Retail assets refer to assets received from individuals and other entities such as companies and trusts. This includes assets received indirectly from retail clients through an intermediary, such as an administrative financial services provider, nominee company or a discretionary financial services provider not registered as an institutional investor with the Financial Surveillance Department.
All assets sourced from an intermediary identified as retail assets applicable to the underlying retail client should be included as retail assets in the quarterly asset allocation report of the reporting institutional investor. All pension funds, life insurers, CIS managers and discretionary financial services providers registered as an institutional investor with the Financial Surveillance Department are treated as institutional investors for exchange control purposes.
Applicants must submit proof of registration with the Financial Sector Conduct Authority as well as a manually completed quarterly asset allocation report reflecting its assets under management as at the last quarter-end or as date of application to the Financial Surveillance Department. Refer to section B. Until , foreign entities were not allowed to list on a South African exchange.
The Minister of Finance announced in his Budget Speech that, to allow South African investors to obtain foreign exposure through domestic channels, entities would be permitted to list on a South African exchange. This dispensation was further expanded to include derivative instruments. Approved inward listed shares, including exchange traded funds as well as debt and derivative instruments, traded and settled in Rand on a South African exchange, are classified as domestic.
South African institutional investors, Authorised Dealers, South African companies, trusts, partnerships and private individuals as well as emigrants, subject to adhering to the emigration policy as outlined in section B. The entity must approach an Authorised Dealer with full details of the proposed transaction. The department monitors exports to ensure that exporters repatriate the proceeds in compliance with Exchange Control Regulations 6, 10 and This data is compared with data on the flow of funds export proceeds , which Authorised Dealers report to the Financial Surveillance Department through the FinSurv Reporting System.
Payment is effected through an Authorised Dealer on presentation of a commercial invoice from the overseas supplier together with the SARS customs clearance documentation evidencing the receipt of the goods in South Africa. Authorised Dealers may provide foreign currency for advance payments on behalf of their clients to cover the cost of permissible imports against the presentation of an invoice.
These imports exclude capital goods. For payments exceeding R50 , the importer must present the customs clearance documentation to the Authorised Dealer once the goods have been cleared through SARS Customs as proof of the use of the foreign exchange and receipt of the goods in South Africa.
ADLAs, including bureaux de change, are authorised by the Financial Surveillance Department to deal in certain designated foreign exchange transactions, including travel-related transactions. The guidelines for submitting an application for authorisation to conduct the business of an ADLA can be found in section A.
The minimum unimpaired capital requirement cannot be used as capital or working capital in the business of the ADLA. The interest earned on the requirement can be used for the business, but the capital requirement must remain unencumbered and may not be ceded, pledged or used as collateral by the ADLA or any of its stakeholders. The SARB does not currently oversee, supervise or regulate crypto assets, which were previously referred to as virtual currencies, but is continuing to monitor this evolving area.
Crypto assets are not legal tender in South Africa, so any merchant or beneficiary may refuse them as a means of payment. These assets are not guaranteed or backed by SARB as they operate independently from the central bank and users are alerted to the potential risk of fluctuation in the value of crypto assets. There are currently no dedicated laws or regulations that specifically govern the use of crypto assets in South Africa and, therefore, no regulatory compliance requirements exist for local trading of these assets.
Legal protection or recourse to users, traders or intermediaries of crypto assets therefore depends on general common law principles. Initial coin offerings are related to crypto assets and their use are also unregulated and unsupervised by the SARB.
Neither the Currency and Exchanges Manual for Authorised Dealers nor the Currency and Exchanges Manual for Authorised Dealers in foreign exchange with limited authority allow for cross-border or foreign exchange transfers for the explicit purpose of purchasing crypto assets. From an exchange control perspective, the Financial Surveillance Department is unable to approve any transactions of this nature.
R1 million or R10 million. This is regarded as a simulated transaction to circumvent the provisions of the Exchange Control Regulations and therefore an illegal activity. The Exchange Control Regulations prohibit transactions where capital or the right to capital is, without permission from National Treasury, directly or indirectly exported from South Africa.
This includes transactions where an individual purchases crypto assets in South Africa and uses them to externalise 'any right to capital'. Contravening these regulations is a criminal offence. This is because of the nature of the assets and because the transaction is currently not reportable on the FinSurv Reporting System. Similarly, non-residents who have introduced crypto assets to South Africa for local sale will not be able to transfer the sale proceeds abroad.
The applicable exchange control policy is outlined in section G. Kindly be advised that the Financial Surveillance Department cannot advise on how individuals or legal entities should comply with any other legislative requirements. Individuals and legal entities should seek independent legal advice to ensure compliance with all applicable legal and regulatory requirements. The Intergovernmental Fintech Working Group IFWG , a committee of South African financial regulators, launched an Innovation Hub to promote responsible financial sector innovation and respond to changing market dynamics.
Kindly visit www. Innovation Hub users have access to three avenues for assistance:. The Regulatory Guidance Unit exists to help market innovators resolve specific questions regarding the policy landscape and regulatory requirements. Regulators will continue to assist queries through digital and virtual means, however, due to the pandemic, response times may depend on the volume and complexity of queries and will be provided on a best effort basis.
The Regulatory Sandbox provides financial sector innovators with an opportunity to test new products and services that push the boundaries of existing regulation, all under the responsible supervision of relevant regulators. The Innovation Accelerator exists to provide a collaborative, exploratory environment for financial sector regulators to learn from and work with each other — and the broader financial sector ecosystem — on emerging innovations in the industry.
There are three options for reporting suspicious activity or transactions to the SARB:. If possible, the following information should be included in the email:. For more information regarding the tip off line, click here.
But fully state-run exchanges have some flexibility on their enrollment schedules. California , Colorado and the District of Columbia have permanently extended open enrollment. There are twelve other states with fully state-run exchanges, and nearly all of them extended open enrollment for coverage — including Pennsylvania and New Jersey, both of which had just transitioned to having their own exchange platforms in the fall of , and thus had their first opportunity to offer a longer enrollment window.
Some states have worked to expand access to non-ACA-compliant health plans. But this can end up being short-sighted and perpetuating a vicious cycle: When healthy people can leave the ACA-compliant market and purchase sub-par insurance, the ACA-compliant market is left with a sicker risk pool, leading to more rate increases and less stability in the market.
Iowa enacted legislation in April to allow similar Farm Bureau plans to be sold in Iowa as well they became available for purchase as of November , with coverage effective January Kansas did the same thing, with non-compliant plans available for purchase as of the fall of , and Indiana followed suit with Farm Bureau plans available as of late And South Dakota may soon join them. When it comes to non-ACA-compliant plans, states have also taken a variety of different approaches to short-term health insurance plans.
Click on a state on this map to see how short-term health insurance is regulated. Initially, there were only two options from which states could pick: A state could run its own exchange state-based exchange, or SBE or it could opt to have the federal government run the exchange federally-facilitate exchange, or FFE.
Then in the summer of , HHS added a state partnership exchange model as a variation of the federally-run exchange. In a partnership exchange, enrollment is conducted through Healthcare. In early , HHS also allowed for a marketplace plan management exchange , which is another variation of the federally-run exchange.
States utilizing this option are generally categorized together with the states that have left the entire process to the federal government, but they retain plan management functions, which includes certification of plans that are sold in the exchange, as well as monitoring and regulatory control over the plans that are sold similar regulatory processes were already undertaken by insurance commissioners in many states prior to the implementation of the ACA.
In June , HHS also outlined provisions for a state to operate a bifurcated exchange, with the state running the small business SHOP exchange , and the federal government running the individual exchange. But all three states eventually switched to the federally-run SHOP exchange and the federally-run SHOP exchange is now conducted directly via insurers and brokers, instead of using an exchange-style platform. For states that want to run their own exchange but also rely on the economies of scale and technological success of Healthcare.
In a supported exchange, the state is in charge of its own exchange, but enrollment is done through the Healthcare. And the SBE-FP model has subsequently been adopted by states that struggled to efficiently run their own enrollment platforms.
Starting in , HHS began charging a fee initially 1. Prior to , state-run exchanges that used HealthCare. Early adopters — A handful of states jumped into exchange planning shortly after the ACA passed. California was the first state to pass legislation authorizing an exchange — doing so in September Colorado , Connecticut , Hawaii , Maryland , Oregon , Vermont , and Washington all authorized state-run exchanges in Massachusetts and Utah were operating exchanges prior to ACA, and both began moving ahead on changes needed to comply with ACA requirements Utah ultimately ended up with a federally-run exchange for individuals, but kept their state-run exchange for small businesses until , when the state opted to defer to the federal small business exchange as well.
In general, it was blue states that moved quickly to establish state-run exchanges in time for the first open enrollment period that began in October , and many of the early adopters had Democratic governors. Pragmatists — A number of states took a pragmatic approach. Despite the uncertainty about the ACA in general and exchange requirements in particular, the pragmatists did enough work to keep their options open.
In some cases, legislatures failed to authorize exchanges, yet federal grants were accepted and spent as executive branches authorized significant planning work to proceed. Minnesota is a good example. This brief presents estimates of the number of people in non-expansion states who could be reached by Medicaid if their states adopted the expansion and discusses the implications of them being left out of ACA coverage expansions.
It is based on coverage data from , the most recent year available. Because this data predates the pandemic and associated job and income loss, it is likely that the number of people in the coverage gap has grown since the start of the pandemic, and these estimates may be a lower bound of how many people are currently in the coverage gap.
An overview of the methodology underlying the analysis can be found in the Data and Methods , and more detail is available in the Technical Appendices. These individuals would be eligible for Medicaid had their state chosen to expand coverage. Adults left in the coverage gap are spread across the states not expanding their Medicaid programs but are concentrated in states with the largest uninsured populations.
More than a third of people in the coverage gap reside in Texas, which has both a large uninsured population and very limited Medicaid eligibility Figure 2. Nineteen percent of people in the coverage gap live in Florida, twelve percent in Georgia, and ten percent in North Carolina. There are no uninsured adults in the coverage gap in Wisconsin because the state is providing Medicaid eligibility to adults up to the poverty level under a Medicaid waiver.
The geographic distribution of the population in the coverage gap reflects both population distribution and regional variation in state take-up of the ACA Medicaid expansion. The South has relatively higher numbers of poor uninsured adults than in other regions, has higher uninsured rates and more limited Medicaid eligibility than other regions, and accounts for the majority 8 out of 12 of states that opted not to expand Medicaid.
Maryland Health Connection. Massachusetts Health Connector. Nevada Health Link. Be Well NM. NY State of Health. HealthSource RI. Vermont Health Connect. Washington Health Benefit Exchange. Each year the Health Insurance Marketplace has an open enrollment period and special enrollment periods for eligible taxpayers. For information about enrollment periods, visit HealthCare. If you enrolled in insurance coverage through the Marketplace, you should report any changes in your circumstances — like changes to your household income or family size — to the Marketplace when they happen.
Changes in circumstances may affect your advance payments of the premium tax credit. When you report a change in circumstances, you may become eligible for a special enrollment period, which allows you to purchase health care insurance through the Marketplace outside of the open enrollment period.
0コメント