In Regulatory Wrap for the week to March 21, Kathryn Fallah discusses the FCA’s decision to axe its controversial “name and shame” proposal.
In this week’s Regulatory Wrap, we recount “name and shame” developments over the past year, as well as additional movements the FCA is taking to reshape its relationship with the industry following critical feedback.
1. Following considerable criticism, the FCA has announced on March 12 that the “name and shame” proposals are being abandoned
2. Some of the main critiques of the proposals included the potential detriment to market integrity, as well as premature damage to firms’ reputations who were still undergoing investigation
3. In its letter announcing the axing, the FCA stated it would not be moving forward due to a “lack of consensus” and instead will continue publicizing investigations in “exceptional circumstances”
4. The FCA announced additional changes to its approach, such as halting its joint proposal with the PRA around diversity and inclusion, which could be in response to its commitment of supporting the U.K. government’s growth by “reducing the regulatory burden”
5. With the FCA vowing to have a “different relationship” with the industry, it seems the regulator is approaching rulemaking with caution moving forward
This episode is brought to you by our Content Writer, Kathryn Fallah.
As the FCA moves away from previous proposals to instead foster a different relationship with the industry, one concentration remains at the core – compliance.
