Skip to content
VARIABLE CAPITAL
COMPANIES ACT
Let’s talk

Singapore VCC insights

Review Remuneration Conflicts for a VCC Team

Independent Singapore VCC guidance

By Variable Capital Companies Actdecision guide

Direct answer

Review remuneration by tracing every material incentive to the decisions it can influence. Map fixed pay, bonuses, carried interests, performance allocations, personal investments, fundraising rewards and discretionary adjustments against portfolio selection, valuation, liquidity, trade timing and investor reporting. Test how the design behaves when short-term performance conflicts with mandate limits or fair treatment. Separate control-function judgement from portfolio outcomes, use independent challenge for conflicts, and approve only arrangements whose measurement, discretion, adjustment and evidence can be explained to the VCC board.

At a glance

  • Map incentives to decisions and data sources before judging whether pay is aligned.
  • Test stressed behaviour, not only the intended behaviour in a normal year.
  • Protect independent risk and compliance challenge from portfolio revenue pressure.
  • Document discretion, exceptions and adjustment decisions with the same care as formulas.

Who this is for

  • VCC boards, family principals and fund managers reviewing how team rewards may affect a VCC mandate or control environment.

Important exclusions

  • Setting individual employment terms, tax treatment or a legal conclusion on a specific remuneration arrangement.

Map the complete incentive population

Start with all economic and non-economic rewards connected to the mandate. Include salary, discretionary bonus, formula bonus, carried interest, performance allocation, co-investment, deferred awards, fundraising credit, promotion criteria, retention arrangements, personal holdings and informal promises. Record the employing or paying entity, eligible person, measurement period, performance data, discretion owner, adjustment rights and payment timing. A fund-level performance fee and an employee bonus are different instruments, but they can push the same portfolio decision and should be tested together where incentives interact.

Sources: Monetary Authority of Singapore · Monetary Authority of Singapore · Monetary Authority of Singapore
Incentive-to-decision map
Incentive featureDecision it may influenceEvidence to review
Short measurement horizonRisk taking, trade timing and year-end positioningPerformance series, decision dates and later reversals
Fundraising rewardCapacity, valuation and marketing pressurePipeline, approvals, disclosures and investor suitability route
Performance allocationValuation, expense and class treatmentApproved terms, calculations and independent checks
Personal co-investmentAllocation, exits and liquidity preferenceConflict declarations, allocation records and recusal evidence
Manager discretionExceptions, retention and unequal outcomesCriteria, challenge, approvals and comparable cases
Sources: Monetary Authority of Singapore · Monetary Authority of Singapore

Separate alignment from conflict

An incentive is not defective merely because it responds to performance. The review asks whether the design rewards sustainable delivery of the approved mandate while keeping material risk, fair treatment, valuation integrity and control obligations visible. Alignment becomes a conflict when the person can improve personal outcome by shifting value between periods or portfolios, avoiding necessary escalation, preferring a related opportunity, delaying recognition of loss or overriding an independent control. Record both the legitimate purpose and the plausible adverse behaviour instead of assuming that disclosure alone resolves the tension.

Sources: Monetary Authority of Singapore · Monetary Authority of Singapore · Monetary Authority of Singapore

Initial conflict classification

  1. Aligned and observableRetain the design with governed data, review and monitoring for changing behaviour or conditions.
  2. Manageable tensionAdd limits, independent review, longer measurement, deferral or documented recusal before approval.
  3. Opaque or discretionaryClarify criteria, data, decision rights and comparable treatment before relying on the arrangement.
  4. Incompatible incentiveRedesign or remove the feature when safeguards cannot protect mandate and investor interests.
Sources: Monetary Authority of Singapore · Monetary Authority of Singapore

Trace the data and measurement choices

Identify exactly which portfolio, share class, benchmark, valuation point, currency, fee basis and risk measure drive the reward. Test data lineage from administrator and portfolio systems through adjustments to the final award input. Separate realised and unrealised results, gross and net performance, cash flows, equalisation, allocations, expenses and restatements where relevant to the design. If a measure depends on judgement, record the methodology and independent challenge. A precise formula applied to the wrong class or an unreconciled valuation can create a confident but unreliable outcome.

Sources: Monetary Authority of Singapore · Monetary Authority of Singapore

Measurement integrity file

  • Name the authoritative source and owner for every performance, risk and conduct input.
  • Reconcile the eligible portfolio, class, period, currency and approved benchmark before calculation.
  • Record manual adjustments with the reason, evidence, preparer and independent reviewer.
  • Carry valuation, expense, data-quality and restatement exceptions into the remuneration decision.
  • Lock the calculation version considered by the authorised decision-maker and preserve later changes separately.
Sources: Monetary Authority of Singapore · Monetary Authority of Singapore

Test the design under adverse scenarios

Run scenarios where personal reward and the mandate pull in different directions. Examples include an illiquid asset near a valuation date, a planned exit that improves one period but harms long-term value, a strategy approaching a risk limit, a redemption requiring liquidity, a related-party investment, a trade allocated across mandates or a control finding that could delay fundraising. Ask what the formula, discretion owner, control function and systems would do. The test is useful only when it follows the actual data and approval path rather than asking participants to describe ideal behaviour.

Sources: Monetary Authority of Singapore · Monetary Authority of Singapore

Scenario test sequence

  1. Set the factsDefine the mandate, incentive, decision, data state, affected people and competing interests clearly.
  2. Run the designCalculate the apparent reward and identify choices that could improve it at another party expense.
  3. Apply safeguardsUse recusal, independent valuation, risk challenge, deferral or adjustment exactly as documented.
  4. Inspect evidenceConfirm that the final decision and reasons are visible without reconstructing an informal conversation.
Sources: Monetary Authority of Singapore · Monetary Authority of Singapore

Protect control-function independence

Risk, compliance and other control roles should be assessed on the quality and effectiveness of their own responsibilities, not rewarded in a way that discourages challenge to a profitable portfolio team. Map who sets their objectives, provides performance input and approves adjustments. Where the manager is small and people hold several roles, disclose the overlap and add proportionate independent review rather than pretending complete separation exists. A control reviewer should not need to protect the revenue result that will determine the same reviewer award before raising a material concern.

Sources: Monetary Authority of Singapore · Monetary Authority of Singapore · Monetary Authority of Singapore

Escalation rights must work in practice. Test whether the control function can obtain data, attend relevant forums, record disagreement and reach senior management or the VCC board when an issue remains unresolved. Compare prior challenge with subsequent pay decisions for signs of retaliation or subtle penalty. The review should protect confidentiality and avoid simplistic conclusions from one outcome, while still examining patterns. Independence is demonstrated by authority, information, behaviour and governance evidence, not only by an organisation chart.

Sources: Monetary Authority of Singapore · Monetary Authority of Singapore · Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority

Govern discretion, deferral and adjustment

Discretion can correct a formula that misses conduct or risk, but opaque discretion creates its own conflict. State who may adjust an outcome, the factors considered, information available, comparable-case review, recusal expectations and evidence required. Where awards are deferred or subject to later adjustment, ensure the terms and operating process are understood before the event that may activate them. Do not invent a post-event rule to produce a desired outcome. Record why the authorised decision was proportionate and how affected data or conduct findings were weighed.

Sources: Monetary Authority of Singapore · Monetary Authority of Singapore · Monetary Authority of Singapore
Decision record for an adjustment
FieldQuestionExpected evidence
TriggerWhat event opened review?Control finding, loss, restatement, conduct event or risk outcome
AuthorityWho may decide and who must recuse?Approved terms, committee mandate and conflict record
InformationWhat was known at decision time?Locked calculation, findings, responses and unresolved facts
ConsistencyHow were comparable cases considered?Reasoned comparison without exposing irrelevant personal data
OutcomeWhy is the result proportionate?Signed decision, implementation check and communication record
Sources: Monetary Authority of Singapore · Monetary Authority of Singapore

Give the VCC board a mandate-level view

The VCC board does not need every employee pay detail to oversee mandate risk. It needs a proportionate view of incentive features that could affect investment judgement, valuation, liquidity, allocation, conflicts, investor reporting or the manager control environment. Report material design changes, unresolved scenarios, significant overrides, control-function concerns and implemented safeguards. Separate manager employment decisions from VCC oversight, while making dependencies visible. Record the board challenge and any condition imposed on the manager response rather than receiving only an annual assurance.

Sources: Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority · Monetary Authority of Singapore · Monetary Authority of Singapore

Frequently asked questions

Does this guide prohibit performance-linked remuneration?

No. It provides a method to test whether the design supports the mandate and manages conflicts. The correct conclusion depends on actual duties, data, time horizon, discretion, risk exposure, safeguards and the legal and contractual context.

Should the VCC board approve every employee bonus?

Usually the manager handles its employment decisions. The VCC board needs enough information to oversee material mandate risks and conflicts, especially where incentive design could affect investment judgement, valuation, fair treatment, liquidity or control independence.

How should family-member incentives be reviewed?

Apply the same decision map while making family relationships, ownership, succession expectations, personal holdings and informal influence visible. Independent challenge may need strengthening where the same family members control pay, portfolio decisions and VCC governance.

Can disclosure solve a remuneration conflict?

Disclosure can be part of a response, but it does not automatically prevent biased selection, valuation, allocation or timing. The review should decide whether limits, recusal, independent approval, deferral, adjustment, redesign or refusal are also needed.

What evidence should be retained?

Retain the approved design, data lineage, calculation, scenarios, conflicts, recusals, independent challenge, discretion record, authorised outcome and implementation evidence. Limit access to sensitive personal information while preserving enough linkage for proper governance and review.

Official sources and further reading

Discuss a Singapore VCC structure

For help coordinating a Singapore VCC setup or corporate administration, contact Raffles Corporate Services.

General information only. This article is not legal, tax, regulatory or investment advice and does not imply affiliation with or endorsement by ACRA, MAS or IRAS.

Your next step.

Let’s talk about your plans.

A fund, a family office or a trust structure. We coordinate corporate work alongside experienced law firms for legal and tax advice.

Talk to our team