ESMA Opinion Highlights Issues Regarding the Functioning of the AIFMD Passport

Currently, non-European hedge fund managers wishing to market or manage funds within the E.U. must comply with the national private placement regime (NPPR) of each Member State where market access is sought, as they are unable to take advantage of the European marketing passport under AIFMD.  To aid the European Parliament, Council and Commission in reaching a decision on the future of NPPRs and/or the potential extension of the AIFMD passport to non-E.U. alternative investment fund managers and non-E.U. alternative investment funds, the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) recently issued an opinion on the functioning of the E.U. passport and the NPPRs.  The opinion ties in with ESMA’s concurrently issued advice regarding the extension of the passport.  See “ESMA Recommends Extension of the AIFMD Passport for Hedge Fund Managers and Funds in Certain Non-E.U. Jurisdictions,” Hedge Fund Law Report, Vol. 8, No. 31 (Aug. 6, 2015).  This article summarizes the methodology and data used by ESMA; highlights the issues identified and conclusions reached in the opinion; and examines stakeholder feedback regarding the functioning of the passport and NPPRs.  For more on the passport and NPPRs, see “Passports, Platforms and Private Placement: Options for Marketing Funds in Europe in the Post-AIFMD Era,” Hedge Fund Law Report, Vol. 8, No. 17 (Apr. 30, 2015); “Navigating the Patchwork of National Private Placement Regimes: A Roadmap for Marketing in Europe by Non-EU Hedge Fund Managers That Are Not Authorized Under the AIFMD,” Hedge Fund Law Report, Vol. 7, No. 28 (Jul. 24, 2014); and “Four Strategies for Hedge Fund Managers for Accessing EU Capital Under the AIFMD,” Hedge Fund Law Report, Vol. 7, No. 6 (Feb. 13, 2014). 

To read the full article

Continue reading your article with a HFLR subscription.