Financial Regulatory Forum

COLUMN – UK Bribery Act guidelines: has the lobbying worked?

By Guest Contributor
April 5, 2011

By Helen Parry,   senior regulatory intelligence expert, Complinet. The views expressed are her own.

Japan’s material adverse change: from financings to M&A

By Guest Contributor
March 23, 2011

By John Mackie

TORONTO, March 23 (Westlaw Business) – Japan’s nuclear difficulties must be mourned, without qualification. At the same time, the business and legal communities cannot stand still, as they deal with several quite-unexpected ripple effects. Both M&A and capital markets transactions have suffered, and disclosure practices are now coming under review. Set against a backdrop of plummeting stock prices, companies in nuclear-related industries are caught in their own battle to sustain themselves. (more…)

Corporate Governance: Staggered U.S. boards are endangered species

By Guest Contributor
March 23, 2011

By Erik Krusch

NEW YORK, March 23 (Westlaw Business) – Classified boards may be moving towards the endangered species list, as investors and even management are hunting them down.

COLUMN – U.S. Libya sanctions: vendors beware — and beware of your vendors

By Guest Contributor
March 18, 2011

By Richard J Cellini, Esq, CEO Briefcast analytics. The views expressed are his own.

UK financial regulatory changes sharpen accountability of senior managers

By Guest Contributor
March 18, 2011

By Susannah Hammond

LONDON, March 18 (Complinet) The new UK financial regulatory architecture is taking shape. The new bodies, their responsibilities and reporting lines are currently being consulted on and seem likely to be fairly close to the structures which will be in place by the end of 2012.

U.S. budget cut seen threatening state, local financial crime-fighting

By Guest Contributor
March 11, 2011

By Brett Wolf

ST. LOUIS, March 11 (Complinet) – A looming cut to the federal financial crime agency’s budget could cripple state and local investigations that depend on transactions monitored via the anti-money laundering Bank Secrecy Act, worried authorities said.

Dodd-Frank’s hatchet men: SEC & others go after incentive-based compensation

By Guest Contributor
March 9, 2011

March 8 (Westlaw Business) –  Can Dodd-Frank’s latest anti-risk salvo, a new proposed rule on incentive-based compensation, solve as many questions as it raises? In theory, the idea is a noble one: break the chain of managing for the short-money by curtailing lopsided risks that ultimately soak the taxpayer. But even the SEC and the other agencies involved under the new Dodd-Frank regime admit there will be no shortage of questions.

INTERVIEW-China seeks developed-country benchmark in corporate governance

By Guest Contributor
March 9, 2011

Patricia Lee in Singapore

SINGAPORE, March 7 (Complinet)  -  In an emerging market such as China, where its codes of market conduct oftentimes fail to keep up with market developments, shareholders and investors dabbling in its equities market remain largely unprotected. Even then, the lack of protection has far from become a deterrent to them. The reason, according to Zhengjun Zhang, senior research fellow at the Development Research Center of the State Council of China, was due mainly to the rush for returns from the country’s burgeoning albeit nascent equities market, which has continued to see rapid growth in new firms seeking an initial public offering.

COLUMN-EU bank stress tests: what’s the point?

By Guest Contributor
March 4, 2011

Employees of the Deutsche Bank walk in front of the Deutsche Bank headquarters in Frankfurt April 28, 2010. REUTERS/Johannes EiseleBy Keith Mullin, Editor at Large, International Financing Review; the views expressed are his own.

SEC’s boardroom bombshell: directors can be costly

By Guest Contributor
March 4, 2011

Traders work in the Goldman Sachs stall on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange July 16, 2010.  REUTERS/Brendan McDermidNEW YORK, March 4 (Westlaw Business) Being an insider with a fiduciary duty sure is risky, as heavyweight Rajat Gupta is now finding out amidst serious SEC charges. So is having board members, as Goldman Sachs and Procter and Gamble are now worrying. Of great concern to each are the reputational risks and attendant costs that this might impose on them. The potential risks could relate to a broad range of issues, ranging from inside information, to disclosure of SEC investigation and board member protection. Though this likelihood may seem remote, recent experiences from Bank of America to Goldman Sachs itself show them to be painfully possible.