Remuneration Governance¶
Back to Governance & Accountability
Overview¶
Remuneration practices for financial advisers and their representatives are a key area of MAS regulatory focus. Poorly designed incentive structures can drive mis-selling, conflicts of interest, and unfair outcomes for consumers. MAS has issued specific guidelines requiring financial institutions to implement balanced and risk-adjusted remuneration frameworks. MAS Notice FAA-N20 (Requirements for the Remuneration Framework for Representatives and Supervisors — "Balanced Scorecard Framework") and its companion Guidelines FAA-G14 are the cornerstones of Singapore's approach to representative remuneration governance.
MAS Guidelines on Remuneration¶
Regulatory Framework¶
MAS regulates representative remuneration through several instruments:
- MAS Notice FAA-N20 (Balanced Scorecard Framework + Independent Sales Audit Unit): Requires licensed and exempt financial advisers to implement the balanced scorecard remuneration framework for representatives and supervisors, and to maintain an Independent Sales Audit Unit
- MAS Guidelines FAA-G14 (Balanced Scorecard Framework — Guidance): Companion guidance on BSC design, weightings, post-sale checks, and independent sales audit
- MAS Guidelines on Sound Remuneration Practices: Broader guidelines applicable to financial institutions on aligning remuneration with risk
- MAS Fair Dealing Guidelines: Overarching principles requiring fair outcomes for customers, including through appropriate remuneration design
- MAS IAC Guidelines: Accountability of senior management for remuneration outcomes
Core Principles¶
MAS expects remuneration frameworks for representatives to adhere to these principles:
- Alignment with customer interests: Remuneration should not create incentives that conflict with the duty to act in customers' best interests
- Risk adjustment: Remuneration should account for the risks associated with the activities that generate the remuneration
- Long-term sustainability: Remuneration should be linked to long-term performance, not short-term sales volumes
- Transparency: Representatives should clearly understand how their remuneration is determined
- Governance: Remuneration policies should be approved by the board and subject to regular review
Balanced Scorecard for Representatives (FAA-N20 + FAA-G14)¶
Purpose¶
The balanced scorecard (BSC) framework under MAS Notice FAA-N20 requires licensed financial advisers (LFAs) and exempt financial advisers (EFAs) to assess representatives and supervisors using a holistic set of criteria, not solely production-based metrics. The BSC must be a meaningful determinant of variable remuneration.
BSC Components¶
The balanced scorecard must include at least four categories of assessment criteria:
1. Compliance and Ethical Standards¶
Measures the representative's adherence to regulatory requirements and ethical standards:
- Compliance with MAS regulations, notices, and guidelines
- Adherence to the institution's code of conduct and internal policies
- Timely and accurate completion of regulatory filings
- Absence of disciplinary actions or regulatory sanctions
- Compliance with anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing requirements
- Proper handling of client confidential information
2. Quality of Financial Planning and Advisory¶
Assesses the quality and suitability of advice provided to clients:
- Thoroughness of needs analysis and fact-finding
- Suitability of product recommendations relative to client needs and risk profile
- Quality of documentation (financial needs analysis reports, risk profiling)
- Client understanding of recommended products (informed consent)
- Appropriateness of asset allocation and portfolio construction
- Consideration of client's existing portfolio and insurance coverage
3. Customer/Client Outcomes¶
Measures the outcomes experienced by the representative's clients:
- Client complaint rates and nature of complaints
- Policy/investment lapse and cancellation rates within the first 12-24 months
- Client satisfaction scores
- Client retention rates
- Fair dealing outcomes (product switching, replacement, concentration)
- Post-sale review completion rates
4. Professional Development¶
Assesses the representative's commitment to professional growth:
- Completion of continuing professional development (CPD) requirements
- Achievement of professional qualifications beyond minimum requirements
- Participation in training programmes and knowledge assessments
- Mentoring and coaching contributions
- Industry engagement and knowledge sharing
BSC Weighting and Impact¶
- Non-production criteria must be significant: The BSC must ensure that non-production-related criteria (compliance, quality, client outcomes, development) collectively have a meaningful impact on variable remuneration
- Production alone is insufficient: Representatives who meet sales targets but score poorly on non-production criteria should see a material reduction in variable remuneration
- Minimum thresholds: FIs should set minimum thresholds for compliance and conduct criteria, below which no variable remuneration is payable regardless of production performance
BSC Governance¶
- The board or a board committee must approve the BSC framework
- The BSC methodology, criteria, and weightings must be documented and communicated to all representatives
- The BSC must be reviewed at least annually and updated to reflect regulatory changes and emerging risks
- Results of BSC assessments should be documented and maintained as part of representative records
- The compliance and risk functions should be involved in the design and calibration of the BSC
Deferred Compensation¶
Purpose¶
Deferred compensation aligns representative remuneration with longer-term outcomes and provides the institution with the ability to adjust payouts if risks materialise after the assessment period.
MAS Expectations¶
MAS expects financial institutions, particularly those of significant size and complexity, to implement deferred compensation arrangements:
- Deferral period: A meaningful portion of variable remuneration should be deferred for a period of at least 3 years
- Vesting conditions: Deferred amounts should vest subject to ongoing compliance with conduct and performance standards
- Risk adjustment during deferral: Deferred amounts should be subject to reduction (malus) or recovery (clawback) if adverse outcomes emerge
Deferral Mechanics¶
| Component | Description |
|---|---|
| Deferral percentage | Typically 40-60% of variable remuneration for senior roles; lower for junior representatives |
| Deferral period | 3-5 years, with pro-rata or cliff vesting |
| Vesting conditions | Continued employment, no material compliance breaches, no client harm |
| Form of deferral | Cash, equity-linked instruments, or phantom units |
| Forfeiture triggers | Gross misconduct, regulatory sanctions, material misstatement |
Application to Representatives¶
For representatives, deferred compensation may take the form of:
- Deferred commission payments released over 12-36 months
- Retention payments subject to conduct conditions
- Performance bonuses with multi-year vesting
- Trail commissions that are subject to clawback in the event of early policy lapse
Clawback Provisions¶
Definition¶
Clawback provisions allow the institution to recover variable remuneration that has already been paid to a representative, where subsequent events reveal that the remuneration was not warranted.
Triggering Events¶
Clawback may be triggered by:
- Misconduct: Discovery of fraud, dishonesty, or deliberate breach of regulations
- Mis-selling: Determination that the representative provided unsuitable advice leading to client harm
- Material risk event: A significant loss or regulatory action resulting from the representative's activities
- Restatement: Material restatement of the financial results on which the remuneration was based
- Policy lapse: Early lapse or cancellation of policies sold by the representative, indicating potential churning or unsuitable advice
Implementation¶
- Clawback provisions should be clearly documented in the representative's contract or appointment agreement
- The maximum clawback period should be defined (typically 3-7 years from the date of payment)
- The process for invoking clawback should be clearly defined, including the decision-making authority and the representative's right to be heard
- Recovered amounts may be offset against future remuneration payments
Variable Remuneration Alignment with Risk¶
Risk-Adjusted Performance¶
Variable remuneration for representatives should be adjusted for the risks associated with their activities:
- Product risk: Higher-risk products (leveraged products, structured products) should not attract disproportionately higher commissions
- Client vulnerability: Additional scrutiny of sales to vulnerable clients (elderly, financially unsophisticated)
- Concentration risk: Excessive concentration in a single product or product type should be flagged
- Suitability risk: Recommendations that appear inconsistent with the client's risk profile should reduce the representative's BSC score
Anti-Churning Measures¶
Remuneration structures should not incentivise churning (excessive replacement of existing policies):
- Commission rates on replacement policies should be lower than for new policies
- Representatives with high replacement ratios should be subject to enhanced supervision
- Lapse-based clawback provisions discourage short-term sales tactics
- Policy persistency should be a component of the BSC
Product-Neutral Incentives¶
Where possible, remuneration structures should be product-neutral or near-neutral:
- Avoid significantly higher commission rates for specific products that could distort recommendations
- Where differential commission rates exist, the BSC should counterbalance production incentives with suitability and client outcome measures
- Consider fee-based (rather than commission-based) remuneration models that better align representative and client interests
Governance and Oversight¶
Board Responsibilities¶
The board or its remuneration committee is responsible for:
- Approving the overall remuneration policy and framework for representatives
- Reviewing the balanced scorecard design and weightings annually
- Ensuring that remuneration practices do not create unacceptable conduct risk
- Reviewing aggregate remuneration outcomes and their alignment with risk
- Approving the application of clawback in significant cases
Management Responsibilities¶
Senior management is responsible for:
- Implementing the board-approved remuneration framework
- Conducting BSC assessments for all representatives
- Applying deferred compensation and clawback provisions consistently
- Monitoring remuneration outcomes for unintended consequences
- Reporting to the board on remuneration practices and their risk implications
Compliance Oversight¶
The compliance function should:
- Review the remuneration framework for compliance with MAS requirements
- Monitor for remuneration-related conflicts of interest
- Assess whether BSC outcomes are consistent with compliance monitoring results
- Report concerns about remuneration practices to the board or relevant committee
Record-Keeping¶
Institutions must maintain comprehensive records of:
- The remuneration policy and BSC framework, including all versions
- Individual BSC assessments and variable remuneration calculations
- Deferred compensation schedules and vesting outcomes
- Clawback decisions and recovery actions
- Board and committee minutes relating to remuneration approvals