-
Jul 29, 2005
- Amended Regulation on Outsourcing by Financial Services Companies Takes Effect July 27, 2005
- The FSC/FSS announced on July 26 that the newly amended Regulation on Business Delegation of Financial Institutions took effect July 27, 2005. The newly amended regulation is a major deregulatory step that significantly broadens the range of activities that can be outsourced by financial services companies and help them utilize outsourcing more efficiently. One of the key changes to be implemented under the amended regulation is a shift from a positive regulatory regime that provides for activities financial services companies may outsource to a negative regulatory regime that provides for activities financial services companies may not outsource. Thus, as a general rule, financial services companies will be allowed to outsource activities unless the regulation specifically provides otherwise. The following is a summary of the newly amended regulation on outsourcing.Expanded outsourcing by financial services companies• Adoption of negative regulatory regime for outsourcingAs a rule, outsourcing is to be allowed for financial services companies unless the activity to be outsourced (i) constitutes a part of the core business activities of the financial service company; (ii) is mandated under the law to the financial service company, or (iii) poses risk to the soundness of the financial services company, undermines orderly conduct of their business, or causes consumer harm. In addition, the core business activities of financial services companies are specifically provided for so that non-core activities may be outsourced without undue discretionary intrusion from the regulators.• Back-office support activitiesThe amended regulation newly defines outsourcing as utilizing the services or the facility of a third party in order to perform financial services activities approved by the FSC/FSS and provides that outsourcing encompasses the back-office and other support activities of financial services companies. As a general rule, outsourcing is to be allowed for back-off
-
Jul 22, 2005
- SFC to file criminal complaints against two individuals and an investment fund for illegal securities trading
- The Securities and Futures Commission announced on July 22 that it had completed deliberations on the findings of the investigation of trading of a listed company’s shares by an investment fund (“H”)* and decided to file criminal complaints with the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office against H, its former director of emerging markets (“R”), and a broker at an overseas subsidiary of a local securities company (“K”). The complaints will allege that R and K engaged in a scheme to manipulate trading of shares of a listed company (“S”) and that H, as R’s principal, was liable for his illegal activities.Findings of Investigation by Financial Supervisory ServiceThe investigation by the Financial Supervisory Service found that R acquired 7,772,000 common shares (5%) of S through H’s account between November, 2003, and March, 2004, and 8,300 preferred shares of S on his own personal account on March 3, 2004, and conspired with K to manipulate trading of S shares by repeatedly portraying the company as a potential takeover target through the news media. R also repeatedly urged S publicly to buy back its preferred shares and retire them.After S publicly made a share buyback offer for its common and preferred shares on November 26, 2004, R raised the prospect for hostile takeover bids for the company and expressed his support for such attempts in an interview he arranged with a widely circulated local newspaper on November 29, 2004. R also expressed his support for retirement of S’s preferred shares in the interview. The interview, which was published on December 1, 2004, prompted heavy trading and bidding up of S’s shares among investors and effectively provided artificial support for price and trading volume R sought to unload H’s substantial holdings in S two days later.On December 3, 2004, R sold off all of H’s holdings in S and realized gains totaling KRW29.2 billion (US$ 28.0 million). On the same day, R also sold off all of his own preferred shar
-
Jul 22, 2005
-
Jul 14, 2005
-
Jul 07, 2005
-
Jul 01, 2005
-
Jun 23, 2005
-
Jun 22, 2005
-
Jun 01, 2005
-
May 27, 2005
- FSC Action on Leading Investment & Securities’ Applications for Share Acquisition and Merger with Bridge Securities
- The Financial Supervisory Commission announced on May 27 that it had decided not to give regulatory approval to the applications by Leading Investment Securities Co., Ltd. to acquire shares of Bridge Securities Co., Ltd. and merge with the company.Leading Investment Securities Co., Ltd. stated in the business plan it submitted to the FSC that it envisioned a sharp turnaround after the proposed merger with Bridge Securities (cumulative three-year net income totaling KRW33.9 billion following the merger). Leading Investment Securities also anticipated securities underwriting and investment banking as its key revenue sources.The FSC noted that the two companies incurred large net cumulative losses totaling KRW58.4 billion between April 2002 and December 2004 from mostly engaging in securities brokerage and dealings. The FSC further noted that the amount of financing put forth by Leading Investment Securities to complete the merger (KRW149.4 billion), including share purchases, restructuring expenses, and share buybacks, can be covered only by disposing of nearly all of the liquid assets of the merged company (KRW156.1 billion). Because the merged company would then be left only with illiquid assets such as unlisted shares and physical assets, it is unrealistic to expect the company to engage in normal securities dealings and underwriting activities, both of which typically require substantial financial resources.Furthermore, the recent increase in share buyback price Leading Investment Securities proposed for the shareholders of Bridge Securities as well as other merger expenses raise serious doubts about post-merger liquidity positions of the company. It was also determined that revenue outlook for the company was uncertain given the planned downsizing of branch operations and underwriting business and a lack of experience in and specific business strategies for investment banking.After taking into consideration the asset structure, the underlying business strength an
-
May 10, 2005
-
Apr 25, 2005
-
Apr 07, 2005
-
Apr 01, 2005
- Correction to March 31 Financial Times Article "Seoul's new rules anger overseas investors" by Anna Fifield
- The FSC/FSS and the Ministry of Finance and Economy hereby issue a correction to March 31 Financial Times article entitled “Seoul’s new rules anger overseas investors.” The article misinterprets the recently amended “5% rule,” labeling it a “draconian” requirement and a move designed to tighten controls on foreign investors. In particular, the article stretches the 5% rule to suggest that it was connected to the equity investment in SK Corp. by Sovereign Asset Management and the gains recently achieved by Newbridge Capital after selling its stakes in Korea First Bank.The 5% rule was first established with an amendment to the Securities and Exchange Act in 1991. The newly amended 5% rule was passed by the National Assembly on December 31, 2004, promulgated on January 17, 2005, and took effect on March 29, 2005.It is important to note that the 5% rule is widely adopted and enforced in many countries—particularly stringently in the U.S.—and Korea’s 5% rule is modest with respect to the kinds of disclosure compliance it requires from investors. Thus, the assertion made in the FT article that Korea’s 5% rule is “draconian” is a hyperbole and a mischaracterization that can only be expected from uninformed or misinformed observers.Moreover, as the FSC/FSS has pointed out on numerous occasions, the changes adopted to the 5% rule were intended only to replace broadly worded provisions with more specific and unequivocal rules. It was never intended to control the “pernicious” effects of foreign capital as the article falsely asserted.The FSC/FSS and the Ministry of Finance and Economy further note that the amended 5% rule is part of the ongoing effort to raise Korea’s corporate governance to the highest global standards. It is not related in any way to particular foreign investors and is applied equally and fairly to all investors, domestic and foreign. It is certainly not intended to tighten controls on foreign investors.The FSC/FSS and the Mi
-
Mar 15, 2005
-
Mar 10, 2005
-
Feb 17, 2005
-
Feb 03, 2005
-
Feb 02, 2005
-
Jan 18, 2005
- FSS Announces Major Organization & Workforce Changes
- The FSS announced the results of the organization and workforce innovation initiative that was launched in October of 2004 to renew and reinvigorate the FSS as an efficient and effective supervisory organization backed by a highly specialized workforce capable of meeting the ever-growing demands and challenges of the marketplace.The organization and workforce innovation initiative, prompted and driven by the growing market demand for highly efficient and specialized supervisory services, brings about a number of major changes to the current examination structure, seeks greater synergy from the integrated supervision, creates a macro-supervision department to help formulate forward-looking supervisory policies, and institutes workforce changes that stress performance-based personnel management and pay. To provide independent perspectives and expertise in implementing the organization and workforce initiative, A.T. Kearney participated in the initiative as an outside consultant.SUMMARY OF ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION1. Reorganization of the examination structureThe examination staff and departments are restructured with the goal of enhancing the ability of the examiners to conduct onsite examinations “whenever necessary, to the extent necessary, and with the examiners necessary” on the basis of the continuous surveillance of financial institutions and to minimize the burden financial institutions face in complying with FSS examinations. The examination teams, which are divided into offsite surveillance and onsite examination teams, are merged together to enable the examiners to carry out both offsite surveillance and onsite examination simultaneously. With the transition to the “relationship manager” system, each examination team is to be assigned specific financial institutions to monitor and examine. An examination support department, staffed by examiners with technical expertise in risk management, IT and other specialized areas, is also newly created to suppo
