August 3, 2026
8 min read
RBI NBFC Governance Directions 2025: What Every NBFC Board Must Know and Do
August 3, 2026
8 min read
On 28 November 2025, the Reserve Bank of India issued the Non-Banking Financial Companies Governance Directions 2025. For the first time in NBFC regulatory history, governance has its own standalone framework extracted from scattered provisions across multiple master directions and consolidated into a single, enforceable document.
RBI NBFC Governance Directions 2025 apply to Base, Middle, and Upper Layer NBFCs. However, the obligations vary according to the regulatory layer. Furthermore, the RBI issued its first enforcement action for governance non-compliance in March 2026. It penalised an NBFC for improper senior management compensation treatment. As a result, the framework is now operational, enforceable, and under active regulatory scrutiny. This guide covers the material obligations.
Previously, the RBI embedded NBFC governance requirements across the Scale-Based Regulation master directions, the Credit Facilities Directions, and various circulars. However, the Governance Directions 2025 now consolidate these requirements into a single framework. As a result, the framework introduces three new governance accountability measures:
Board composition requirements under the Governance Directions scale with the NBFC’s regulatory tier.
For Middle Layer and Upper Layer NBFCs, the Directions specify:
Base Layer NBFCs face lighter Board composition requirements but must still ensure the Board is functional, meets at least four times per year, and has at least one Director with relevant financial sector experience.
The Governance Directions mandate specific KMP positions for NBFCs above defined thresholds. The most significant addition:
Chief Compliance Officer (CCO): for Middle Layer NBFCs above Rs 1,000 crore in assets and all Upper Layer NBFCs, a dedicated CCO with a direct reporting line to the Board (or the Board-level Audit Committee) is mandatory. The CCO cannot report to the business lines they are monitoring. The CCO’s appointment and removal require Board approval.
The Governance Directions explicitly require the CCO to operate independently. They also establish the position as an internal check on regulatory compliance, free from commercial pressure. An NBFC where the compliance function reports to the MD/CEO, who may also have commercial targets, does not meet the spirit of this requirement.
Other mandated KMP for Upper Layer NBFCs: Chief Risk Officer (with direct Board access), Chief Financial Officer, and Company Secretary, all with specified qualification requirements and independence provisions.
Compensation governance is the most operationally specific new requirement in the Governance Directions and the one that triggered the first enforcement action in March 2026.
Variable compensation for senior management and material risk takers must:
The March 2026 enforcement action specifically penalised an NBFC that paid the entire variable compensation package of its senior management as a single upfront payment, explicitly the structure the Directions prohibit. The action signals that RBI examiners are checking compensation governance from the first examination cycle after the Directions took effect.
The Governance Directions formalise committee requirements that were previously discretionary for many NBFCs:
The RBI Non-Banking Financial Companies Governance Directions 2025, issued on 28 November 2025, are India’s first standalone NBFC governance framework. They apply to all registered NBFCs categorised under the Scale-Based Regulation framework: Base, Middle, and Upper Layer. Obligations scale with layer, with Base Layer NBFCs facing lighter requirements than Middle and Upper Layer entities.
Middle Layer NBFCs above Rs 1,000 crore in assets and all Upper Layer NBFCs must appoint a dedicated CCO. The CCO must report directly to the Board or Board-level Audit Committee, not to the MD/CEO or business lines. The CCO’s appointment and removal require Board approval. The requirement is designed to create an independent compliance oversight function insulated from commercial pressure.
Malus is the reduction of variable compensation that has been accrued but not yet paid down to zero if warranted by material performance misstatement or excessive risk-taking. Clawback is the recovery of variable compensation that has already been paid out if material compliance violations, fraud, or adverse risk outcomes are subsequently identified. Both mechanisms align senior management compensation with the multi-year risk outcomes of their decisions.
In March 2026, the RBI penalised an NBFC for disbursing the entire variable compensation of its senior management as a single upfront payment, violating the deferral requirements introduced in the Governance Directions 2025. This was the first enforcement action specifically tied to governance non-compliance under the new framework and signals that RBI examiners are actively checking compensation governance from their first examination cycle post-Directions.
No. The Governance Directions are explicitly tiered. Base Layer NBFCs face lighter requirements: a functional Board meeting at least four times per year, at least one Director with financial sector experience, and basic credit policy governance. The more demanding CCO, Risk Management Committee, formal compensation governance, and majority independent directors apply to Middle and Upper Layer NBFCs above specified thresholds.
RBI NBFC Governance Directions 2025 are not a theoretical framework; they are an operational reality with enforcement teeth. The March 2026 penalty action occurred just four months after the Directions were issued, confirming that the RBI is treating governance compliance with the same seriousness as prudential compliance.
Conduct a gap analysis against the Directions immediately. Prioritise Board reconstitution where necessary, CCO appointment where required, and compensation structure redesign to incorporate deferral, malus, and clawback. These are not complex changes in concept, but they require Board-level decisions and institutional implementation timelines that favour early action.