As I articulated in Profit & Loss, “Though [the FX Global Code] does not have the force of law, it can serve as a useful springboard for fiduciaries to buttress risk controls and fiduciary awareness over an industry that seems obscure to some. The Code can catalyse a change from disengagement and insufficient understanding of common (and, in certain instances, controversial) FX practices to engagement and a deeper understanding of a market whose products are in so many investment policy statements and mandates of retirement plans.” I wrote that the Code’s voluntary nature opened the door to plan investment committees and investment managers the opportunity to gauge the level of the FX service provider’s engagement with the Code and how such engagement (or lack thereof) could implicate their fiduciary duties. I opined: “However, the genius of the Code is that not all principles apply to each market participant, and, as a result, requires at least an active review of the Code to determine which principles apply to a particular market participant, including a fiduciary. An investment committee that outsources currency hedging to a third party may have an interest in how that third party will plan to adhere to the Code. Through awareness comes engagement with service providers. Because the Code’s principles set forth good practice in the market, a plan fiduciary should become aware of the Code and internalise it.” My full op-ed can be found here.
George Michael Gerstein advises financial institutions on the fiduciary and prohibited transaction provisions of ERISA. As co-chair of the fiduciary governance group, he assists clients with tracking, and understanding, the numerous fiduciary developments at the federal and state levels, including the rules and regulations of governmental plans. He also advises clients with respect to the fiduciary duty implications of ESG investing.