SFC issues consultation paper on short selling disclosures
Friday, May 27, 2011 at 5:13PM Yesterday the HK SFC issued a second consultation paper (see www.sfc.hk) on the issue of mandatory short selling position disclosures. This paper follows on from the first one where the SFC asked the industry to comment on whether a reporting regime should be put in place. The MFA and our firm were the only two that at the time said it was a bad idea. Other organisations seemed to lack the will to explain what a silly policy idea this was.
So now we have the consultation on how the new rules will work.
The new rules essentially will invovle the following:
1 - It will apply initially just to Hang Seng Index component stocks
2 - Reporting threshold is 0.02%
3 - Reporting would be once a week, within 2 days of the last trading day of the week
4 - Reporting is aggregated and published one week after the reporting date, individual positions are confidential
5 - Reporting will be done electronically
6 - OTC short positions do not need to be reported
7 - Reporting is done by the entity beneficially owning the security, ie a fund has an obligation to report. If a manager has more than one fund then each fund has a separate obligation to report
8- It will be a criminal offence to not comply with the rules with both jail terms and fines for breaches
The new system will be costly to implement and the majority of smaller managers/funds will probably just do what many do in Australia and Japan and go on swap. The loser here will be investors. Going on swap adds a few basis points here and there to the cost of every trade.
The Commission is wrong on this point. There is no policy need for this in Hong Kong, the Commission has other established tools at its disposal to monitor the volume of short sales in relation to a security and to find out who is behind such selling.
In addition the proposal that breaching this costly and unecessary legislation would be a criminal offence is totally unacceptable. Lets hope the investment community in Hong Kong has a little more stomach to complain to its regulator this time around than they did last time.
