The first detailed analysis of the legal and practical implications of the AIFMD at regional and national level.

Apart from MiFID, the Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive (AIFMD) may be the most important European asset management regulation of the early twenty-first century. In this in-depth analytical and critical discussion of the content and system of the directive, thirty-eight contributing authors – academics, lawyers, consultants, fund supervisors, and fund industry experts – examine the AIFMD from every angle. They cover structure, regulatory history, scope, appointment and authorization of the manager, the requirements for depositaries and prime brokers, rules on delegation, reporting requirements, transitional provisions, and the objectives stipulated in the recitals and other official documents. The challenging implications and contexts they examine include the following: – connection with systemic risk and the financial crisis; - nexus with insurance for negligent conduct; - connection with corporate governance doctrine; - risk management; - transparency; - the cross-border dimension; - liability for lost assets; - impact on alternative investment strategies, and - the nexus with the European Regulation on Long-Term Investment Funds (ELTIFR). Nine country reports, representing most of Europe’s financial centres and fund markets add a national perspective to the discussion of the European regulation. These chapters deal with the potential interactions among the AIFMD and the relevant laws and regulations of Austria, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, Liechtenstein, The Netherlands, Malta and the United Kingdom. The second edition of the book continues to deliver not only the much-needed discussion of the inconsistencies and difficulties when applying the directive, but also provides guidance and potential solutions to the problems it raises. The second edition considers all new developments in the field of alternative investment funds, their managers, depositaries, and prime brokers, including, but not limited to, statements by the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) and national competent authorities on the interpretation of the AIFMD, as well as new European regulation, in particular the PRIIPS Regulation, the ELTIF Regulation, the Regulation on European Venture Capital Funds (EuVeCaR), the Regulation on European Social Entrepreneurship Funds (EUSEFR), MiFID II, and UCITS V. The book will be warmly welcomed by investors and their counsel, fund managers, depositaries, asset managers, administrators, as well as regulators and academics in the field.

The first detailed analysis of the legal and practical implications of the AIFMD at regional and national level.

In this report the European Union Committee warn that unless the Directive on alternative investment funds is compatible with a global regulatory approach it will seriously damage the EU and UK economies. The UK Government should not agree with the Directive unless it is compatible with equivalent legislation in third countries and in particular the United States. It is essential to ensure that EU alternative investment fund managers do not lose competitiveness at a global level. This is a particular concern for the UK and the City of London which has a large alternative investment fund industry that employed an estimated 40,000 people in 2009. The Committee recognise the risk the aggregate activity of hedge funds could cause to financial stability and welcome the principle of EU regulation of the managers. The Directive has the potential to reduce risk posed by fund managers and be beneficial to the single market and the EU economy as a whole. The Committee stress that the requirements on provision of information should be proportionate and carefully thought out to ensure Supervisors are provided with the relevant data. The Committee also criticise the "one size fits all" approach of the Directive. The Directive covers a wide variety of fund managers including hedge funds, private equity and infrastructure funds, and its detailed requirements must differentiate between types of managers to avoid unwanted outcomes that could restrict the operation of fund managers unnecessarily.

The European Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive (AIFMD) has been formulated as a response to the global financial crisis, which climaxed in the collapse of Lehman Brothers on 15 September 2008. The securitisation of real estate risks that came about by launching financial innovations such as asset-backed securities (ABS), mortgage-backed securities (MBS), collateralised debt obligations (CDO) or structured investment vehicles (SIV) contributed particularly to the fast worldwide circulation of ‘poisoned’ papers. Assuming that the financial crisis of 2008/2009 was the consequence of wrongfully set incentives that primarily concerned the fund managers’ remuneration, the European Commission followed the ideas of Jacques de Larosière, Klaus-Heiner Lehne and Poul Nyrup Rasmussen and set the legal focus on the fund managers, as these entities launch and distribute financial products such as those mentioned above and also decide on the investment strategy that might bear systemic risks. Due to their financial market potential and in view of the design of financial products, these entities admittedly have a strong impact on the financial market development and may jointly be responsible for the realisation of systemic risks of transnational dimensions. In particular, in the view of a steady credit supply of the real economy, the enormous transnational mobility of capital and the global competition of financial market regulations, it seems doubtful whether one can identify the fund managers as those responsible for the financial market crisis of 2008/2009. This thesis highlights the history, symptoms and supposed core reasons of the financial crisis of 2008/2009 and critically assesses whether the AIFMD can reach its objective to effectively contain systemic risks in the context of a globalised financial system.

This monograph provides a comprehensive source of analysis and research on alternative investments in the wealth management process, with a special focus on Poland and Eastern Europe. It presents the characteristics that distinguish alternative investments from traditional investments and illustrates the benefits and risks involved in the former. The experience gained in developed countries is extremely valuable for the analysis of both the Polish and Eastern European financial markets. In the theoretical part of the book, key aspects of alternative investments are collected, systematized and developed; subsequently, in the empirical part the results of selected studies on the alternative investment sector around the world are examined. Lastly, the book’s findings are applied to the context of alternative financial investments in Poland, investigating the preferences for alternative investments in the country, which is the largest market in Central and Eastern Europe. Not only of theoretical interest, these insights have a high application value, making the book an essential resource for scholars, practitioners and policymakers alike.

The purpose of this book is to present the principles of alternative investments in management. The individual chapters provide a detailed analysis of various classes of alternative investments on the financial market. Despite many different definitions of alternative investments, it can be assumed that a classical approach to alternative investments includes hedge funds, fund of funds (FOF), managed accounts, structured products and private equity/venture capital. Alternative investment in keeping with this broad definition is the subject of consideration here. The theoretical part of each chapter is meant to collect, systematize and deepen readers’ understanding of a given investment category, while the practical part of each focuses on an analysis of the current state of development of alternative investments on the global market and outlines the prospects of future market development. This book will be a valuable tool for scholars, practitioners and policy-makers alike.

This report examines the proposed Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive which introduces an EU-wide approach to the regulation of Alternative Investment Fund Managers, including hedge fund and private equity fund managers. The Directive aims both to increase the stability of the financial system and to facilitate the single market in Alternative Investment Funds. The report argues that the Directive will seriously damage the EU and UK economies unless it is fully compatible with the global approach to the regulation of fund managers and the Government should withhold agreement on the Directive until these concerns are addressed.

Directive on alternative investment fund Managers : 3rd report of session 2009-10, Vol. 2: Evidence