SIAS submits proposal to tighten requirements for foreign listings

[CY09]

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/s...36/1/.html.

Do you think the 5 recommendations propsosed by SIAS will be able to stem the fradulant practises of firms?

[dzwm87]

4. A foreign listed company board should not be allowed to transfer monies raised from the Singapore market out of Singapore, unless the board obtains a confirmation in writing signed by the Audit Chairman and the independent directors collectively that the purpose of the transfer is bonafide as disclosed in the prospectus.
==

Won't this create much red tapes given that a business often needs to transfer money quite frequently?

Think it's more important to align both parties' interest together instead of creating a whole batch of regulations.

[CityFarmer]

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/s...36/1/.html.

Do you think the 5 recommendations propsosed by SIAS will be able to stem the fradulant practises of firms?

My view is the recommendations are overly-done as remedy to the issue. It will seriously undermine SGX, or Singapore as financial hub in the region.

“削足适履”? (direct translation is "cut the feet to fit the shoes?")

I recalled SGX had already amended its listing requirements recently, it serves as better remedy to the issue.

I post here the 5 recommendations below for reference.

1. The authorities legislate to disallow the resignation of directors, CEO and CFO, except for serious illness, during the life of the Notice of Compliance issued by SGX or any other relevant authority, until the Company complies fully with the requirements of SGX and relevant authorities.

2. SGX seriously consider not listing any company from a foreign country which has no reciprocal or extradition treaty with Singapore. In the event SGX does so, then it must require the company to prominently highlight the absence of both in the rospectus.

3. At the time of listing of a foreign company in Singapore, SGX should require the company to provide a bank guarantee, or a relevant instrument of comfort, of a sufficient quantum to ensure that the company and its directors will fully comply with the Laws, Regulations and the Listing Rules for the period of at least five years.

4. A foreign listed company board should not be allowed to transfer monies raised from the Singapore market out of Singapore, unless the board obtains a confirmation in writing signed by the Audit Chairman and the independent directors collectively that the purpose of the transfer is bonafide as disclosed in the prospectus.

5. This arbitration agreement should be part of the conditions to list on the SGX and the foreign issuer must come from a country which is a party to the New York Convention. This will ensure certainty in enforcement to some extent.

[yeokiwi]

The CFO, IDs always suka suka resign and quote "Leave to pursue personal interest"....
Happy happy collect fee and salary but when the shits hit the fans, they are the first to run road.

CFO, independent directors can only submit their resignation during AGMs. If they do not endorse the financial statements/annual report of the company, they better say so during the AGM and subject themselves to questions by shareholders.

If they endorse the statements/report, they will be liable to be charged for negligence when any misinformation are found in the statement/report.

[Blackjack]

4. A foreign listed company board should not be allowed to transfer monies raised from the Singapore market out of Singapore, unless the board obtains a confirmation in writing signed by the Audit Chairman and the independent directors collectively that the purpose of the transfer is bonafide as disclosed in the prospectus.

This is somewhat similar to the 'Corzine Rule' approved by CFTC, which required top executives at futures brokers to sign off on major withdrawals from customer accounts. Objective is primarily to imbue accountability in the top dogs, as a response to the MF Global blow-up, and more recently in PFG as well.

[CY09]

So if rule 4 is implemented, does it mean that IDs will be held accountable if the money which was transferred out is used for non bonafide purposes? this is due to the fact that the IDs have signed for its transfer

[ValueBeliever]

SIAS' CEO and president David Gerald said: "Over the years, we have been looking at the patterns of offenses and the pattern of default by some of these foreign listed companies. There are 150 of them of which I think 14 have gotten into trouble and nine which are currently under investigations.

I not sure what he is referring to - 14 in trouble and nine under investigation? Is it a joke!!

Please go check. Almost 90% in trouble! All kinds of events these Chinese pull off that shocked investor and they are as good as giving free money from Sporean pocket. But in this case SGX understated the seriousness of the issue. What is SIAS role here? Non-event!

I think SGX if they ever loss political support in terms of shldrs that own them, people have a chance will go on revot and sue them, lead by foreign instituition.

[pianist]

i think these 2 recommendations are good and sensible:

2. SGX seriously consider not listing any company from a foreign country which has no reciprocal or extradition treaty with Singapore. In the event SGX does so, then it must require the company to prominently highlight the absence of both in the rospectus.

3. At the time of listing of a foreign company in Singapore, SGX should require the company to provide a bank guarantee, or a relevant instrument of comfort, of a sufficient quantum to ensure that the company and its directors will fully comply with the Laws, Regulations and the Listing Rules for the period of at least five years.

and it goes to show sgx may have failed its duties as regulator for so many years. may i humbly suggest sgx cough out some of its profits to compensate retail investors for their undue losses?

[CityFarmer]

i think these 2 recommendations are good and sensible:

2. SGX seriously consider not listing any company from a foreign country which has no reciprocal or extradition treaty with Singapore. In the event SGX does so, then it must require the company to prominently highlight the absence of both in the rospectus.

3. At the time of listing of a foreign company in Singapore, SGX should require the company to provide a bank guarantee, or a relevant instrument of comfort, of a sufficient quantum to ensure that the company and its directors will fully comply with the Laws, Regulations and the Listing Rules for the period of at least five years.

and it goes to show sgx may have failed its duties as regulator for so many years. may i humbly suggest sgx cough out some of its profits to compensate retail investors for their undue losses?

Should I also humbly suggest that my company pay me extra bonuses, entitlements and salary increments for not performing its best since i joined? We had gone thru endless rounds of productivity improvement events, restructuring (to improve efficiency) and improvements on employee entitlements.

To answer your question in slightly different way.

[KopiKat]

i think these 2 recommendations are good and sensible:

2. SGX seriously consider not listing any company from a foreign country which has no reciprocal or extradition treaty with Singapore. In the event SGX does so, then it must require the company to prominently highlight the absence of both in the rospectus.

3. At the time of listing of a foreign company in Singapore, SGX should require the company to provide a bank guarantee, or a relevant instrument of comfort, of a sufficient quantum to ensure that the company and its directors will fully comply with the Laws, Regulations and the Listing Rules for the period of at least five years.

and it goes to show sgx may have failed its duties as regulator for so many years. may i humbly suggest sgx cough out some of its profits to compensate retail investors for their undue losses?

Should I also humbly suggest that my company pay me the extra bonuses entitlements and salary increments for not performing its best since i joined? We had gone thru endless rounds of productivity improvement events, restructuring (to improve efficiency) and improvements on employee entitlements.

To answer your question in slightly different way.

Hey! From the investment POV, Looks like I ought to put SGX in my watch list for the following reasons,

1. Huge Moat - It's a monopolistic biz. What's the alternative? Only non local Exchanges which means FOREX risks and non-familiarity with their listcos.

2. Incredible Franchise - We're all 'addicts' (actually no choice). They can raise their fees and we'll still come back for more. In a flattering sense, like See's Candies!

3. A biz that even a fool can run, like Cocal Cola sometime back (from Warren Buffett stories).

Hmm....