Wednesday, March 31, 2010

Is FSDC the solution to India's regulatory woes?

Status Quo
The current regulatory framework does not allow for innovation and has excessive micro-management. Also the objectives of the regulators are not clear and there is a lack of communication between different regulators. Additionally there are overlaps between different regulators and there is no clear overriding regulator in such cases. For instance there are products that overlap between two markets such as ULIPs which cause a huge dispute between mutual funds and insurance companies due to the disparate nature of regulation by SEBI and IRDA
But the biggest draw-back of a fragmented regulator is the underestimation of conglomerate wide risk. Today financial conglomerates manage different but highly inter-related business. While individual regulators assess the risk of individual businesses, there is a need for a regulator that can assess the total systemic risk of such financial giants. Currently HLCC (High Level Co-ordination Committee) is expected to resolve regulatory issues. The problem with HLCC is that there is no mandate or objective because of which the meetings are meaningless with clear communication and coordination gaps. Additionally committees by nature are not effective as power centers, as they have no statutory powers.
What is required?
What’s required is coordination among regulators, integrated regulation of financial conglomerates and overall monitoring of entire financial system.
Is FSDC the answer?
Financial Stability and Development Council is expected to coordinate and preside over regulators including RBI, SEBI, IRDA and PFRDA. This corrects one big flaw in case of HLCC; the fact that HLCC was chaired by RBI, which itself was a regulator. Also assuming the sectoral regulators continue to regulate their respective activities, FSDC can step in cases of systemic risk in the financial market. It would also better assess the risk of a financial conglomerate. Currently financial institutes operate in such diverse domains, that some of the fields go completely unregulated. The presence of FSDC would create an agency which would be able to regulate the activities of such conglomerates. This would be particularly useful in case of products that straddle different markets. FSDC can set up consistent regulatory norms for such products. While we cannot deny the need of a super regulator there are certain pressing concerns. There is some lack of clarity regarding the role of FSDC whether it would have the overriding powers or not, also finance minister chairing the FSDC would bring political interference in financial regulation, which is seemingly a bad idea. Another problem might be the loss of accountability and reduced efficiency due to the introduction of an additional layer of approval. Additionally the unified regulator, which would essentially result from merging the existing regulatory agency, would create a regulatory behemoth; this might create huge bureaucracy issues in the system.
The implementation is the key here. The role of FSDC, its powers, the change if any in HLCC are factors that would change the way we would view FSDC and its efficacy. The devil here as they say lies in the details!

No comments: