Sophisticated Investor Funds – Page 11 – Global Investment Law Watch

Australia: Cybersecurity now a legal obligation for AFS Licensees

Jun 09 2022

By Kane Barnett and Bernard Sia

As technology continues to drive change within the financial services industry, Australian courts and regulators have confirmed the need for Australian financial services (AFS) licensees to address the cybersecurity risks. On 5 May 2022, the Australian Federal Court ruled in favour of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC), holding that AFS licensee RI Advice Group Pty Ltd (RI Advice) had breached its statutory obligations by failing to have adequate cybersecurity measures in place.

Europe: AIFMD II – Proposed Refinements to Loan Originating Fund Proposals

May 31 2022

By: Philipp Riedl

On 18 May 2022, the Rapporteur submitted to the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON) a report suggesting changes to the EU Commission’s envisaged regulation of loan originating funds under its proposed AIFMD amendments (AIFMD II). The report includes some proposed relief, notably:

Australia: ESG Investing a target for the New Government?

May 23 2022

By Jim Bulling and Kithmin Ranamukhaarachchi

A Federal election in Australia was held at the weekend which resulted in a change of Government. One of the signature priorities of the incoming Government is to introduce policies which more comprehensively address climate change challenges.

United States: MNPI (aka, “My Next Possible Investigation”): The SEC’s Scrutiny of MNPI Compliance Programs

May 11 2022

By: Keri E. Riemer

The SEC’s Division of Examinations recently released a risk alert describing a pattern of deficiencies relating to investment advisers’ use of material non-public information (MNPI). The Staff highlighted the following as areas of concern:

Alternative Data. Advisers that used data from non-traditional sources beyond company financial statements, filings, and press releases appeared to not have adopted or implemented written policies and procedures reasonably designed to address the potential risk of receiving and using MNPI through such sources.
“Value-Add Investors”. Advisers did not have—or did not appear to implement—adequate policies and procedures related to investors who are more likely to possess MNPI (e.g., officers or directors of a public company, asset management firm principals or portfolio managers, and investment bankers).
Expert Networks. Advisers did not appear to adequately track calls with expert network consultants, retain detailed notes from the calls, and monitor trading activity related to companies in industries similar to those discussed during the calls.
Deficiencies related to Access Persons. The Staff identified advisers who failed to correctly identify “access persons” (as defined in Rule 204A-1(c) under the Investment Advisers Act), ensure that those access persons obtain pre-approval for investments in IPOs and other similar offerings, and maintain adequate records of the holding and transactions of access persons.

The Staff also encouraged industry participants to review their practices, policies, and procedures regarding the topics addressed above. We recently issued a client alert which describes the risk alert in greater detail and provides takeaways for industry participants.

Australia: Finally, a new fund vehicle

May 06 2022

By Kane Barnett

On 1 July 2022 Australia will finally get a new fund vehicle, the corporate collective investment vehicle (CCIV).

Historically, Australian funds have been established as unit trusts or, in the case of certain venture capital funds, limited partnerships. The CCIV is a corporate structure that is intended to be more internationally recognisable than the trust-based fund structure as it is similar to the equivalent structure in other key fund jurisdictions such as the United Kingdom, Cayman Islands, Singapore and Hong Kong.

United States: Being a SPAC is No Fun(d): SEC Proposes “Safe Harbor” Exclusion for SPACs

Apr 14 2022

By: C. Todd Gibson

Last year, a number of lawsuits were filed against SPACs and their sponsors challenging (in part) their status under the U.S. Investment Company Act of 1940 (“1940 Act”) arguing that SPACs are essentially unregistered investment companies. A brief filed by two professors supported this notion on the basis that SPACs typically hold government securities until a target company is acquired (and thus, such SPACs are investment companies required to be registered). In an unusual move to provide SPAC market participants with some comfort on this issue, a number of law firms joined together refuting this position in a joint public statement outlining legal practioners’ historic view that SPACs are not investment companies.

United States: To be Continued (or not)

Apr 12 2022

By: Yasho Lahiri

Continuation funds exist because closed-end funds are better suited to a perfect world than an imperfect one.

In a perfect world, as a closed-end fund nears the end of its term, the few remaining portfolio companies the fund owns are ready for sale at attractive prices. The sales happen. Proceeds from the sales wind their way through the fund waterfall to grateful limited partners and successful sponsors. The fund is wound up just as its term comes to an end.

Australia: Russian Sanctions and Fund Managers

Apr 08 2022

By: Jim Bulling and Kithmin Ranamukhaarachchi

As Russia’s invasion of Ukraine continues, global economic sanctions have evolved into a complex web of restrictions and prohibitions with limited exceptions. As a result, asset managers have more layers of regulation to navigate in relation to current holdings and future investments in virtually all markets directly or indirectly connected to Russia, Belarus and Ukraine (Region).

Europe: Welcome New Clarity on the Phasing in of EU ESG Disclosure Requirements

Mar 30 2022

By: Philipp Riedl

Revised guidance from the European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) contains much-needed information on the extent to which affected firms should be anticipating detailed Regulatory Technical Standards (RTS) that are not expected to be effective until 1 January 2023. The German regulator BaFin issued an accompanying statement on 30 March 2022. The key information is:

Europe: From Russia With FUD: Settlement of Credit Derivatives Transactions Referencing Entities Under Western Sanctions and Kremlin Capital Controls

Mar 29 2022

By: Anthony R.G. Nolan and Kenneth Holston

Russia’s war against Ukraine has led in record time to the implementation of extensive anti-Russian sanctions by the United States, the European Union, and the United Kingdom, among others. Those initiatives in turn have led to the imposition of extensive capital controls within Russia. The combined effect of Western sanctions and Russian countermeasures threaten the liquidity and creditworthiness of Russian debt obligations. Although the Russian Federation avoided defaulting on a coupon payment on its dollar bonds on March 16, it subsequently announced that it will satisfy its obligations under rubles a dollar bond coming due on April 4 by making payment of principal and interest in rubles.

Catagory:Sophisticated Investor Funds