An EU directive that would impose new regulations and restrictions on private equity and private equity real estate funds has reportedly received more than 1,000 proposed amendments from European politicians.
Javier Echarri, secretary general of the European Venture Capital Association, told the UK Telegraph the level of feedback from Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) was unprecedented, and showed there was a “long way to go to get the directive into an acceptable shape”.
There is there is a long way to go to get the directive into an acceptable shape.
The directive requires any fund wanting to market to EU investors to prove it is subject to sufficiently rigorous regulation in its home country. This would be a particular blow to US-based asset managers, as the US currently does not qualify as a rigorous enough system, and US funds would not qualify for a fundraising “passport”.
With the UK taking the lead in opposition to the directive, the FSA last year released a report claiming the regulations could impose substantial one-off compliance costs of up to €3.2 billion on alternative investment fund managers, while driving capital to non-EU competitors.
In November, Waters also testified about the potential negative impact of the directive before the UK's House of Lords, which then met with members of the European Commission in Brussels to press these concerns.
While a final AIFM directive was at one point expected to be passed by mid-2010, the large number of MEP amendments received by Jean-Paul Gauzes – rapporteur for the European Parliament’s Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs – may push a final vote further off.
Before a vote can occur, the proposed amendments to the separate European Council and European Parliament versions of the directive must be reconciled. Gauzes, who is responsible for guiding the Parliament process, has already made 135 amendments to the first draft himself.
Among his proposals, announced last year, were subjecting fund managers to restrictions on pay similar to those for bank staff, as well as widening the scope of the directive to cover all managers of alternative investment funds, not just those at the larger end of the spectrum.