CP12/32: Implementation of the Alternative ... - BVCA admin
CP12/32: Implementation of the Alternative ... - BVCA admin
CP12/32: Implementation of the Alternative ... - BVCA admin
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
<strong>CP12</strong>/<strong>32</strong><br />
<strong>Implementation</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Alternative</strong> Investment Fund Managers Directive<br />
Annex X<br />
5.20 Our view is that <strong>the</strong> first option is <strong>the</strong> better policy choice and we have drafted <strong>the</strong><br />
proposed rules on this basis. It is consistent with <strong>the</strong> UCITS approach and means an AIFM<br />
could not undertake discretionary portfolio business without being a BIPRU limited licence<br />
firm. It also means that a firm which undertakes <strong>the</strong>se MiFID activities is treated in <strong>the</strong><br />
same way from a capital perspective, regardless <strong>of</strong> whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong> firm is an AIFM or a MiFID<br />
investment firm.<br />
5.21 Some respondents to DP12/1 took a different interpretation. They suggested it was not<br />
appropriate to apply <strong>the</strong> CAD in this way and our proposal would require firms to<br />
comply with <strong>the</strong> substantial GENPRU and BIPRU requirements and <strong>the</strong> connected<br />
reporting requirements. However, our analysis indicates a significant number <strong>of</strong> AIFMs<br />
currently also undertake MiFID-scope business as BIPRU limited licence firms.<br />
5.22 Our preferred approach means that, as well as meeting <strong>the</strong> GENPRU and BIPRU<br />
requirements for a limited licence firm (with <strong>the</strong> BIPRU application limited to its designated<br />
investment business), <strong>the</strong> firm must ensure that it meets any additional capital provisions <strong>of</strong><br />
AIFMD and/or <strong>the</strong> UCITS Directive. This includes our interpretation that <strong>the</strong> initial capital<br />
requirements <strong>of</strong> AIFMD and <strong>the</strong> UCITS Directive should be met by own funds on an<br />
ongoing basis (as explained in paragraphs 5.7 and 5.8).<br />
5.23 This means that a CPMI firm must maintain own funds that are <strong>the</strong> higher <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> GENPRU<br />
and BIPRU requirement for a limited licence firm and <strong>the</strong> following own funds<br />
requirement, which derives from AIFMD or <strong>the</strong> UCITS Directive (as applicable):<br />
• <strong>the</strong> higher <strong>of</strong>: €125,000 plus 0.02% <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> portfolios <strong>of</strong> AIFs and UCITS under<br />
management over €250m 37 and one quarter <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> firm’s relevant fixed expenditure 38 ; plus<br />
• additional own funds and/or PII to cover risks arising from pr<strong>of</strong>essional negligence 39<br />
(see paragraphs 5.29 to 5.31 for details).<br />
5.24 Own funds (o<strong>the</strong>r than those held to meet <strong>the</strong> basic €125,000 requirement) must be<br />
invested in liquid assets (see paragraphs 5.<strong>32</strong> to 5.35 for more details).<br />
Q3: Do you agree that we should treat an AIFM that also<br />
undertakes MiFID services as a BIPRU limited licence firm?<br />
The use <strong>of</strong> a guarantee<br />
5.25 Article 9(6) allows a Member State to let an AIFM provide up to 50% <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> additional<br />
own funds required under Article 9(3) with a guarantee from a credit institution or<br />
insurance undertaking.<br />
37 Article 9(3) AIFMD or Article 7(1)(a) <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> UCITS Directive.<br />
38 Article 9(5) AIFMD or Article 7(1)(a) <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> UCITS Directive.<br />
39 Article 9(7) AIFMD.<br />
36 Financial Services Authority November 2012