Wednesday, December 24, 2014

SElf REgulation < IS IT A MISCONCEIVED idea ; that can never work, more so, forget wonders, any IMPROVEMENT >>>



 Not unrelated ?! 

SEBI (Another roll back- of yet another impulsively introduced 'regulation'?! )

Start-up listing: Sebi may further relax proposals

Could halve minimum investment size from what was proposed in March paper, plus other concessions; to approve framework next month

< The disclosure requirement would not require start-ups to disclose objects of an issue if the money was raised for commercial purposes. The basis of the issue price would require disclosures as deemed fit by the issuer, and disclosure of litigation depending on its relevance. >


Commoner's (common sense) Reaction:

“Many ... are lobbying to extend  that allows them to maintain low provisions against impaired or stressed assets."

Bluntly stating, is not what is being lobbied for, the most dreaded and obnoxious practice of  "window dressing”, that happens to being indulged in, with or without forbearance by the Regulator, quite for long? On that premise, is not the 'statutory audit' of banking sector reduced to an empty or meaningless formality, a farce? Does not then, the report, as is the convention, expressing the opinion, -regardless of the clumsily guarded language in which it is lately chosen to be couched, - that the audited final accounts show a true and fair view (picture) of the financial position , if were construed / interpreted in actual and factual terms, and in substance, tantamount to saying it all but really divulging nothing to the stakeholders ?


Ajay Singh: Forty companies, a dispute and some defaults

SpiceJet's saviour has interests across sectors; some of those could come under scrutiny. Business Standard explores

IMPROMPTU: The narrated episode makes for ,-to rhyme with 'tale of two cities' or 'one man company' a novel idea given a legal shape under the new company law – a tell-tale of one man with many ('RELATED', a modern day concept that has increasingly come to be regarded as the proverbial red rag to a BULL (-as personified by the whole lot of so called regulators , or semi- or self-regulators, styled/named  SEBI, ICSI,  CLB, RBI,  ICAI >>>) companies; and, with many fanciful names – ANY THOUGHTS to toe the line , especially from the expected-to-be-concerned government / its authoritative quarters AND/OR company law experts at large?


]1 Administrative Reforms Commission's 9th Report titled ..



Self-regulation may work for microfinance  

<....has appointed a tough self-regulatory body is testimony to its commitment to a client-centric approach.
< In fact, the self-regulation model has traditionally been viewed with scepticism. There would seem to be an in-built conflict between advocating and promoting the interest of the individual member and the larger interest of the industry.
< Globally, the model hasn’t met with much of success. Most countries have either weak or non-existent financial consumer protection rules, that do not touch providers of financial services at the base of the pyramid.>>>

Sporadic (with courage of conviction, to call a spade a spade):

At best, the write-up makes for a soliloquy; a confus-ed/-ing bag of mutually contradicting thoughts- a typical sort of blowing/breathing hot and hold simultaneously.

E.g.  'tough self-regulatory authority' < a patently self defeating ideology; an oxymoron, a proven failure , if not a non-starter.

For practical clues, if not for a clear-cut answer, recommended to mindfully look around; and look into/through specially appointed domestic and foreign experts'  committee Reports galore. Many of them bluntly decry the poor quality, nay futility, that the loosely called "home jurisdiction regulation" is inherently potent with / bears on its sleeves. It is a tragedy that contrary to sane expectations, some have been gathering dust in the nation’s archives, for years, with no follow-on. 

Worth remembering  that for quite some time now, the idea of a 'super regulator', over and above even so-believed –all- powerful and full-fledged regulators already in place - such as SEBI and IRDA , intended to take on and tackle the idiosyncrasies of homo sapiens, has been mooted, and is being discussed ceremoniously, off and on.


The Sarbanes–Oxley Act: Rewriting Audit
Committee Governance

Stephanie Tsacoumis, Stephanie R. Bess and
Bryn A. Sappington*

For those non-US companies that wish to access the US public capital markets, the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(“SOX”) has ushered in a new regime of compliance obligations,
particularly in relation to audit committees. These compliance obligations, among other things, will impact governance practices, an area traditionally reserved for home jurisdiction regulation.

CRoss REfer >

swamilook: Action vs Inaction; SELF REgulatory 9th Report ..

swamilook: SElf REgulation < IS IT A MISCONCEIVED idea ...

 Report of the Committee on Capacity Building in Banks and ...

Master Circular on Audit System issued by Government

“Why to say, NO - to semi regulatory authority (special .

S L Rao: A stronger backbone for regulators

< With due respect to the writer's views, if one were to be guided by the history of the post-independent nation, neither a stronger backbone , nor introducing and imbibing the American system , by itself, may not have any salutary effect, or a fruitful outcome / result, or even help in improving upon the extant deficiencies, being galore, particularly in the near future. Frankly speaking,if at all, only a revolutionary change, by inducting people with proven impregnable probity / integrity, also known for an upright thinking, who could be trusted to act having in mind the basic objective of any such institution in the name of 'regulator' can be expected to help. Besides, if one remembers right, a special committee appointed years ago (how long ago ?) for looking into and making its recommendations on the regulatory system in place, the one important and significant change advocated for was to do away with semi-regulatory system in certain key regimes (e.g. RBI , ICAI and ICSI) to be replaced by inherently independent and fully fledged regulators. That assumes greater significance and calls for priority consideration, now that lately the idea of having an overall supervisory institution of a super regulator has come to be mooted and is being seriously under discussion. (Left open for views to be shared,if for or against, but well-reasoned)

No comments:

Post a Comment