Banking supervision and regulation by the Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) remain strong. This assessment confirms the 2014 Basel Core Principles assessment that the HKMA achieves a high level of compliance with the BCPs. The Basel III framework (and related guidance) and domestic and cross-border cooperation arrangements are firmly in place. The HKMA actively contributes to the development and implementation of relevant international standards. Updating their risk based supervisory approach helped the HKMA optimize supervisory resources. The HKMA’s highly experienced supervisory staff is a key driver to achieving one of the most sophisticated levels of supervision and regulation observed in Asia and beyond.
he Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) is among the world’s major fintech hubs, well positioned to develop fintech initiatives from its traditional strengths in financial services. Key factors enabling the HKSAR to emerge as a fintech hub include its presence as an international financial center, its free-flowing talent and capital, a highly developed information and technology communication (ITC) infrastructure, and its most unique trait, a geographical and strategic advantage by proximity to the market in Mainland China.
This note provides an update and assessment of developments in insurance supervision since 2014. It is part of the 2020 Financial Sector Assessment Program (FSAP) for the Hong Kong SAR (HKSAR) and draws on discussions there from September 10 to 24, 2019. It has not been updated for the impact of recent global events associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. The insurance sector is large, especially long-term (life) insurance, highly international and has been growing steadily. The long-term market is amongst the world’s largest, particularly by penetration (premiums to GDP). Growth has been supported by the popularity of savings products, including sales of policies to Mainland Chinese visitors (MCVs), although these have declined from their peak. The general insurance sector, though comprising many more companies, is relatively small and spread over many lines. The authorities have identified scope for growth in protection policies as well as opportunities for captive and specialty lines related to China’s Belt and Road Initiative. Tax incentives have supported the recent successful introduction of new annuity and health insurance products. Although foreign-owned companies account for a large share of business, the HKSAR is the home of three major domestic groups operating internationally.
The institutional framework for Macroprudential Policies (MaPP) in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (the Hong Kong SAR) is well established. According to the Basic Law, the Government of the Hong Kong SAR shall on its own formulate monetary and financial policies. The Financial Secretary (FS) and the Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury (SFST) are responsible for policies for maintaining the stability and integrity of the financial system of the Hong Kong SAR. The Hong Kong SAR has a sector-based regulatory structure and the responsibilities and tools for safeguarding financial stability are spread across the Financial Services and the Treasury Bureau (FSTB) and three regulators (namely, the Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA), Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) and Insurance Authority (IA)). There are good and well-structured interagency coordination and consultation mechanisms, through the Council of Financial Regulators (CFR) and the Financial Stability Committee (FSC), chaired by the FS and the SFST, respectively. Broad coordination between the CFR and government agencies on taxation and housing supply-side policies has also worked well. MaPP and risk assessment are communicated to the public openly and frequently through speeches, press releases and regular publications, including the Half-Yearly Monetary and Financial Stability Report of the HKMA and the Half-yearly Review Report of the Global and Local Securities Markets of the SFC.
Hong Kong SAR (HKSAR) is a small and open economy, and a major international financial center with extensive linkages to Mainland China. Over the past two years, Hong Kong SAR’s economy and financial sector were adversely impacted by domestic social unrest, US-China tensions, and the global COVID-19 pandemic, resulting in an unprecedented two consecutive years of negative economic growth.
This Technical Note on Oversight and Supervision of Financial Market Infrastructures has been prepared in the context of the Financial Sector Assessment Program for the People’s Republic of China–Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR). Nine financial market infrastructures (FMIs) operate in HKSAR; the effectiveness of their supervision and oversight is critical in maintaining financial stability. In order to support their objective of consolidating Hong Kong’s position as an international financial center, the Hong Kong authorities have fostered the development of sophisticated and multicurrency FMIs. The risks associated with domestic and overseas linkages appear to be adequately managed. Extensive domestic and overseas system linkages have been implemented making HKSAR a regional settlement hub. The legal framework should be amended to explicitly prohibit a domestic clearing house from operating in HKSAR without being recognized as such. The respective legal framework and policy mandate determines the actions of the Hong Kong Monetary Authority and the Securities and Futures Commission as the two regulatory, oversight and supervision authorities for FMIs in HKSAR.
Hong Kong SAR has significantly strengthened its crisis management arrangements through a thorough update of the framework for resolution of financial institutions, as recommended by the 2014 Financial Sector Assessment Program. The 2017 Financial Institutions (Resolution) Ordinance (FIRO) creates a resolution regime that is clear, comprehensive in scope, and closely aligned with the Financial Stability Board (FSB) Key Attributes of Effective Resolution Regimes for Financial Institutions. Some aspects of the FIRO, such as the cross-sectoral scope of the regime, are particularly strong. To implement the regime, the Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) 2 has established a Resolution Office (RO) with clear operational separation from banking supervision.
The Hong Kong Special Administrative Regime (HKSAR) is home to a fast-growing and highly international investment fund industry. The public investment fund industry authorized in HKSAR has grown rapidly from US$628 billion in 2008 to US$1.6 trillion in net asset value (NAV) in 2020. The locally domiciled sector grew from US$121 billion in early 2015 to almost US$155 billion in 2020. Open-end funds authorized for sale in HKSAR are substantially invested in foreign assets and significantly invested in by non-HKSAR residents and are therefore reactive to international liquidity and price conditions. Locally domiciled funds invest their portfolios in both local and overseas assets markets, while they are overwhelmingly funded by HKSAR investors.
Political boundaries are often porous to finance, financial intermediation, and financial distress. Yet they are highly impervious to financial regulation. When inhabitants of a country suffering a deficit of purchasing power are able to access and deploy funds flowing in from a country with a surfeit of such power, the inhabitants of both countries may benefit. They may also benefit when institutions undertaking such cross-border financial intermediation experience economies of scale and are able to innovate and to offer funds and services at lower costs. Inevitably, however, at least some such institutions will sometimes act imprudently, some of the projects in which such funds are deployed may be unwise, and other such projects can suffer from unforeseen circumstances. As a result of such factors, a financial institution may suffer distress in one country, and may then transmit such distress to other countries in which it operates. The efficacy of any response to such cross-border transmission of distress may turn on the response being given due effect in both (or all) the territories in which the distressed financial institution operates. This situation creates a conundrum for policymakers, legislators, and regulators who wish to enable those subject to their jurisdiction to access the benefits of cross-border financial intermediation, yet cannot make rules and regulations that would have effect outside that jurisdiction. This book explores this conundrum and offers a response. It does so by drawing on and adding to the literatures on financial intermediation, regulation, and distress, and on existing hard and soft laws and regulations. The book advocates for the creation of a model law that would address the full range of financial institutions, including insurance companies, and that would enable relevant authorities to cooperate with counterparts in advance of the onset of distress and to give appropriate effect in their jurisdiction to measures taken by counterpart authorities in other jurisdictions in which the distressed institution also operates.
In recent years, the IMF has released a growing number of reports and other documents covering economic and financial developments and trends in member countries. Each report, prepared by a staff team after discussions with government officials, is published at the option of the member country.
