Both parties have held several regular and ad hoc discussions about monetary management, crossborder supervision of financial institutions and linkages between payment and settlement systems, and the achievements in these fields have been many. The mutual trust between the HKMA and the PBOC has contributed to exchanges and co-operation between the two places in relation to monetary affairs. 3  BIS Review 39 /1999  (C) Financial business between the Mainland and Hong Kong are treated as international financial affairs and are conducted in accordance with the rules and practices of international financial activities. 14. All financial transactions between the two places after the handover have been conducted according to the rules and practices of international financial activities. Claims and liabilities between banks and companies from the mainland and those in Hong Kong are regarded as external claims and liabilities. Investment by Hong Kong companies in the mainland is regarded as foreign investment. When raising funds in Hong Kong, mainland entities are treated as other international and local market participants. Mainland companies listed in Hong Kong are required to abide by security laws of Hong Kong and are regulated by the relevant regulatory authorities in Hong Kong. Disputes relating to financial transactions are handled in accordance with international practice. Where China’s Arbitration Law and other relevant laws and regulations are applicable according to the terms of a contract, the provisions relating to arbitration involving foreign parties are applied. (D) The HKSAR maintains its existing system of currency issuance and management.

In the case of trust structures, this would include an assessment of whether: (i)  adequate information on beneficial ownership of the trust is being collected;  (ii)  such information is available to law enforcement authorities; and  (iii)  regulated entities, such as trust companies and banks, are doing their part in complying with the relevant AML/CFT regulations to collect beneficial ownership information. Singapore’s approach to increased transparency on Beneficial Ownership 14. Let me now share with you Singapore’s position on increased transparency on beneficial ownership. 15. We believe that increased transparency on beneficial ownership is consistent with continued strong growth in the trust industry. Conversely, Singapore’s reputation as a dynamic trust centre could easily be tainted by just one or two incidents where proceeds derived from illicit activities are found to be linked to trust companies or trusts in Singapore because of inadequate due diligence. 16. There are several ways to enhance transparency of beneficial ownership for trusts. Singapore’s approach has been to strike a balance between protecting the legitimate need for confidentiality, while ensuring that this protection is not abused for illegitimate purposes. This is consistent with our approach taken with regard to tax crimes. Let me elaborate. 17. Besides the current framework we have put in place for the regulation of trust companies, MAS also regularly reviews our AML/CFT regime. We issued in July 2014 a public consultation on proposed amendments to the MAS Notice on AML/CFT for Financial Institutions.