Senior Managers / Governance regulatory updates from International.
We track 28 Senior Managers / Governance updates from International regulators, published by BIS and FSB. The archive covers 23 news items, 3 speeches and 2 consultations. Most recent update: September 2026. Coverage runs from 2025 to 2026.
Roundtable to explore how collaboration efforts between the public and private sectors can be structured and applied to prepare for and manage significant operational disruptions.
Why this matters
This is a news item reporting on an FSB roundtable discussion focused on strengthening operational resilience through public-private collaboration. The content discusses practical steps, relationship-building, lessons learned, and interoperability across sectors and jurisdictions.
FSB annual financial report for the 12-month period ending 31 March 2026.
Why this matters
The FSB Annual Financial Report is a standard audited financial statement and governance disclosure document covering the 12-month period ending 31 March 2026. It contains financial statements, governance arrangements, and transparency/accountability mechanisms.
Consultation responses to ‘Sound Practices for Responsible Adoption of Artificial Intelligence (AI): Consultation report‘.
AI Analysis
The FSB has published public responses to its consultation on sound practices for responsible AI adoption, following the 10 June 2026 consultation report and the 22 July 2026 comment deadline. This is a consultation-stage update, so it does not create binding obligations, but it signals the direction of emerging global expectations for AI governance in financial institutions.
Key dates
2026-06-10
FSB published the consultation report on Sound Practices for Responsible Adoption of Artificial Intelligence (AI)
2026-07-22 Deadline
Deadline for written comments on the consultation report
2026-08-06
FSB published the public responses to the consultation
Suggested considerations
Compliance teams may wish to review the consultation responses to identify supervisory themes and likely refinements to the final FSB report.
Firms considering or already using AI may wish to map their current governance, risk, and lifecycle controls against the FSB’s 12 proposed sound practices.
Risk and model governance teams may wish to assess whether their controls address generative AI, agentic AI, and third-party or technology dependencies in a way that aligns with the consultation’s focus.
Public policy and regulatory affairs functions may wish to track the final report once published, as it may influence national supervisory expectations even if it remains non-binding soft law.
What changed
The publication makes available the written public comments received on the FSB’s consultation report on Sound Practices for Responsible Adoption of Artificial Intelligence (AI). The underlying consultation proposed a menu of 12 sound practices for financial institutions to apply across organisation-wide AI governance and the full AI lifecycle, including emerging forms such as generative AI and agentic AI.
Compliance impact
The immediate compliance impact is limited because this is a consultation-response publication and the underlying document is non-binding guidance. The practical consequence is that firms may see the direction of future international supervisory expectations on AI governance, lifecycle controls, and related technology and third-party risks.
In this speech, FSB Secretary General, John Schindler highlights the importance of resolve in resolution planning, emphasising collaboration, preparedness, in maintaining financial system resilience.
Why this matters
This is an informational speech (urgency: null) but carries noteworthy regulatory signals. The FSB Secretary General explicitly announces a strategic review of crisis preparedness and emphasizes a deliberate policy shift from sector-by-sector resolution frameworks to integrated cross-sectoral planning.
In this speech, Dominique Laboureix, Chair of the FSB Resolution Steering Group, discusses the importance of cross-border, cross-sectoral crisis preparedness.
Why this matters
This is a speech by the Chair of the FSB Resolution Steering Group at the ReSolve event, focused on cross-sectoral interconnections in financial stability and crisis management.
In her remarks, Michelle W. Bowman, Chair of the FSB Standing Committee on Supervisory and Regulatory Cooperation (SRC), discusses the FSB’s Consultation Report on the Sound Practices for Responsible Adoption of Artificial Intelligence.
AI Analysis
The FSB used this speech to signal that its consultation report on sound practices for responsible AI adoption is meant to guide, not hard-code, how financial institutions govern AI use. For compliance teams, the key message is that the draft framework is risk-based and proportional, with lighter-touch expectations for lower-risk uses and greater scrutiny where AI is material to business operations or legal and regulatory obligations.
Key dates
2026-06-10
FSB published the consultation report on Sound Practices for Responsible Adoption of Artificial Intelligence
2026-07-07
FSB virtual outreach event and Michelle W. Bowman opening remarks on the consultation
2026-07-22 Deadline
Deadline for public comments on the consultation report
Suggested considerations
Compliance teams may wish to map all AI use cases and classify which deployments are material to business operations, legal obligations, or regulatory obligations.
Firms should consider whether existing governance, model risk, and operational risk controls already cover AI lifecycle risks, including selection, data governance, monitoring, human oversight, and cyber/ICT exposures.
Institutions may wish to test whether AI governance is proportionate by business size and complexity, especially where lower-risk use cases could justify lighter controls.
Board and senior management teams should consider whether roles, responsibilities, and escalation paths for AI are clearly defined and documented.
Firms may wish to maintain a current inventory of AI systems and vendors so they can evidence oversight, dependency management, and remediation decisions if the final report adopts similar sound practices.
Compliance teams should monitor the final FSB report later in 2026 and compare any finalized practices against current internal policies, third-party controls, and incident response arrangements.
What changed
This publication does not impose new binding rules; it is an opening remark supporting the FSB’s June 2026 consultation report on Sound Practices for Responsible Adoption of Artificial Intelligence. The speaker says the report is intended to be finalized later in 2026 as a U.S. G20 deliverable, and that feedback from the public comment process will shape the final text.
Compliance impact
The current publication is consultative and non-binding, so immediate legal impact is limited. The practical consequence is preparatory pressure: firms that use AI should expect a future FSB final report to reinforce risk-based governance, proportionality, and stronger controls for materially important AI deployments.
The FSB hosted a virtual outreach event on 7 July 2026.
Why this matters
This is an announcement of a virtual outreach event supporting an FSB consultation on responsible AI adoption. The underlying consultation report (published 10 June 2026) is substantive policy guidance on AI governance and risk management for financial institutions.
The sustainability of the AI boom, financial vulnerabilities and strained public finances are among pressure points facing the global economy, along with the return of inflation. The interplay of record-high public debt with the increasing role of highly-leveraged hedge funds creates a new sovereign-financial…
Why this matters
This is a BIS press release accompanying its Annual Economic Report 2026. It is informational/advisory in nature (not a binding rule, consultation, or enforcement action) but carries significant regulatory signals about emerging risks and policy priorities: fiscal-financial stability nexus, non-bank leverage (hedge...
Roundtable hosted by the Bank of Spain discusses external audit.
Why this matters
This is a news item reporting on an FSB convened roundtable discussion (not a binding rule, consultation, or enforcement action). The content addresses structural changes in the audit profession driven by technology (AI) and ownership shifts, with implications for audit quality and financial stability.
BIS Board of Directors elects Fabio Panetta, Governor of the Bank of Italy, as its new Chair Gabriel Galípolo, Governor of the Central Bank of Brazil, is appointed Chair of the meeting of Governors of major emerging market economies Michele Bullock, Governor of the Reserve Bank of Australia, is appointed Chair of the…
Why this matters
The content is purely informational, announcing the election of central bank governors to leadership roles at the BIS and its committees. It contains no new rules, guidance, enforcement actions, or obligations affecting regulated firms.
Press release from May 12, 2026 on central bank governors appointed to lead the BIS board of directors, the meeting of governors of major emerging market economies, the asian consultative council and the committee of the global financial system.
Why this matters
The content is a media release announcing leadership appointments at the BIS (Fabio Panetta as Board Chair, and three other central bank governors to key BIS groups).
CPMI-IOSCO is seeking input from interested stakeholders on amendments to CCP-related resilience guidance and public quantitative disclosures requirements.
AI Analysis
CPMI and IOSCO have launched a consultation on targeted amendments to the 2017 CCP resilience guidance and the 2015 public quantitative disclosure (PQD) standards for central counterparties. The changes are intended to implement selected proposals from the January 2025 BCBS-CPMI-IOSCO report on initial margin transparency and responsiveness, with comments due by 30 June 2026.
Key dates
2026-05-06
CPMI-IOSCO published the consultation on updated CCP resilience guidance and PQD disclosures
2026-06-30 Deadline
Deadline to submit consultation comments to the CPMI and IOSCO secretariats
Suggested considerations
Compliance teams may wish to review the January 2025 BCBS-CPMI-IOSCO initial margin report to map likely changes to CCP resilience guidance and PQD disclosure expectations.
CCPs may wish to assess whether their current margin simulation tools, responsiveness metrics, override governance, and public disclosures could support the kind of targeted enhancements described in the consultation.
Clearing members and clients may wish to evaluate how more detailed CCP disclosures could affect margin forecasting, model validation, and due diligence workflows.
Firms may wish to prepare consultation submissions by the 30 June 2026 deadline, particularly if they have views on feasibility, data granularity, disclosure lags, or governance implications.
Compliance and legal teams may wish to monitor whether the final amendments create new reporting or disclosure obligations under the revised CCP guidance and PQD standards.
What changed
The consultation proposes targeted additions to the CPMI-IOSCO 2017 guidance on the resilience of central counterparties and to the 2015 PQD standards for CCPs. The stated purpose is to incorporate relevant elements of the January 2025 BCBS-CPMI-IOSCO final report on transparency and responsiveness of initial margin in centrally cleared markets.
The areas specifically addressed are simulation tools, the measurement of initial margin responsiveness, margin model governance frameworks, the use of margin model overrides, and CCP public disclosures.
Compliance impact
The publication is a consultation, so the immediate legal severity is moderate rather than binding, but it signals concrete supervisory direction on CCP margin transparency and governance. If adopted, the amendments could increase disclosure granularity and scrutiny of margin-model responsiveness, simulation tools, and override controls for CCPs and their clearing relationships.
Press release: Statement on the appointment of Hyun Song Shin as Governor of the Bank of Korea
Why this matters
The content is a press release announcing the appointment of Hyun Song Shin as Governor of the Bank of Korea and related internal BIS management changes. It is purely administrative and informational in nature, containing no new rules, guidance, enforcement actions, or obligations affecting regulated firms.
The General Manager of the BIS, Pablo Hernández de Cos, made the following statement today on the announcement that Hyun Song Shin has been appointed to serve as Governor of the Bank of Korea.
Why this matters
The content is a media release announcing the appointment of Hyun Song Shin as Governor of the Bank of Korea and related internal BIS management changes. It is purely administrative and informational in nature, containing no new rules, guidance, enforcement actions, or regulatory obligations.
The UK's framework for systemically important payment systems and central securities depositories/securities settlement systems is complete and consistent with the CPMI-IOSCO Principles for financial market infrastructures (PFMI) in most aspects. The CPMI-IOSCO assessment identified some areas for improvement where…
Why this matters
This is a published assessment report from CPMI-IOSCO evaluating UK implementation of the Principles for Financial Market Infrastructures as of September 2023. The report confirms broad compliance for payment systems but identifies improvement areas for CSDs/SSSs, particularly in risk and governance principles.
The UK's framework for systemically important payment systems and central securities depositories/securities settlement systems is complete and consistent with the CPMI-IOSCO Principles for financial market infrastructures (PFMI) in most aspects.
Why this matters
This is a published assessment report evaluating UK implementation of international financial market infrastructure standards (PFMI) as of September 2023. The report confirms broad compliance but identifies improvement areas in risk and governance principles for payment systems and securities settlement...
John C. Williams, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, is to continue as Chair of the Bank for International Settlements' Markets Committee.
Why this matters
The content is a press release announcing the extension of John C. Williams' term as Chair of the BIS Markets Committee for a second three-year term. This is a straightforward governance/personnel matter with no new regulatory requirements, policy guidance, or enforcement action.
John C. Williams, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, is to continue as Chair of the Bank for International Settlements' Markets Committee.
Why this matters
The content is a media release announcing the extension of John C. Williams' term as Chair of the BIS Markets Committee for a second three-year period. This is a straightforward governance/appointment matter with no new regulatory requirements, policy changes, or enforcement actions.
Following the nomination of Hyun Song Shin as Governor of the Bank of Korea, the BIS today announced that Mr. Shin will step back from his duties with immediate effect. In the interim, the Monetary and Economic Department will be led by Frank Smets, who will serve as Acting Head.
Why this matters
The content is a press release announcing the nomination of Hyun Song Shin as Governor of the Bank of Korea and his consequent departure from the BIS, with interim leadership arrangements. This is administrative and personnel-related rather than substantive regulatory guidance or policy.
Ben Gully will lead the international standard setter's Secretariat in Basel. Mr Gully has been appointed for a three-year term, starting in August. He is currently Deputy Superintendent at the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI) in Canada.
Why this matters
The content is purely administrative—announcing Ben Gully's appointment as Secretary General of the Basel Committee effective August 2026. While the Basel Committee is the primary global standard setter for bank prudential regulation, this update contains no new rules, guidance, consultations, or enforcement actions.
Hélène Rey, Professor of Economics at London Business School, appointed as Economic Adviser and Head of the Monetary and Economic Department of the BIS. Ms Rey is appointed for a five-year term, effective September 2026. She will lead the economics work of the Bank and join its Executive Committee.
Why this matters
The content is a press release announcing Hélène Rey's appointment as Economic Adviser and Head of the Monetary and Economic Department at the BIS, effective September 2026. It is purely administrative and informational in nature, documenting a leadership transition at an international financial institution.
Group of Central Bank Governors and Heads of Supervision (GHOS) welcome the progress to fully implement Basel III. GHOS endorsed targeted reviews of the Committee's prudential standards for cryptoassets and global systemically important banks.
Why this matters
This is a GHOS press release announcing implementation progress on Basel III (affecting prudential capital requirements for banks globally) and endorsing two targeted reviews: one on cryptoasset exposures and one on G-SIB assessment methodology.
François Villeroy de Galhau, Governor of the Bank of France, today announced his decision to leave the Bank of France at the beginning of June to become President of the Fondation Apprentis d'Auteuil. Accordingly, he will step down from his position as Chair of the BIS Board of Directors.
Why this matters
The content is a press release announcing François Villeroy de Galhau's resignation from his position as Chair of the BIS Board of Directors to pursue a role at a charitable foundation.
The Bank for International Settlements has reviewed the content of the FX Global Code and acknowledges that the Code represents a set of principles generally recognised as good practice in the wholesale foreign exchange (FX) market.
Why this matters
The BIS press release announces its commitment to conduct FX market activities consistent with the FX Global Code principles. This is an informational statement of compliance with a recognized voluntary code of conduct, not a new rule, consultation, or enforcement action.
Since its publication in 2013, BCBS 239 has become a foundational framework for data management and risk management practices in the banking sector. While its principles still apply, its implementation has evolved over the years, reflecting changes in the business, technology and risk landscape.
Why this matters
This is a Basel Committee newsletter providing thematic guidance on BCBS 239 principles implementation based on recent supervisory outreach. While it does not introduce new binding obligations, it offers noteworthy regulatory signals on current supervisory expectations regarding risk data aggregation, governance...
Since the banking turmoil of 2023, the Committee has worked to strengthen supervisory effectiveness in relation to material risks that could result in financial losses, impacting the safety and soundness of financial institutions.
Why this matters
This is an informational newsletter from the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) documenting supervisory cooperation and best practices following the 2023 banking turmoil.
As part of its 2025-2026 work programme, the Basel Committee is advancing various supervisory initiatives related to the digitalisation of finance.
AI Analysis
The Basel Committee has published its Principles for the sound management of third-party risk, setting a common baseline for banks and supervisors as firms become more dependent on third-party service providers. The publication matters because it broadens the supervisory lens beyond traditional outsourcing to a wider range of third-party arrangements, with implications for governance, due diligence, contracts, monitoring, and exit planning.
Key dates
2025-12-10
Basel Committee publication date for the Principles for the sound management of third-party risk
Suggested considerations
Compliance teams may wish to map all third-party arrangements against the new lifecycle expectations, including non-traditional outsourcing and intra-group or technology-enabled arrangements.
Firms should consider whether board-approved third-party risk appetite, tolerance for disruption, and reporting lines are documented clearly and align with current governance arrangements.
Banks may wish to review due diligence, contracting, onboarding, monitoring, continuity, and exit procedures to confirm they address the principle-based expectations across the full relationship lifecycle.
Supervisory liaison teams may wish to assess whether concentration risk, critical provider dependencies, and cross-border coordination issues are adequately captured in existing risk registers and escalation frameworks.
What changed
The document sets out 12 principles covering the full third-party service provider lifecycle, divided between bank-facing expectations and supervisor-facing expectations. For banks, the principles cover governance and strategy, board and senior management oversight, risk assessment, due diligence, legally binding contracts, onboarding, ongoing monitoring, business continuity, and termination/exit management.
Compliance impact
The publication is a material supervisory signal rather than a binding rule, but it raises the expected standard for how banks identify, manage, and oversee third-party dependencies. Institutions that rely heavily on external providers may face closer supervisory scrutiny of governance, resilience, and concentration risk, especially where critical services are involved.
The Basel Committee has published principles for the sound management of third-party risk in the banking sector. The principles establish a common baseline for banks and supervisors for the sound management of third-party risk. The Committee will continue to monitor developments related to the digitalisation of…
AI Analysis
The Basel Committee published final principles for the sound management of third-party risk in the banking sector on 2025-12-10. The publication matters because it creates a common prudential baseline for banks and supervisors and explicitly supersedes the Basel/Joint Forum 2005 outsourcing paper for banking-sector purposes.
Key dates
2025-12-10
Basel Committee published the principles for the sound management of third-party risk
2024-10-09 Deadline
Comment deadline for the consultative version of the principles
Suggested considerations
Compliance teams may wish to compare existing outsourcing and third-party risk frameworks against the new 12-principle baseline to identify gaps in governance, lifecycle controls, and supervisor-facing documentation.
Firms may wish to review board and senior management oversight arrangements for third-party risk to ensure responsibilities, risk appetite, escalation, and reporting are clearly assigned.
Banks should consider whether their third-party inventories, risk assessments, due diligence files, contracts, monitoring processes, and exit planning are aligned to a full lifecycle model rather than a narrow outsourcing model.
Supervisory relations teams may wish to map the principles against home and host jurisdiction requirements to identify where local rules are already aligned or where additional supervisory engagement may be needed.
Operational resilience teams may wish to test whether critical third-party dependencies, including cloud and technology providers, are sufficiently captured in business continuity and termination planning.
What changed
The Basel Committee replaced the older 2005 Joint Forum outsourcing guidance with a new 12-principle framework focused on third-party service provider arrangements in banking. The framework is broader than traditional outsourcing and is designed to cover the larger, more diverse third-party ecosystem created by digitalisation and financial technology.
Compliance impact
The practical impact is broad for banking-sector third-party risk management because the publication updates the prudential benchmark supervisors may use when assessing governance, controls, and resilience. The Committee does not describe legal sanctions, but firms that lag the baseline may face supervisory challenge, remediation expectations, or pressure to strengthen third-party oversight and lifecycle controls.