MAS issues $27.45m in penalties to 9 financial institutions over $3b money laundering case, Singapore News
MAS identified the nine FIs through supervisory examinations conducted between early 2023 and early 2025, according to a statement released on Friday (July 4).
The nine FIs being penalised — including banks like Credit Suisse Singapore Branch, United Overseas Bank Limited (UOB) and UBS AG, Singapore branch — were found to have breaches in connection with anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) to persons of interest (POIs) in the major money laundering case.
According to MAS, the penalties took into account various factors including the extent of the FI's exposure to the POIs, the number of breaches of MAS' requirements, among others.
Credit Suisse was fined $5.8 million, the highest of the nine FIs.
Through its investigations, MAS generally did not find a pervasive lack of AML/CFT controls, but found that breaches arose out of "poor or inconsistent implementation".
Out of the nine FIs involved, five failed to perform adequate customer risk assessments, which subsequently led to a mis-rating of money laundering risks and their ability to implement appropriate controls.
MAS also found that eight FIs failed to take appropriate measures despite having suspicious transactions being flagged by their systems. In such cases, there was insufficient vigilance regarding transactions that were unusually large or inconsistent with customers' profiles.
Establishing and corroborating the source of wealth of customers who posed higher risks of money laundering was also observed in all FIs being penalised. Regulatory action against individuals
Apart from the nine FIs, MAS also issued prohibition orders ranging from three to six years against individuals who were involved in the managing the financial institutions' relationships with the POIs.
The four individuals identified were from Blue Ocean Invest (BOIPL), one of the nine FIs being penalised, including CEO and executive director Tsao Chung-yi.
Tsao will serve a six-year prohibition order from Aug 1, along with Wong Xuan Ling, CEO of BOIPL, who will serve a five-year prohibition order.
Both Tsao and Wong "failed as senior managers to ensure that the AML/CFT policies and controls in BOIPL kept pace with significant growth in its business in the three years since the company was set up", said MAS.
Hsia Lun Wei, an executive director and relationship manager, and Deng Xixi, a former relationship manager, both from BOIPL, were also issued three-year prohibition orders with effect from June 30.
For the duration of their prohibition orders, they will be barred from carrying out any business regulated by MAS, and will also be prohibited from taking part, directly or indirectly, in the management of a financial institution.
MAS also issued public reprimands to five individuals, and private reprimands to nine individuals, for their failure to ensure due diligence and implement AML/CFT policies sufficiently.
According to MAS, a reprimand is "issued to an individual based on their misconduct at the material time". FIs should adopt best practices: MAS
Following the major money laundering case, MAS published supervisory expectations in October last year regarding the controls that FIs should implement.
The banking industry also published best practice papers on implementing such controls, which "FIs should benchmark themselves against", so that they can "execute robust, reasonable and risk-proportionate defences" against money laundering.
"MAS will work closely with financial institutions to promote more consistent implementation of AML/CFT measures. Where there are serious failings by FIs and their employees, MAS will not hesitate to take firm action," said Ho Hern Shin, Deputy Managing Director (Financial Supervision), MAS.
Speaking to AsiaOne, a UOB spokesperson said that the bank acknowledges and accepts MAS' findings, and is "fully committed to ensuring compliance with regulatory requirements and to upholding the integrity of the Singapore financial system".
"Over the past two years, we have implemented prompt remedial actions to address the deficiencies identified after a comprehensive internal review, including stepping up on our transaction monitoring and customer due diligence processes," said the spokesperson.
UOB has also made significant investments in technology to enhance internal risk management standards, while boosting employee training so that they can "the highest professional and ethical standards". Singapore's largest money laundering case
Simultaneous raids across Singapore on Aug 13, 2023, involving over 400 police officers, resulted in the arrest of 10 foreign nationals for their links to organised crime, including scams and online gambling.
The 10 convicted, who were all Chinese nationals with citizenship in countries like Turkey and Cambodia, were Su Haijin, Su Baolin, Vang Shuiming, Wang Dehai, Su Jianfeng, Chen Qingyuan, Su Wenqiang, Wang Baosen, Zhang Ruijin and his lover Lin Baoying.
They have all been jailed, deported and barred from re-entering Singapore.
In total, over $3 billion worth of assets were seized, including properties, vehicles and country club memberships.
[[nid:719707]]
dana.leong@asiaone.com
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Times
6 hours ago
- Business Times
MAS considers calibrating corporate governance code to meet diverse needs of companies
[SINGAPORE] The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) is considering adopting a nuanced approach in its ongoing review of the corporate governance code. This includes calibrating the rules such that they cater to the diverse needs of different types of companies, from large-cap firms to family-controlled enterprises, said Lim Tuang Lee, assistant managing director of the central bank's capital markets division. Speaking on Wednesday (Aug 13) at the release of an annual corporate governance scorecard for Singapore-listed companies, Lim said that this will be among the primary focuses of a group undertaking the review. The sub-committee will fall under a main advisory committee, with a view to facilitate 'more meaningful and practical application of the code'. He added: 'One key objective of this review is that we want to take a long, hard, introspective look at our corporate governance requirements across the corporate governance code and practice guidance, to look at whether they are delivering the outcomes that we want. So a one-size-fits-all approach may not be the way to achieve this.' In May, MAS said that it was reviewing its corporate governance code to complement ongoing efforts in revamping Singapore's equities market. Regulators had previously announced that capital markets would be moving towards a disclosure-based regime. A NEWSLETTER FOR YOU Friday, 12.30 pm ESG Insights An exclusive weekly report on the latest environmental, social and governance issues. Sign Up Sign Up Noting the need to 'look outward and engage widely with different stakeholders', Lim said MAS is taking 'a broader consultative approach beyond the Corporate Governance Advisory Committee... to engage widely across the ecosystem'. 'So this includes both investors and companies of various profiles,' he added. A second sub-committee will examine new code provisions to guide companies' boards on corporate culture, board effectiveness, as well as mismanagement in emerging areas such as artificial intelligence. 'The aim is to strengthen boards' abilities to capture opportunities brought about by the dynamic environment that we are facing, especially with rapid changes in technologies,' Lim said. Stakeholder engagement He also noted that MAS has received feedback, as part of its equities review, that listed companies in Singapore can do more to engage investors and stakeholders. 'Too many companies here limit themselves to the bare minimum disclosure requirements, and in doing so, they've missed the opportunity to articulate strategic visions and plans for companies,' he said. He added that listed companies should hold more active dialogues with investors and the boarder markets, and use these conversations to guide strategic direction. 'The most effective companies do not wait for the annual general meeting to engage their investors and stakeholders. They maintain regular dialogue to seek to better understand their views and concerns,' he said. 'The investor-relations function should not be seen as just a help desk to answer queries. Strong investor-relations teams anticipate queries, provide meaningful context and help shape the narratives around the company.' Such engagements can become a strategic advantage for companies, as they may lead to better valuations, greater trading liquidity and a lower cost of capital.
Straits Times
a day ago
- Straits Times
SG60: The development of Singapore's corporate and securities law over the last 6 decades
Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox It has evolved from a colonial-era system into a globally respected, business-friendly and sophisticated legal regime The Monetary Authority of Singapore Act was passed in 1970, leading to the birth of the eponymous financial services regulator in 1971. SINGAPORE'S corporate law framework has undergone remarkable transformation over the past 60 years, evolving from a colonial-era system into a globally respected, business-friendly and sophisticated legal regime. This evolution directly mirrors Singapore's journey from a developing nation to a premier global financial hub. Here is a breakdown of the key developments. Foundational period (1960s–1980s): Establishing sovereignty and basic frameworks Prior to 1967, the Companies Ordinance 1940, which was modelled after the English Companies Act 1929, was the only corporate Act in force. Thereafter, the Companies Act 1967, Singapore's first major independent corporate statute, was enacted in 1967. While it was largely based on the Malaysian Companies Act (1965 edition), this began the process of localisation. The Companies Act 1967 was focused on basic incorporation, administration and creditor protection. The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) Act was passed in 1970, leading to the birth of the eponymous financial services regulator in 1971. In 1973, the Securities Industry Act 1973 was established. This set the framework for regulating securities markets in Singapore. The same year, the Stock Exchange of Singapore was formed. The key focus during this period was building foundational legal structures for a nascent economy, ensuring basic corporate governance and market regulation. Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. Singapore Luxury items seized in $3b money laundering case handed over to Deloitte for liquidation Singapore MyRepublic customers air concerns over broadband speed after sale to StarHub Singapore Power switchboard failure led to disruption in NEL, Sengkang-Punggol LRT services: SBS Transit Singapore NEL and Sengkang-Punggol LRT resume service after hours-long power fault Business Ninja Van cuts 12% of Singapore workforce after 2 rounds of layoffs in 2024 Singapore Hyflux investigator 'took advantage' of Olivia Lum's inability to recall events: Davinder Singh Singapore Man who stabbed son-in-law to death in Boon Tat Street in 2017 dies of heart attack, says daughter Singapore Man who stalked woman blasted by judge on appeal for asking scandalous questions in court Modernisation and liberalisation (1980s–late 1990s): Embracing market economics and global standards Against the backdrop of an economic recession in 1985, the enactment of the Companies (Amendment) Act 1987 facilitated tighter regulatory standards. The Securities Industry Act 1973 was replaced by the Securities Industry Act 1986 and, later, the Securities and Futures Act 2001. This created a more comprehensive and modern capital markets regulatory framework, aligning more closely with international standards such as those of the International Organization of Securities Commissions. The Singapore Code on Take-overs and Mergers, first introduced in 1974, was refined in 1979 and again in 1985. Rudimentary corporate governance guidelines began to take shape. In 1977, MAS played a predominant role in regulating the securities and futures industries, such as the insurance industry, alongside banking. Towards the late 1990s, Singapore's approach shifted to a disclosure-based regime, granting public companies greater liberty to tap the stock market. The focus was on making Singapore attractive to foreign investment and multinational corporations, fostering a dynamic capital market, and improving regulatory robustness. Strategic review and enhancement (late 1990s–2010): Post-Asian financial crisis and competitiveness drive December 1999 marked the appointment of the Company Legislation and Regulatory Framework Committee (CLRFC), which was pivotal to conducting a coherent and comprehensive review of Singapore's corporate law and framework. The recommendations of the CLRFC were implemented across major amendments of the Companies Act from 1999 to 2005. In 1999, the Companies Act criminalised any person who acted as a director or manager of a company while being an undischarged bankrupt. Major amendments were made to the Companies Act in 2002, with key recommendations being the introduction of the limited partnership and limited liability partnership business structures, the simplification of incorporation and maintenance procedures for private companies, and the threshold for compulsory share acquisition. More significant changes were made with the Companies (Amendment) Act 2004, and subsequently the Companies (Amendment) Act 2005. Singapore's corporate governance was further enhanced with the enactment of the statutory derivative action in 1993, which was a significant milestone for the protection of minority shareholders. Singapore progressed from a merit-based regime for public companies to a disclosure-based model in 1997. The Companies Act began codifying the general management powers of directors, duties of disclosure of conflicts of interest, and duties not to misappropriate company assets and breach of directors' fiduciary duties. Following the Companies (Amendment) Act 2005, the Companies Act 2006 strengthened creditors' protection by imposing restrictions on a company's provision of financial assistance for the acquisition of its own shares. It also empowered creditors to declare that a person engaged in fraudulent trading was personally liable for the debt of the company. In 2004, the Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority (Acra) was formed by merging the Registry of Companies and Businesses and the Public Accountants Board, creating a one-stop regulator for company registration and accounting standards. Greater administrative efficiency came with Acra's launch of the BizFile+ portal, which streamlined filing requirements and processes for businesses. Acra was formed in 2004 through the merger of the Registry of Companies and Businesses and the Public Accountants Board, creating a one-stop regulator for company registration and accounting standards. PHOTO: ACRA The first Code of Corporate Governance that was formalised in 2001 and made applicable to all listed companies came into effect in 2003. The code was significantly revised in 2005 to strengthen the disclosure framework for directors. The statutory and regulatory focus was in response to the Asian financial crisis. The development of Singapore's corporate laws and regulations during this period emphasised enhancing transparency, accountability, and investors' protection to boost international confidence and Singapore's attractiveness as a financial and business hub. Comprehensive reform and global leadership (2010–present): Agility, innovation and sustainability After extensive review and public consultation, the Companies Act 1967 was repealed and replaced with the landmark Companies Act (Chapter 50) 2006, which came into full effect with the Companies (Amendment) Act 2014 and Companies (Amendment) Regulations 2016. The key changes included simpler criteria to be registered as a 'small company' exempt from audit requirements and mandatory annual general meetings. New solvency tests were introduced for capital reductions and financial assistance to apply uniformly to all transactions, allowing more flexible options for mergers and amalgamations. Corporate governance was strengthened through more stringent disclosure requirements for nominee directors, refined director duties and shareholder remedies. In 2020, the Variable Capital Companies Act 2018 took effect, creating a novel, flexible corporate structure specifically designed for investment funds. This boosted Singapore's status as an asset management hub. Sweeping revisions were made to the Corporate Governance Code in 2012 and 2018, emphasising board independence, diversity (including gender diversity), business sustainability, internal risk governance and remuneration-linked risk management, as well as stakeholder engagement beyond pure shareholder primacy. The Covid-19 years also saw the modernisation of company communications through the embrace of virtual meeting technologies. Singapore also made significant progress in environmental, social and governance areas. In 2021, Singapore Exchange Regulation (SGX RegCo) mandated sustainability reporting for listed companies in line with the recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures. This enhanced the transparency of climate-related disclosures by listed companies in Singapore. In 2022, MAS and SGX jointly launched ESGenome, a disclosure portal for listed companies to voluntarily make climate-related financial disclosures. In 2024, MAS' investigative and enforcement powers against corporate miscreants were expanded. Acra's scope of such powers were also widened with the Corporate Service Providers Act 2024 and its regulations. Greater enforcement powers accorded to SGX RegCo were introduced from August 2021, including its ability to issue public reprimand and compel listed companies to comply with its directives. The BizFile+ portal was further revamped in 2024 to ensure seamless online corporate filings and transactions, streamlining digitalisation. The Corporate Restructuring and Insolvency Regime implemented pre-packaged schemes of arrangements and adopted the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law's Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency. Regulatory reforms were implemented to maintain Singapore's competitiveness, foster innovation (particularly in areas such as fintech and asset management), promote sustainable and responsible business practices, enhance ease of conducting businesses – especially for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) – and strengthen Singapore's reputation as a trusted international dispute resolution centre. The key drivers of these developments span various factors. The laws governing Singapore's corporate regulatory regime were shaped to support the national economic goals of attracting foreign direct investment, developing financial services, and facilitating the growth of SMEs. Global best practices have also served as a reference point for Singapore when international regulatory standards are adopted. The regulatory authorities have demonstrated continual stakeholder engagement by seeking extensive public and industry consultations prior to introducing and formalising reforms to the corporate regulatory regime in Singapore. Through the various reforms, Singapore has also shown its willingness to adapt to various crises such as the Asian financial crisis by forming review committees such as the CLRFC. The developments in Singapore's corporate law landscape have been complemented by a robust dispute resolution system, offering multiple forms of internationally recognised dispute resolution processes. Over the last six decades, Singapore's corporate law has shifted from a basic compliance framework to a dynamic, sophisticated, and principles-based system. It successfully balances competing priorities: robust investor protection and corporate governance with business-friendly efficiency and flexibility; adherence to global standards with responsiveness to local needs (especially SMEs); and traditional commercial law with emerging demands such as sustainability and digital innovation. The continuous, strategic evolution of Singapore's corporate law has been a cornerstone of the Republic's economic success, as well as its reputation as a premier global business and financial centre. The focus now extends beyond pure efficiency and growth to encompass long-term sustainability and responsible stewardship. In 2024, the government formed a review committee headed by a Cabinet minister to boost Singapore's attractiveness as a venue for initial public offerings and secondary listings. The various proposals that have been announced by the review committee led to a perceptible increase of new listings from both foreign and local companies on the Singapore bourse in 2025.
New Paper
2 days ago
- New Paper
Govt official impersonation scams involving cryptocurrency claim at least $2m in Q1
At least $2 million was lost to government official impersonation scams involving cryptocurrency in the first three months of 2025. The police said on Aug 11 that the losses from January to March involved at least 19 reported cases. In this scam variant, victims would receive unsolicited calls from scammers impersonating representatives from banks, insurance companies, payment institutions, airlines or telecommunications companies. The conmen would claim that the victim had conducted banking or financial transactions or had outstanding premiums associated with a new or expiring insurance policy. They may also claim that the victim had phone numbers or other registered personal banking information that were found to have been involved in fraudulent activities. When victims deny involvement in such activities, they would be transferred to another scammer impersonating a government official from the Monetary Authority of Singapore, the Singapore Police Force (SPF), Ministry of Law or the Chinese police, for example. This scammer would accuse the victims of being involved in criminal activities such as money laundering. Scammers would then ask victims to perform cryptocurrency transfers to a "safety account" for alleged investigation purposes. The conmen would instruct victims to download cryptocurrency applications such as Coinbase, OKX or StraitsX, said the police in their statement. The scammers would then ask victims to buy and transfer cryptocurrencies to a cryptocurrency wallet address. In some cases, the scammers would provide victims with specific e-mail addresses and passwords to set up accounts with. Victims would realise they had been scammed only when the conmen become uncontactable or when victims seek verification from SPF. The police urge the public not to transfer or give out valuables such as cryptocurrencies to people they do not know. They added that government officials will not require the public to disclose personal information over phone calls, or ask them to transfer money. Government officials will also not transfer calls to the police or ask the public to install applications from unofficial app stores. For more information on scams, visit
