AIFM Private Placement Solution
- Aug 9, 2018
July 22, 2018 marked the four-year anniversary of the Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive (“AIFMD”) legislation coming into full effect throughout the European Union, including the end of the one-year grace period. In the years leading up to its implementation, AIFMD brought about great uproar in the financial sector.
Many managers were hopeful that exemptions or milder treatments would apply for them, as AIFMD seemed expensive, time-consuming, complicated, and nearly impossible for small-to-midsized managers to comply with.
Today, AIFMD is the new normal within Europe. Looking back, much of what seemed impossible in the beginning is now part of regular day-to-day business.
AIFMD for the Non-European Manager
Though we might be getting used to this new normal in Europe, the perception of legislation amongst non-European managers still largely differs. As a global administrator working alongside managers across the world, we have come to realize that there is a level of misconception about the options available to non-European managers.
A significant number of non-European managers are focused on raising capital in a select number of European countries, and have come to realize that they simply don’t need to market E.U.-wide – making the benefits of a passport irrelevant for them. National Private Placement Regimes (“NPPRs”) can be an alternative for such managers.
Subject to the NPPRs in place in each European Member State, private placement is available to Non-European AIFMs marketing AIFs, both European and non-European AIFs.
The aim of this article is to outline the private placement solution, including a high-level comparison of the requirements under NPPRs versus being fully AIFMD-compliant. In closing, we will also describe what could be a viable alternative for certain non-European managers who want to market into Europe.
National Private Placement Regimes
Non-European managers can market funds into Europe under NPPRs – provided that the manager reports to each applicable national regulator. A significant difference is that many compliance obligations are replaced by reporting obligations.
For non-European managers who are looking to reach out to investors across the entire European continent, the NPPR solution might not be the most suitable. However, for non-European managers who are interested in a select number of countries operating under the NPPRs, it can be an excellent solution.
Each regulator has a slightly different reporting format and time line for submission of these reports.
The differences across the Member States, and the fact that a small number of countries do not have NPPRs in place, have added to confusion amongst non-European managers. The result is that managers for whom this would be a perfectly manageable solution have held back from using the NPPRs,
due to their unfamiliarity.
With the right guidance and the right partner(s), using the NPPR solution is straightforward for non-European managers and investment advisors.
One alternative, as an example, can be to appoint a third-party off-shore management vehicle, under the NPPR as non-European AIFM for clients with AIFs based in Delaware or Cayman Islands.
The benefit would be that, when using a management vehicle that remains outside of Europe, you can take advantage of the NPPR, whilst removing the need to comply with the full scope of requirements under AIFMD.
In such a scenario, the non-European AIFM can delegate the portfolio management to the investment advisor, while retaining general oversight and the risk advisory function. The remuneration and disclosure requirements will then be dealt with on the level of our non-European AIFM management vehicle – which investment advisors often perceive as a major advantage. This in addition to the potential cost and time efficiencies gained.
Requirements under private placement versus full AIFMD
For comparison purposes, here we’ve outlined briefly what the main differences are:
Requirements under private placement:
Requirements when fully AIFMD- compliant and passporting:
Deciding how to enter the European market as non-European manager is a major decision, for which it would be worthwhile running a cost-benefit analysis. While for some managers launching in Europe and using the AIFMD passport is the most suitable solution, we’ve seen that the NPPR solution can be an efficient alternative for others – from both a cost and operational perspective.
If you have any questions, we'd like to hear from you.
Explore More Insights
Insights on the Private Fund Adviser Rules & Form PF for Chief Compliance OfficersRead More
Receive the latest business insights, analysis, and perspectives from EisnerAmper professionals.