MAS accepts recommendations from Corporate Governance Council and issues revised Code

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
#1
Amendment to Code of CG. 

Independent Directors who served more than 9 year since first appointment (before or after listing) will be subjected to 2 tier vote. 2nd vote by shareholders excluding
those shareholders serving as directors or CEO ( and their associates). If they fail the 2nd vote, they can still stay as non-independent director)

[opmi: If the incumbent IDs failed the 2nd vote, they are 'useless' to the controlling shareholders since they dont help to add to no. of required IDs on the Board to comply with the Code and also for situations like Offers. Technically minorities can 'kick out'/neutralize the IDs if they organize]  

http://www.mas.gov.sg/News-and-Publicati...uncil.aspx

http://www.mas.gov.sg/News-and-Publicati...uncil.aspx

http://www.mas.gov.sg/~/media/MAS/Regula...ations.pdf

http://www.mas.gov.sg/~/media/MAS/Regula...20Code.pdf

http://www.mas.gov.sg/~/media/MAS/Regula...idance.pdf

http://www.mas.gov.sg/~/media/MAS/Regula...nboard.pdf
"... but quitting while you're ahead is not the same as quitting." - Quote from the movie American Gangster
Reply
#2
I wonder if this move will eventually nudge those "chao kuan" companies (aka OPMI unfriendly ones) to delist?

SGX RegCo caps independent directors’ tenure, enhances remuneration disclosures

Singapore Exchange Regulation (SGX RegCo) will limit to nine years the tenure of independent directors (IDs) serving on the boards of listed issuers. The proposal to limit the tenure of IDs, which stemmed from recommendations by the Corporate Governance Advisory Committee (CGAC), received broad market support during a public consultation process.

While concerns about competition, sensitivity and privacy were raised during the consultation, market participants largely supported the proposal for issuers to disclose the exact amount and breakdown of remuneration paid to directors and the CEO in their annual reports.

https://links.sgx.com/FileOpen/20230111_...eID=743746
Reply
#3
Hi weijian,

Well, there are always ways to work around problems, and certainly with the new rules in place too.

For example, previously during the two tier voting, which excludes those shareholders serving as directors or CEO (and their associates) from voting, controlling shareholder can still vote as long as they do not serve as director or CEO in the company, thereby rendering the two tier voting pointless.

Let's see how companies react to them first.
Reply
#4
Looking at other countries, perhaps a "Commission" is good for Singapore OPMIs ? What do VBs think ?

-------------
Investor protection has not improved in Singapore: Mak Yuen Teen
https://www.businesstimes.com.sg/esg/inv...-yuen-teen
"...While he says that regulators have stepped up enforcement actions over the last two to three years, there is still no real improvement in investors’ ability to protect themselves by exercising their rights to seek recourse when companies and their board of directors fail to carry out their duties...."

https://www.sfc.hk/en/About-the-SFC/Our-role
The Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) is an independent statutory body set up in 1989 to regulate Hong Kong's securities and futures markets.

Securities and Exchange Commission
https://www.sec.gov/about
The SEC’s mission is to protect investors; maintain fair, orderly, and efficient markets; and facilitate capital formation.

Securities Commission Malaysia
https://www.sc.com.my/about

State Securities Commission
https://ssc.gov.vn/webcenter/portal/ssc/...nsandtasks

China Securities Regulatory Commission
http://www.csrc.gov.cn/csrc_en/c102023/c...zcnr.shtml

https://www.valuebuddies.com/thread-4019...protection
China securities regulator calls for more retail investor protection

Financial Conduct Authority
https://www.fca.org.uk/about
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)