Employment in Financial Services

Contributing Editor

In a rapidly evolving regulatory landscape, employers in the financial services sector must ensure they are fully compliant with local employment rules and procedures. Helping to mitigate risk, IEL’s guide provides clear answers to the key issues facing employers in the sector

Choose countries

 

Choose questions

Choose the questions you would like answering, or choose all for the full picture.

07. Are there any specific rules relating to compensation payable to financial services employees in your jurisdiction, including, for example, limits on variable compensation, or provisions for deferral, malus and/or clawback of monies paid to employees?
 

07. Are there any specific rules relating to compensation payable to financial services employees in your jurisdiction, including, for example, limits on variable compensation, or provisions for deferral, malus and/or clawback of monies paid to employees?
 

Flag / Icon

Hong Kong

  • at Morgan Lewis & Bockius
  • at Morgan Lewis & Bockius

There are no specific mandatory rules relating to compensation payable to financial services employees in Hong Kong.

The HKMA has issued a Supervisory Policy Manual CG-5 “Guideline on a Sound Remuneration System”. This focuses on providing a broad idea and introducing basic principles of how remuneration policies should be designed and implemented in the authorised institution, to encourage employee behaviour that supports the risk management framework, corporate values and long-term financial soundness of the authorised institution.

Under the Guideline, the elements of a sound remuneration system are as follows:

Governance

  • Remuneration policy should be in line with objectives, business strategies and the long-term goals of the authorised institution.
  • The remuneration arrangement for employees whose activities could have a material impact on the authorised institution’s risk profile and financial soundness should support, but not undermine, the overall risk management approach.
  • The Board of an authorised institution is ultimately responsible for overseeing the formulation and implementation of the remuneration policy.
  • The establishment of a Board remuneration committee would assist the Board in discharging its responsibility for the design and operation of the authorised institution’s remuneration system.
  • Risk control personnel should have appropriate authority and involvement in the process of design and implementation of the authorised institution’s remuneration policy.

Structure of remuneration

  • Balance of fixed and variable remuneration should be determined with regard to the seniority, role, responsibilities and activities of their employees and the need to promote behaviour among employees that support the authorised institution’s risk-management framework and long-term financial soundness.
  • Variable remuneration should be paid in such a manner as to align an employee’s incentive awards with long-term value creation and the time horizons of risk.
  • Guaranteed minimum bonus to senior management or key personnel should be subject to the approval of the Board (or the Board’s remuneration committee with the necessary delegated authority).

Measurement of performance for variable remuneration

  • The award of variable remuneration should depend on the fulfilment of certain pre-determined and assessable performance criteria, which include both financial and non-financial factors.
  • Size and allocation of variable remuneration should take into account the current and potential risks associated with the activities of employees, as well as the performance (overall performance of the relevant business units and the authorised institution as a whole as well as the contribution of individual employees to such performance).
  • Judgement and common sense may be required during the process to arrive at a fair and appropriate remuneration decision. The rationale for the exercise of judgment and the outcomes should be recorded in writing.

Alignment of remuneration pay-outs to the time horizon of risks

  • Deferment of variable remuneration is appropriate when the risks taken by the employee in question are harder to measure or will be realised over a longer timeframe.
  • The award of deferred remuneration should be subject to a minimum vesting period and pre-defined vesting conditions in respect of future performance.
  • Authorised institutions should seek undertakings from employees not to engage in personal hedging strategies or remuneration and liability-related insurance to hedge their exposures in respect of the unvested portion of their deferred remuneration.

Remuneration disclosure

  • Authorised institutions should make remuneration disclosures at least annually. The disclosure should include the qualitative and quantitative information that the HKMA has set out in its annual remuneration disclosure.
Last updated on 22/01/2023

Flag / Icon

Switzerland

  • at Walder Wyss
  • at Walder Wyss
  • at Walder Wyss

Swiss civil law provides for special rules that govern the compensation of current and former members of inter alia the board and executive committee (Ordinance against Excessive Compensation) of Swiss companies limited by shares that are listed on a Swiss or foreign stock exchange. In addition, there are disclosure provisions listed companies need to follow concerning remuneration under stock exchange regulations.

In addition to the above, FINMA has formulated ten principles regarding remuneration that banks, securities firms, financial groups and conglomerates, insurance companies, insurance groups and conglomerates are required to implement. The principles serve as minimum standards for the design, implementation and disclosure of remuneration schemes.

These schemes should not incentivise to take inappropriate risks and thereby potentially damage the stability of financial institutions.

One of the focal points of the principles is variable remuneration that depends on business performance and risk. In particular, all variable remuneration must have been earned by the company over the long term. Consequently, remuneration is dependent on performance, taking into account the sustainability of such performance as well as the risks. That said, FINMA’s principles do not limit the amount of variable remuneration. However, FINMA aims to prevent the granting of high remuneration based on large risks and the generation of short-term, unsustainable earnings. Furthermore, persons who have significant responsibility relating to the risk or receive a high total remuneration, must receive a significant part of the variable remuneration on a deferred basis and consequently, in a way that is linked to the current risk. Under the FINMA principles, "clawback" and "malus" arrangements are permitted.

Last updated on 16/04/2024

10. Are there any circumstances in which notifications relating to the employee or their conduct will need to be made to local or international regulators?
 

10. Are there any circumstances in which notifications relating to the employee or their conduct will need to be made to local or international regulators?
 

Flag / Icon

Hong Kong

  • at Morgan Lewis & Bockius
  • at Morgan Lewis & Bockius

SFC – Self-reporting obligation

An SFC-licensed intermediary is subject to the self-reporting obligation under paragraph 12.5 of the “Code of Conduct for Persons Licensed by or Registered with the Securities and Futures Commission”. A licensed or registered person should report to the SFC immediately upon the occurrence of any material breach, infringement or non-compliance with any laws, rules regulations, and codes administered or issued by the SFC, exchange or clearing house of which it is a member or participant of, and the requirement of any regulatory authority applicable to that intermediary. This encompasses both actual and suspected breaches, infringements or non-compliance. In the report, the particulars of the actual or suspected breach, infringement or non-compliance, and relevant information and documents must be included to fulfil the obligation.

The same is to be reported by the registered institutions to the HKMA. The HKMA also requires authorised institutions to submit an incident report on the same day of discovering the incident.

SFC - Internal investigation disclosure obligation

In addition, a licensed corporation is required to provide the SFC with information about whether a licensed individual who ceases to be accredited to it (outgoing employee) was under any investigation commenced by the licensed corporation within six months preceding his or her cessation of accreditation. If the internal investigation commences after the notification of cessation of accreditation, the licensed corporation should also notify the SFC as soon as practicable. In addition, even if a firm has completed its investigation and made no negative findings against an outgoing employee, the firm will still be required to notify the SFC of the investigation.

The SFC expects licensed corporations to proactively disclose information about all investigative actions and the following is a non-exhaustive list of examples of investigations involving an outgoing employee that a licensed corporation should disclose to the SFC:

  • investigations about a suspected breach or breach of applicable laws, rules and regulations;
  • investigations about a suspected breach or breach of the licensed corporation's internal policies or procedures;
  • investigations about misconduct that are likely to give rise to concerns about the fitness and properness of the outgoing employee;
  • investigations about any matter that may have an adverse market or client impact; and
  • investigations about any matter potentially involving fraud, dishonesty and misfeasance.

HKMA – Reporting incidents to HKMA

According to the “Incident Response and Management Procedures” published by the HKMA, once an authorised institution has become aware that a significant incident has occurred, the authorised institution concerned should notify the HKMA immediately and provide it with whatever information is available at the time. An authorised institution should not wait until it has rectified the problem before reporting the incident to the HKMA.

According to the Supervisory Policy Manual SB-1 “Supervision of Regulated Activities of SFC-Registered Authorized Institutions”, to be in line with the reporting requirements imposed by the SFC on licensed representatives, authorised institutions will be required to notify the HKMA in writing within seven business days upon knowledge of the occurrence of certain information (including any subsequent changes) of the relevant individuals. The required information is on whether or not the person is or has been:

  • convicted of or charged with any criminal offence (other than a minor offence) in Hong Kong or elsewhere;
  • subject to any disciplinary action, or investigation by a regulatory body or criminal investigatory body (as the case may be) in Hong Kong or elsewhere;
  • subject to, or involved in the management of a corporation or business that has been or is subject to, any investigation by a criminal investigatory body or any regulatory body in Hong Kong or elsewhere concerning offences involving fraud or dishonesty;
  • engaged in any judicial or other proceedings, whether in Hong Kong or elsewhere, that is material or relevant to the fitness and propriety of the individual; or
  • bankrupt or aware of the existence of any matters that might render him insolvent or lead to the appointment of a receiver of his property under the Bankruptcy Ordinance.

HKMA – Guidance Note on Cooperation with HKMA Investigations

Under the “Guidance Note on Cooperation with the HKMA in Investigations and Enforcement Proceedings”, the HKMA encourages and recognises the cooperation of authorised institutions, banks and their staff in investigations and enforcement proceedings. Under this Guidance Note, cooperation includes early and voluntary reporting of any suspected breach or misconduct, taking a proactive approach to assist the HKMA’s investigation, and making timely arrangements to provide evidence and information.

IA – Self-reporting obligation

Under “the Code of Conduct for Licensed Insurance Agents/Brokers”, there is a self-reporting obligation by licensed insurance agencies or brokerages to the IA. A licensed insurance agency or brokerage is required to have proper controls and procedures to ensure the following incidents are reported to the IA as soon as is reasonably practicable:

  • a disciplinary action taken by the HKMA, the SFC or the Mandatory Provident Fund Schemes Authority;
  • a criminal conviction (other than a minor offence) by any court in Hong Kong or elsewhere;
  • any material breaches of requirements under the IO or any rules, regulations, codes or guidelines administered or issued by the IA; and
  • any material incidents which happen to the agency or brokerage.
Last updated on 22/01/2023

Flag / Icon

Switzerland

  • at Walder Wyss
  • at Walder Wyss
  • at Walder Wyss

As a general principle, supervised companies are required to ensure that persons holding, in particular, executive, overall management, oversight or control functions fulfil the requirements of the “fit and proper” test. Consequently, such persons must be of good repute and can guarantee compliance with applicable laws and regulations.

If a person cannot guarantee that the regulatory requirements are fulfilled at all times (eg, because of a material breach of its duties) the employing entity and its audit companies may be required to immediately report to FINMA, respectively, any incident that is of significance.

Last updated on 16/04/2024