Compliance
Credibility Of Swiss Regulatory System Called Into Question

It was a short honeymoon. On 1 January 2009 the new Swiss regulator FINMA took over the roles of the Swiss Banking Commission, the Federal Office for Insurance and the Money Laundering authority.
The new body has to regulate activities that produce some 12 per
cent of Swiss GDP. To do this FINMA has some 300 staff with a
budget of SFr95 million (about $81 million). Ninety people are
responsible for the surveillance of some 260 insurance entities,
80 people review 337 banks and 5,794 authorities funds, and some
60 people are responsible for the three local exchanges. This, it
has now been noticed, seems rather a low ratio of staff to
institutions.
Excuses are made, for example that the number of employees is not
so important as their quality - and it is also true that a
number of the tasks that FINMA undertakes are delegated to the
big four audit firms and some large law firms, but the lack of
clear oversight and the mishmash of 11 self-regulatory
organisations for the 6,869 independent financial intermediaries
is beginning to look less than prudent.
One of the results of this structure is that the authorities are
“very tolerant of the large banks and very intolerant of the
small ones” according to
Hans Geiger, a professor at the Swiss Banking Institute.
There has long been a muttered suspicion amongst the smaller
players that the large Swiss banks were not subject to the same
oversight as the smaller concerns and this now seems to be coming
to the surface.
There has also been a considerable amount of criticism to the
effect that FINMA has not censured any senior member of UBS’s
board or management over its recent problems in the US. FINMA's
report states blandly that there is no evidence that senior
management knew what was going on.
While one can agree that this may be the case, should not the
regulator be asking why the board and the senior management did
not know what UBS was doing in the US? Surely ignorance is no
excuse when dealing with corporate governance?
There are now suggestions that the fact that
Eugen Haltiner, president of FINMA, worked for UBS from 1973
to 2005 should have disqualified him from the position.
Otto Stich, a past member of the federal council was quoted
in local media over the weekend as saying “In order to exercise
the function of president of FINMA objectively (the holder)
should be at a healthy distance from the banks”.
One thing is also clear, but has yet to become a part of the
debate in Switzerland. Some 7.7 million people live in a country
that manages about one third of the world’s private wealth. There
is no way that you can both do this and regulate what
is going on, however much you delegate, if you are relying
fundamentally on home-grown talent or self-regulation.