strengthened and tasked to oversee reforms to address each of these vulnerabilities. the way the international regulatory community came together and forged a consensus on the necessary reforms was exemplary. between 2008 and 2016, the fsb, working closely with the basel committee, iosco, and other standard - setting bodies, put in place the basic building blocks for a new regulatory architecture that continues to serve us today. in banking, capital buffers were increased, liquidity requirements were introduced, and caps placed on leverage under a new basel iii accord. in the derivatives markets, requirements were put in place for trade reporting, central clearing, and margining. to tackle the too - big - to - fail problem, global systemically important financial institutions, or gsifis, were identified and subjected to higher loss absorbency requirements, more intensive supervision, and resolution planning. implementation of the reforms – especially basel iii – progressed well, driven by a broad - based consensus on preventing a repeat of the global financial crisis. the generous timelines for implementation allowed industry to adjust to the new regulatory landscape. it was only last year, in 2027, that we achieved full implementation of the final component of the basel iii reform package – the output floor. regulatory evaluation and adjustment ( 2017 to 2020 ) during the second phase, from 2017 to 2020, the focus turned to evaluating the effects of the regulatory reforms. there was growing feedback that some reforms had unintended consequences, some reforms were at odds with others, and that the cumulative impact of the reforms had dampened economic growth. a series of reviews was undertaken during this period to assess both the effectiveness and effects of various reforms. the reviews largely affirmed that the benefits of the reforms, in terms of reducing the risk of financial crisis and its consequent economic impact, far outweighed the costs. in fact, controlling for other factors, there was little evidence that the reforms resulted in any general deterioration in the availability or pricing of credit. but the reviews did surface areas for improvement. they identified specific areas – like trade finance, infrastructure finance, sme finance and market liquidity – where the cumulative effects of various reforms had led to sub - optimal social outcomes. this led the way to carefully calibrated adjustments to regulations that eased the constraints in these areas without significantly increasing risk. the responsiveness and flexibility shown by regulators helped to sustain the broad - based political and industry consensus in favour of the post - crisis reforms. today, looking back from the vantage point

mas web - site for public comment for a minimum two weeks. we view this as an advance in speed and efficiency. as a safeguard, mas may refuse to register a prospectus if it does not satisfy the disclosure requirements or if its registration is not in the public interest. if a prospectus is found to be misleading or deficient after it has been registered, mas can serve a stop order on the prospectus to prevent further issuance or sale of securities to the public. following a public consultation in august, mas will issue comprehensive retail hedge fund guidelines by year - end that will include, among other things, a requirement for some specific information to be disclosed in both prospectuses as well as marketing materials. in particular, the material differences between the hedge fund offered and traditional funds. also the fees and charges. for funds of hedge funds, the method of achieving diversification must be disclosed. turning to the second pillar – enabling and flexible regulation, the new guidelines aim to align our hedge fund regulations with international best practice, so that well - managed hedge funds from established markets can be offered in singapore. a key development is to distinguish between single hedge funds, funds of hedge funds and capital protected hedge funds. recognising that features such as diversification and capital protection would reduce the risk of investing in a hedge fund, mas will introduce a lower minimum initial subscription of s $ 20, 000 for funds of hedge funds. no minimum subscription will be required for capital protected and capital guaranteed hedge funds. single hedge funds may continue to be offered to retail investors with a minimum initial subscription of s $ 100, 000. to maintain professional standards, retail hedge funds must have at least two executives who each have a minimum of five years ’ experience in managing hedge funds. in addition, managers should have at least three of those five years of experience managing funds of hedge funds if they offer this product. redemptions of retail hedge funds need only be made once every quarter. this is an accepted international practice. managers who want to provide for more frequent redemptions are free to do so. redemption procedures should be prominently disclosed. to facilitate the entry of foreign funds of hedge funds, there will be a flexible diversification rule. the rule will require any fund of hedge funds to be diversified either across 15 hedge fund managers or by having not more than 8 % of its assets allocated to a single hedge fund manager. this would enable foreign funds of hedge funds to benefit from an earlier liberalisation introduced by the sfa