the current regime, this informtion is not required to be disclosed.
The disclosure should be done at two levels:
a) the prospectus should specify the maximum charges that can be taken away from the investment for the various items of expenses.
b) an annual report should be presented to show the accounts of the fund.
Unit trusts have to disclose the charges and to render an annual statement of the fund. These requirements are more important in the case of the unlisted investment products.
I am not sure if this point has been adequately addressed in the new regulatory requirements that is being proposed in the consultation paper. I hope that someone can check this point and inform me.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
CASE forum on MAS consultation paper
CASE will be organising a public forum to gather feedback in response to the latest guidelines put up by the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS).
The proposals were formulated based on MAS' review of the sale and marketing of unlisted investment products after the current global financial crisis led to the failure of several structured notes in Singapore. The public is invited to comment on the proposals to strengthen the regulation of the sale and marketing of unlisted financial investment products. CASE will then channel the responses to MAS.
Details for the forum are as follows:
Date: Saturday, 28 March 2009
Time: 10am - 12pm
Venue: NTUC Business Centre, Level 8, Theatre Room 801
1 Marina Boulevard, Singapore 018989
The forum will include a presentation on the paper and a Q & A discussion with a panel. Refreshments will also be provided.
For more information, please refer to the MAS website here and the consultation paper released here.
Interested parties are requested to RSVP to rsvp@case.org.sg or fax to 6467 9055 by 27 March 2009.
Lim Si Hui Jean (Ms.)
The proposals were formulated based on MAS' review of the sale and marketing of unlisted investment products after the current global financial crisis led to the failure of several structured notes in Singapore. The public is invited to comment on the proposals to strengthen the regulation of the sale and marketing of unlisted financial investment products. CASE will then channel the responses to MAS.
Details for the forum are as follows:
Date: Saturday, 28 March 2009
Time: 10am - 12pm
Venue: NTUC Business Centre, Level 8, Theatre Room 801
1 Marina Boulevard, Singapore 018989
The forum will include a presentation on the paper and a Q & A discussion with a panel. Refreshments will also be provided.
For more information, please refer to the MAS website here and the consultation paper released here.
Interested parties are requested to RSVP to rsvp@case.org.sg or fax to 6467 9055 by 27 March 2009.
Lim Si Hui Jean (Ms.)
A better way to regulate housing agent
26 March 2009
Editor
Forum Page
Straits Times
A better way to regulate housing agent
Senior Minister of State Lim Hwee Hua reported in Parliament that the Government is reviewing ways to strengthen the regulatory framework for housing agents. This is in response to complaints about malpractices by housing agents.
The measures being considered are:
1. raise professional standard of agents
2. quality and training requirements
3. dispute resolution framework
4. enforcement framework
This is similar to the regulatory framework used for the sale of life insurance and investment products. It has failed to deal with the problem of the mis-selling of credit linked notes and other financial products that are bad for consumers.
This approach relies on the principle of the free market - provide information for consumers to make their decision. The crux of the problem - the information is provided by the seller, who makes a bigger profit or commission by mis-informing the consumer. There is a serious conflict of interest.
If this approach is adopted, the regulator has to look after the interest of the consumers, and to take appropriate action against "cheating". Cheating is a crime - and include making an unfair profit by misleading the other party.
In my view, a better alternative is to have a strong regulator to set the rules for the market. An example is the regulation on the sale of medicine and food products. These products are tested to be safe and suitable for consumption. The regulator can carry out the test or engage independent experts to do the work. But the regulator take the responsibility to put the stamp on the product.
I prefer a system where the regulator licenses the agents and sets the professional standards of ethics and conduct. If the agents fail to meet the standard, they should be removed. This is similar to the licensing of doctors, lawyers and other professionals.
The regulator has the option to outsource the actual assessment to a professional or self-regulatory body, but this body should have the "teeth" and backing of the regulator. I wish to say that stronger regulation actually benefits the majority of ethical agents and create a better market for all parties.
I hope that the Government will consider the above suggestions.
Tan Kin Lian
Editor
Forum Page
Straits Times
A better way to regulate housing agent
Senior Minister of State Lim Hwee Hua reported in Parliament that the Government is reviewing ways to strengthen the regulatory framework for housing agents. This is in response to complaints about malpractices by housing agents.
The measures being considered are:
1. raise professional standard of agents
2. quality and training requirements
3. dispute resolution framework
4. enforcement framework
This is similar to the regulatory framework used for the sale of life insurance and investment products. It has failed to deal with the problem of the mis-selling of credit linked notes and other financial products that are bad for consumers.
This approach relies on the principle of the free market - provide information for consumers to make their decision. The crux of the problem - the information is provided by the seller, who makes a bigger profit or commission by mis-informing the consumer. There is a serious conflict of interest.
If this approach is adopted, the regulator has to look after the interest of the consumers, and to take appropriate action against "cheating". Cheating is a crime - and include making an unfair profit by misleading the other party.
In my view, a better alternative is to have a strong regulator to set the rules for the market. An example is the regulation on the sale of medicine and food products. These products are tested to be safe and suitable for consumption. The regulator can carry out the test or engage independent experts to do the work. But the regulator take the responsibility to put the stamp on the product.
I prefer a system where the regulator licenses the agents and sets the professional standards of ethics and conduct. If the agents fail to meet the standard, they should be removed. This is similar to the licensing of doctors, lawyers and other professionals.
The regulator has the option to outsource the actual assessment to a professional or self-regulatory body, but this body should have the "teeth" and backing of the regulator. I wish to say that stronger regulation actually benefits the majority of ethical agents and create a better market for all parties.
I hope that the Government will consider the above suggestions.
Tan Kin Lian
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)