The plan to relocate the Financial Services Commission (FSC) to Sejong has prompted calls from the financial sector for a Seoul office to facilitate policy discussions and address urgent issues. Unions representing financial institutions, including the Financial Supervisory Service (FSS) and state-owned banks, maintain that the FSC's move is separate from their own relocation concerns.
According to the financial sector on October 14, the government announced the inclusion of the FSC and its affiliated Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) in the relocation plan. The move is scheduled for the second half of next year, affecting a total of 420 employees, including 340 from the FSC and 80 from the FIU.
Concerns have been raised about the operational burden resulting from the increased physical distance from policy authorities. Collaboration between the FSC and financial institutions often occurs not only at the leadership level but also among operational departments. There are worries that response times could be delayed in urgent situations, such as recent hacking incidents in the banking sector. A representative from a major bank stated, "If the FSC's relocation to Sejong leads to delays in addressing urgent issues, we expect to consider necessary measures, such as adjusting our public relations strategies."
In light of this, there are suggestions that the FSC should establish a workspace in Seoul for meetings and operational staff, even after the relocation. The need for face-to-face consultations with other government departments and related agencies must also be taken into account.
Some argue that certain functions of the FIU should remain in Seoul. Kim Sang-bong, a professor of economics at Hansung University, noted, "The FIU's work is closely linked to on-site inspections, and many related agencies are located in Seoul. Therefore, we should consider keeping the FIU in Seoul alongside the FSS. While operations can be conducted remotely, functions requiring rapid response should remain in Seoul for efficiency."
However, the FSC has refrained from commenting on the establishment of a Seoul office following the announcement of the relocation.
Unions representing financial institutions are wary that the FSC's move could set a precedent for the relocation of other financial entities. Unions from the FSS, the Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation, and the Export-Import Bank of Korea continue to oppose any plans for relocation but have stated they will not issue separate statements or hold protests in response to the FSC's move.
The Export-Import Bank union emphasized that while the FSC is an administrative body responsible for setting policy directions, state-owned banks focus on core operational tasks such as corporate finance and collaboration with overseas financial institutions and contractors. They argue that the FSC's relocation should not undermine the government's vision of making Seoul the 'economic capital' and stress the need to distinguish between the functions of administrative and financial institutions. They assert that the FSC's move cannot justify the relocation of financial institutions.
In anticipation of future announcements regarding the relocation of public institutions, the Export-Import Bank union has begun negotiations with management. They have indicated that if included in any relocation plans, they may escalate their response through strikes or rallies.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.