What is the primary objective of **J-SOX**?

**The primary objective of J-SOX is to ensure the reliability of financial reporting through effective internal controls over financial reporting (ICFR) for listed companies.** Embedded in the **Financial Instruments and Exchange Act (FIEA)** promulgated June 14, 2006, and effective April 2008, J-SOX requires management to establish, evaluate, and report on ICFR, covering **COSO**'s five components plus explicit **Response to Information Technology** and asset preservation. This restores investor confidence in Japan's capital markets via risk-based controls, entity-level programs, ITGCs, and auditable evidence.

Who is legally or professionally required to comply with **J-SOX**?

**J-SOX applies to roughly 3,800 listed companies in Japan and their foreign subsidiaries, effective April 2008.** Under the **FIEA**, management of these entities must design, assess, and disclose ICFR effectiveness in Securities Reports, including consolidated statements and equity-method affiliates. External auditors attest to management's report reliability, with **Financial Services Agency (FSA)** oversight.

Does **J-SOX** require an external audit or third-party certification?

**Yes, J-SOX requires external auditors to audit and attest to the reliability of management's ICFR assessment and report.** Per **Business Accounting Council (BAC)** Implementation Guidance (February 2007), management evaluates ICFR, but independent accountants provide assurance on the report submitted with annual Securities Reports under FIEA.

How often should an assessment for **J-SOX** be performed?

**J-SOX requires annual management assessment of ICFR effectiveness as of fiscal year-end.** Evaluations align with Securities Report filings, supported by ongoing monitoring, periodic testing of key controls, and updates for significant changes like IT implementations or acquisitions, per BAC guidance and COSO principles.

What are the consequences of non-compliance with **J-SOX**?

**Non-compliance with J-SOX risks FSA enforcement, fines, listing suspension, reputational damage, and market penalties.** FIEA violations can lead to administrative sanctions, share price declines (up to 19% post-material weakness disclosure), elevated audit costs (over 60% increase), and executive liability for inaccurate ICFR reports.

Can **J-SOX** be mapped to other international frameworks?

**Yes, J-SOX aligns closely with COSO Internal Control—Integrated Framework (2013), using its five components for ICFR design and evaluation.** BAC guidance supports COSO mapping for entity-level controls, risk assessment, ITGCs, and monitoring, enabling risk-based scoping while emphasizing J-SOX-specific IT response and asset preservation.

What is the first step to begin implementing **J-SOX**?

**The first step for J-SOX implementation is establishing governance with executive sponsorship and a cross-functional steering committee.** Secure **CFO/CEO** commitment, define RACI for finance/IT/internal audit, adopt COSO framework, and conduct materiality-based scoping of significant accounts, processes, and IT systems per BAC guidance.

What is the primary objective of **MAS TRM**?

**MAS TRM's primary objective is to establish sound technology risk governance and cyber resilience through defence-in-depth controls preserving CIA of data and systems.** Per the January 2021 Guidelines (Preface 1.4), financial institutions must implement proportional practices across governance (Section 3.1), risk frameworks (Section 4), secure SDLC (Sections 5-6), IT operations (Section 7), resilience (Section 8), cyber defence (Sections 9-13), and audit (Section 15), ensuring board-approved risk appetite and continuous improvement amid digital threats.

Who is legally or professionally required to comply with **MAS TRM**?

**MAS TRM applies to all financial institutions supervised by MAS, including banks, insurers, capital markets intermediaries, payment providers, and fintechs.** Implementation must be commensurate with risk, complexity, and technology reliance (Section 2.2); boards and senior management bear accountability (Section 3.1), with mandatory CIO/CISO appointments approved by the CEO (Section 3.1.3). Information assets include third-party-managed items (Section 3.3).

Does **MAS TRM** require an external audit or third-party certification?

**MAS TRM mandates an independent internal audit function to assess controls, governance, and risk management (Sections 3.1.7, 15), but does not require external audits or certifications.** FIs must ensure proportionate independent assurance; external penetration testing is expected annually for Internet-facing systems (Section 13.2.4), and ongoing monitoring includes third-party assessments where relevant (Section 3.4).

How often should an assessment for **MAS TRM** be performed?

**TRM assessments must occur regularly, with frequency commensurate to system criticality and exposure.** Vulnerability assessments are ongoing (Section 13.1.1); penetration testing is required at least annually for Internet-accessible systems or post-major changes (Section 13.2.4); DR plans are reviewed annually (Section 8.2.2); policies and risk frameworks are reviewed periodically amid evolving threats (Sections 3.2.1, 4.1.5).

What are the consequences of non-compliance with **MAS TRM**?

**Non-compliance risks supervisory actions including fines, license conditions, revocations, and executive prohibitions.** MAS considers TRM observance in supervision (Section 2.2); examples include S$27.45M AML/CFT fines across nine FIs and CMS license revocation for governance failures, with personal liability for boards/senior management via timely escalation duties (Section 3.1.8).

Can **MAS TRM** be mapped to other international frameworks?

**Yes, MAS TRM aligns with frameworks like NIST CSF 2.0 and ISO 27001 via shared outcomes in governance, risk assessment, and controls.** Section 3.2.1 encourages incorporating industry standards; TRM's CIA focus, risk lifecycle (Section 4), and defence-in-depth map to NIST's Identify-Protect-Detect-Respond-Recover-Govern and ISO's ISMS, enabling hybrid implementations with CSRRs for ERM integration.

What is the first step to begin implementing **MAS TRM**?

**The first step is board approval of a technology risk appetite statement and establishment of governance structures (Section 3.1).** Appoint CIO/CISO (Section 3.1.3), create an independent TRM function (Section 3.1.7), and build an information asset inventory with classification (Section 3.3) to enable proportional control design.

J-SOX vs MAS TRM

Standards Comparison

J-SOX

Mandatory

2008

Japanese regulation for ICFR in listed companies

MAS TRM

Mandatory

2021

Singapore guidelines for financial technology risk management.

Quick Verdict

J-SOX mandates ICFR assessments for Japanese listed firms to ensure financial reporting reliability, while MAS TRM provides technology risk guidelines for Singapore FIs to build cyber resilience. Companies adopt J-SOX for securities compliance and MAS TRM for supervisory alignment.

Financial Reporting

J-SOX

Financial Instruments and Exchange Act (FIEA)

Cost

€€€€

Complexity

High

Implementation Time

12-18 months

Key Features

Principles-based ICFR for listed companies under FIEA
Explicit Response to IT control component
Management assessment with auditor attestation
Covers foreign subsidiaries in consolidated scope
Risk-based scoping aligned with COSO framework

Technology Risk Management

MAS TRM

MAS Technology Risk Management Guidelines

Cost

€€€€

Complexity

High

Implementation Time

12-18 months

Key Features

Board and senior management accountability for oversight
Proportional implementation based on risk and complexity
Comprehensive technology risk management lifecycle framework
Third-party service risk assessment and monitoring
Annual penetration testing for internet-facing systems

Detailed Analysis

A comprehensive look at the specific requirements, scope, and impact of each standard.

J-SOX Details

What It Is

J-SOX, embedded in Japan's Financial Instruments and Exchange Act (FIEA) promulgated in 2006, is a regulatory framework mandating internal controls over financial reporting (ICFR) for listed companies effective April 2008. It requires management to design, evaluate, and report on ICFR effectiveness using a principles-based, risk-based approach aligned with COSO principles, emphasizing reliable financial disclosures.

Key Components

Five COSO components plus explicit Response to IT.
Entity-level, process-level, and IT general controls (ITGCs).
Covers ~3,800 listed companies and foreign subsidiaries.
Management assessment audited by external auditors for report reliability.

Why Organizations Use It

Mandatory for listed entities to ensure market transparency and investor confidence.
Mitigates misstatement risks, reduces audit costs long-term.
Enhances governance, operational efficiency, and strategic IT alignment.
Builds stakeholder trust amid auditor shortages.

Implementation Overview

Phased: governance, scoping, design, testing, reporting, monitoring.
Risk-based with heavy documentation and IT focus.
Applies to Japanese-listed firms, multinationals; requires annual filings.

MAS TRM Details

What It Is

MAS Technology Risk Management (TRM) Guidelines (revised January 2021) are supervisory guidelines from Singapore's Monetary Authority for financial institutions (FIs). They outline a principles-based, risk-proportional framework for governing technology and cyber risks, focusing on confidentiality, integrity, and availability (CIA).

Key Components

15 sections spanning governance, risk frameworks, secure SDLC, IT operations, resilience, access controls, cryptography, cyber defense, assessments, and audit.
Synthesized 12 core principles including board accountability, asset inventories, third-party oversight, and defense-in-depth.
No fixed controls; emphasizes continuous improvement and independent assurance.

Why Organizations Use It

Fulfills MAS supervisory expectations to mitigate enforcement risks like fines.
Builds cyber resilience, supports digitalization, enhances stakeholder trust.
Manages ecosystem risks from third parties and interconnected services.

Implementation Overview

Phased: governance setup, asset classification, control deployment, testing, monitoring.
Applies to all MAS-supervised FIs; scalable by risk profile and size.
Board-approved risk appetite; ongoing audits, no formal certification.

Key Differences

Aspect	J-SOX	MAS TRM
Scope	ICFR for financial reporting controls	Technology/cyber risk across IT lifecycle
Industry	Japanese listed companies only	Singapore financial institutions broadly
Nature	Mandatory FIEA securities law provision	Supervisory guidelines, proportionate implementation
Testing	Annual management assessment, auditor review	VA/PT annually for internet systems, DR tests
Penalties	FSA fines, reputational damage	Supervisory fines, license actions

Scope

J-SOX

ICFR for financial reporting controls

MAS TRM

Technology/cyber risk across IT lifecycle

Industry

J-SOX

Japanese listed companies only

MAS TRM

Singapore financial institutions broadly

Nature

J-SOX

Mandatory FIEA securities law provision

MAS TRM

Supervisory guidelines, proportionate implementation

Testing

J-SOX

Annual management assessment, auditor review

MAS TRM

VA/PT annually for internet systems, DR tests

Penalties

J-SOX

FSA fines, reputational damage

MAS TRM

Supervisory fines, license actions

Frequently Asked Questions

Common questions about J-SOX and MAS TRM

J-SOX FAQ

MAS TRM FAQ

You Might also be Interested in These Articles...

Singapore PDPA Implementation Guide: Mastering Part 6A Breach Notification Thresholds and Timelines from Primary Statute

Master Singapore PDPA Part 6A breach notifications: statutory thresholds (risk of significant harm), 72-hour timelines, checklists, templates & frameworks. Comp

CIS Controls v8.1, Operationalized: Top 10 Reasons Compliance Monitoring Software Accelerates Real-World Implementation

Operationalize CIS Controls v8.1 with compliance monitoring software. Turn checklists into dashboards, tickets, and audit-proof workflows. Top 10 reasons it acc

Proving CIS Controls v8.1 Works: A KPI & Evidence Framework for Board Reporting, Audits, and Continuous Assurance

Prove CIS Controls v8.1 effectiveness with KPI catalog, evidence checklist & reporting cadence. Ideal for board reports, audits & cyber-insurance. Measure outco

Run Maturity Assessments with GRADUM

Transform your compliance journey with our AI-powered assessment platform

Assess your organization's maturity across multiple standards and regulations including ISO 27001, DORA, NIS2, NIST, GDPR, and hundreds more. Get actionable insights and track your progress with collaborative, AI-powered evaluations.

100+ Standards & Regulations

AI-Powered Insights

Collaborative Assessments

Actionable Recommendations

Check out these other Gradum.io Standards Comparison Pages

SAFe vs FERPA

Discover SAFe vs FERPA: Compare Scaled Agile Framework's enterprise agility with FERPA's student privacy rules. Unlock compliant scaling, secure data flow, and business value now!

ISO 27701 vs U.S. SEC Cybersecurity Rules

Unlock ISO 27701 privacy controls vs U.S. SEC cybersecurity rules. Compare governance, risk management & compliance strategies for integrated protection. Align now for audit-ready resilience.

CE Marking vs ISO 27001

Discover CE Marking vs ISO 27001: EU product safety marking or global ISMS standard? Key differences, requirements, strategies for compliance & market success. Read now!

J-SOX

MAS TRM

Quick Verdict

J-SOX

Key Features

MAS TRM

Key Features

Detailed Analysis

J-SOX Details

What It Is

Key Components

Why Organizations Use It

Implementation Overview

MAS TRM Details

What It Is

Key Components

Why Organizations Use It

Implementation Overview

Key Differences

Scope

Industry

Nature

Testing

Penalties

Frequently Asked Questions

J-SOX FAQ

What is the primary objective of J-SOX?

Who is legally or professionally required to comply with J-SOX?

Does J-SOX require an external audit or third-party certification?

How often should an assessment for J-SOX be performed?

What are the consequences of non-compliance with J-SOX?

Can J-SOX be mapped to other international frameworks?

What is the first step to begin implementing J-SOX?

MAS TRM FAQ

What is the primary objective of MAS TRM?

Who is legally or professionally required to comply with MAS TRM?

Does MAS TRM require an external audit or third-party certification?

How often should an assessment for MAS TRM be performed?

What are the consequences of non-compliance with MAS TRM?

Can MAS TRM be mapped to other international frameworks?

What is the first step to begin implementing MAS TRM?

You Might also be Interested in These Articles...

Singapore PDPA Implementation Guide: Mastering Part 6A Breach Notification Thresholds and Timelines from Primary Statute

CIS Controls v8.1, Operationalized: Top 10 Reasons Compliance Monitoring Software Accelerates Real-World Implementation

Proving CIS Controls v8.1 Works: A KPI & Evidence Framework for Board Reporting, Audits, and Continuous Assurance

Run Maturity Assessments with GRADUM

Check out these other Gradum.io Standards Comparison Pages

SAFe vs FERPA

ISO 27701 vs U.S. SEC Cybersecurity Rules

CE Marking vs ISO 27001