The Alternative Investment Management Association

Alternative Investment Management Association Representing the global hedge fund industry

Replacement of the law of 19 July 1991 concerning institutional funds: Proposal for a new law on Specialised Investment Funds (Luxembourg)

Jacques Elvinger and Frédérique Lifrange

Elvinger, Hoss & Prussen

Q1 2006


Luxembourg is about to adopt a new investment vehicle in replacement of the existing institutional fund. This new vehicle will offer greater flexibility in terms of corporate structure and a lighter prudential regime. Besides, the scope of eligible investors will be widened so as to cover not only institutional investors but also other types of well-informed investors, including sophisticated private investors.

On 5 October 2006, the Luxembourg government deposited with Parliament a bill on specialised investment funds (the Bill).

The object of the Bill is to replace the law of 19 July 1991 concerning undertakings for collective investment (UCIs) the securities of which are not intended to be placed with the public (the Law of 1991) by a new law on specialised investment funds.

The Law of 1991 governs UCIs reserved for one or several institutional investors (Institutional UCIs). The Law of 1991 thus differs from the law of 30 March 1988 relating to UCIs (Law of 1988) and the law of 20 December 2002 relating to UCIs (Law of 2002) which govern UCIs, the securities of which are intended to be placed with the public by means of a public or private offer.

In all other respects, notably as regards the rules applicable to the operation and monitoring of Institutional UCIs, the Law of 1991 refers to the provisions of the Law of 1988, which governs UCIs subject to part II of that law (i.e. non-EU harmonised UCIs). Apart from the possibility of having a single investor and the obligation to be reserved for institutional investors, the regime applicable to Institutional UCIs is, therefore, similar to the one applicable to non-EU harmonised UCIs, which may be distributed to retail investors. However, in light of the fact that institutional investors do not need a protection similar to the one that needs to be assured for retail or private investors, the Luxembourg regulator (Commission de Surveillance du Secteur Financier or CSSF) is, in practice, more flexible in certain respects, notably regarding diversification rules.

Due to the cross-reference it contains to the Law of 1988, the Law of 1991 must be amended or redrafted by 13 February 2007, after which the Law of 1988 will be repealed as a result of the transitional provisions included in the Law of 2002 which implements the UCITS Directive 85/611/EC, as amended, (the so-called UCITS III regime), into Luxembourg law.

The purpose of this contribution is to give a brief overview of the main features of the Bill.

1. A self-contained law on SIFs

Rather than modifying the Law of 1991, the approach adopted by the Bill is to replace it by instituting a self-contained law providing for a more flexible corporate framework and a lighter prudential regime than that applicable to UCIs which may be distributed to retail investors. To further distinguish the vehicles created under this new regime from UCIs governed by the Law of 2002, the Bill refers to them as "Specialised Investment Funds" (SIFs).

2. Flexibility with respect to eligible assets

Like part II of the Law of 2002 and in contrast to the law of 15 June 2004 relating to the investment company in risk capital (SICAR), the Bill allows significant flexibility with respect to the assets in which SIFs may invest. Accordingly, the new regime will be available for vehicles investing in any type of assets and pursuing any type of investment strategies, including alternative strategies. SIFs could, therefore, be used, inter alia, for the creation of transferable securities funds, money market funds, real estate funds, hedge funds, private equity funds and debt funds.

3. Maintaining the principle of risk spreading

Like UCIs governed by the Law of 2002 and UCIs currently governed by the Law of 1991, SIFs will have to invest in accordance with the principle of risk-spreading. The CSSF could, however, allow a lower level of diversification, as SIFs will be restricted to well-informed investors. It is expected that principles based investment restrictions will be applicable rather than quantitative investment restrictions.

4. Extending the concept of eligible investors to other types of well-informed investors

Eligible investors in SIFs will comprise, besides institutional investors, professional investors and other well-informed investors, who invest a minimum of 125,000€ or, have obtained an assessment, made by a credit institution or another financial sector professional, certifying their capability to appraise the contemplated investment and the risk thereof. This third category means that SIFs could be distributed to sophisticated retail or private investors. This should be particularly valuable in the context of the hedge fund industry, given the growing demand from private investors for access to alternative investments funds.

5. No requirement for a promoter

In contrast to UCIs which may be distributed to retail investors, SIFs will not be required to be set up at the initiative of an institutional promoter with significant financial resources approved by the CSSF. The CSSF will no longer check the financial standing of the investment managers of SIFs but focus on the good repute and expertise of the directors of the vehicle, in light of the investment policy.

The waiver of the requirement to have a promoter should boost the growth in Luxembourg of certain products where the expertise is developed by smaller institutions, like hedge funds.

6. Allowing the start of activities prior to regulatory approval

SIFs could be created and start their activities before having received regulatory approval, provided that an application for authorisation is filed with the CSSF within the month following their creation.

7. Flexible share capital structure

Like UCIs governed by the Law of 2002 and those currently governed by the Law of 1991, the minimum capitalisation for a SIF will be 1,250,000€. However, the time period within which this minimum must be reached is extended to 12 months after the authorisation of the vehicle, compared to 6 months for UCIs under the Law of 2002. Except for the fonds commun de placement (FCP), the reference should be the subscribed capital rather than the net assets but the issue premium can be included.

Furthermore, under the new regime, the possibility to issue partly paid shares should be extended to investment companies with variable capital (société d'investissement à capital variable or SICAV).

8. Other lighter requirements

Although SIFs will be subject to the supervision of the Luxembourg regulator, as is the case for UCIs created under the Law of 2002 and those currently governed by the Law of 1991, the Bill provides for a somewhat less strict regulatory regime. For instance, there is no requirement to publish a semi-annual financial report and the Bill does not provide for a specific schedule with respect to the minimum contents of the offering document.

In the same manner as UCIs created under the Law of 2002 and the Law of 1991, SIFs will have to appoint a depository which must be a Luxembourg credit institution or a Luxembourg branch of a foreign credit institution. However, the Bill does not require the depository to perform additional monitoring functions in relation to certain operations of the fund as imposed by the Law of 2002 and the Law of 1991. This lightening of the duties of the depositary should be particularly valuable in the context of hedge funds, notably in the light of the significant involvement of prime brokers.

9. Additional flexibility

Under the Bill, a SICAV will not be required to be a limited liability company (société anonyme) as is the case for SICAVs subject to the Law of 2002 or the Law of 1991. Under the new regime, a SICAV could also be established in the form of a partnership limited by shares (société en commandite par actions), a private limited company (société à responsabilité limitée), or a cooperative set up as a public limited company (société coopérative organisée sous la forme d'une société anonyme).

In addition, the conditions and procedures for the issue and redemption of shares or units are relaxed, compared to the rules applicable to UCIs governed by the Law of 2002 or those currently subject to the rules of the Law of 1991. In this regard, the Bill provides that the conditions and procedures applicable to the issue and, if applicable, the redemption of shares or units, is determined in the constitutive documents. As a result for example, there is no requirement that the issue price be based on the net asset value as it is the case for a SICAV governed by the Law of 2002 or the Law of 1991.

10. Taxation

In the same manner as for UCIs governed by the Law of 1991, SIFs will be subject to the subscription tax (taxe d'abonnement) at a rate of 0.01% (compared to 0.05% for most UCIs existing under the Law of 2002). In the same manner as the Law of 2002, the Bill exempts from the subscription tax, the portion of assets invested in other Luxembourg UCIs subject to this tax, certain institutional cash funds and pension pooling funds. In respect of the latter, the Bill innovates by not requiring (contrary to the Law of 2002) that the participating pension schemes be of the same group and, by permitting individual sub-funds and classes reserved to pension schemes, to also benefit from the exemption.

11. Ensuring continuity for UCIs currently existing under the Law of 1991

Given that there are currently 193 UCIs governed by the Law of 1991 (source: CSSF, 5 October 2006), it is important to ensure that these entities may continue their investments with no impact other than formal amendments to their documentation, to bring them into compliance with the new regime. To this end, the Bill includes appropriate transitional provisions, ensuring continuity for UCIs presently existing under the Law of 1991, by providing that these UCIs will be automatically subject to the new law (i.e. will automatically become SIFs) and that all references in the constitutive documents of such UCIs to the Law of 1991, shall be construed as references to the new law.

Back to Listing

Main Menu

  1. Home
  2. About
    1. Our Core Objectives
    2. AIMA's Policy Principles
    3. Meet the team
    4. AIMA Council
    5. Global Network
    6. Sponsoring Partners
    7. Opportunities at AIMA
    8. AIMA’s 25th anniversary in 2015
  3. Join AIMA
    1. Benefits of Membership
    2. Membership Fees
    3. Application form
  4. Members
    1. AIMA DDQs
    2. AIMA Annual Reports
    3. AIMA Governance
    4. AIMA Logo
      1. Policy note
    5. AIMA Members' List
    6. AIMA Review of the Year
    7. Committees and Working Groups
    8. Weekly News
    9. Update Profile
  5. Investors
    1. AIMA Investor Services
    2. AIMA Members' List
    3. Investor Steering Committee
  6. Regulation
    1. Asset Management Regulation
      1. EU Asset Management Regulation
        1. AIFMD
        2. European Capital Markets Regulation
        3. MiFID / MiFIR
        4. UCITS
        5. European Venture Capital Directive
        6. Shareholder Rights Directive
        7. European Long Term Investment Fund Regulation
        8. Loan Origination Funds
        9. Capital Raising
        10. AIFMD-Related Events
      2. US Hedge Fund Adviser Regulations
        1. Registration and Reporting
        2. Incentive-Based Compensation
        3. JOBS Act
      3. Asia Pacific Asset Management regulation
      4. Other Jurisdictions’ Asset Management Regulation
      5. Private Placement Regime
        1. Canada
        2. Dubai
        3. Finland
        4. Germany
        5. Hong Kong
        6. Japan
        7. Saudi Arabia
        8. Sweden
        9. United Arab Emirates
      6. Systemically Important Financial Institutions ('SIFIs')
      7. Remuneration
        1. UK
        2. United States
        3. CRD IV and CRR
        4. AIFMD
        5. MiFID
      8. Shadow Banking
      9. Volcker Rule
      10. Other
      11. Systemic Risk Reporting
      12. Dealing Commission
      13. Corporate Governance
      14. Securitisation
    2. Markets Regulation
      1. Bank/Capital Regulation
        1. Capital Requirements Directive
        2. EU Bank Structural Reforms
      2. Capital Markets Union
      3. Derivatives/Clearing
        1. EMIR
        2. MiFID II / MiFIR - Derivatives
        3. MAD / MAR
        4. Dodd-Frank Act Title VII
        5. Hong Kong
        6. IOSCO
        7. Singapore
      4. High Frequency Trading
        1. EU automated trading
          1. ESMA Guidelines
          2. Germany
          3. MiFID II / MiFIR - HFT
        2. US automated trading
          1. SEC Regulation SCI
          2. CFTC Automated Trading
        3. IOSCO
        4. Flash Crash
      5. Insurance Regulation
        1. Solvency II
      6. Market Abuse
        1. MAD / MAR
        2. Indices as Benchmarks
      7. Position Limits
        1. MiFID II - Commodities
        2. CFTC Position Limits
      8. Resolution of Financial Institutions
        1. Europe
          1. EU Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive
          2. EU Non-Bank Recovery and Resolution
        2. CPSS-IOSCO
        3. Financial Stability Board
        4. UK
        5. USA
      9. Shadow Banking
        1. International Shadow Banking
        2. EU Shadow Banking - SFT reporting & transparency
      10. Short Selling
        1. EU Short Selling Regulation
        2. Hong Kong Short Selling Regulation
        3. US Short Selling Regulation
      11. Trading
        1. Dodd-Frank Act
        2. MiFID Portal
        3. REMIT
        4. Securities Settlement
    3. Tax Affairs
      1. Automatic Exchange of Information (AEOI)
        1. FATCA
        2. EU - AEFI
        3. OECD - Global Standard on AEFI
      2. Australia - Investment Manager Regime (IMR)
      3. Base Erosion - Profit Shifting (BEPS)
      4. FIN 48 and IAS 12
      5. Financial Transaction Tax (FTT)
      6. UK Investment Management Exemption (IME)
      7. UK Offshore Funds Regime
      8. Other
    4. AIMA's Policy Principles
    5. Search
    6. Resources
      1. Guidance Notes
      2. Jurisdictional Guides
      3. Noticeboard
        1. AEOI: FATCA and other regimes
        2. AIFMD
        3. Bank/Capital Regulation (including NSFR)
        4. BEPS
        5. CFTC Registration and Exemptions
        6. Corporate Governance
        7. Dealing Commission
        8. Derivatives
        9. FTT
        10. High Frequency Trading
        11. MiFID / MiFIR
        12. Other Hot Asset Management Topics
        13. Other Hot Markets Topics
        14. Other Hot Tax Topics
        15. Position Limits
        16. Trading
        17. UCITS
        18. UK Partnership Tax Review
        19. US State and Local Taxes
        20. Volcker Rule
      4. Hedge Fund Manager Training
      5. Quarterly Regulatory Update
      6. Webinar Programme
      7. Regulatory Compliance Association
        1. About the Regulatory Compliance Association
        2. RCA Curricula and initiatives for alternative investment firms
        3. Meet the regulators and Sr. Fellows
  7. Education
    1. Research
      1. AIMA Research
      2. Industry research
      3. Search research documents
    2. "The Case for Hedge Funds"
      1. Global Hedge Fund Industry Paper: The value of our industry
      2. The Value of the Hedge Fund Industry to Investors, Markets and the Broader Economy: Research commissioned by AIMA and KPMG
      3. The Evolution of an Industry: KPMG/AIMA Global Hedge Fund Survey
      4. Contributing to Communities: A global review of charitable and philanthropic activities by the hedge fund industry
      5. Beyond 60-40: The evolving role of hedge funds in institutional investor portfolios
      6. The Cost of Compliance: Global hedge fund survey by AIMA, MFA and KPMG
      7. Capital Markets and Economic Growth: Long-term trends and policy challenges
      8. Apples and Apples: How to better understand hedge fund performance
      9. The Extra Mile: Partnerships between hedge funds and investors
      10. Key articles by AIMA on the case for hedge funds
    3. AIMA Journal
      1. Recent issues
      2. Search AIMA Journal articles
      3. AIMA Journal Archive
    4. AIMA Guides to Sound Practices
    5. AIMA guides for institutional investors
    6. CAIA Association pages
      1. Fundamentals of Alternative Investments
    7. Regulatory Compliance Association pages
      1. About the Regulatory Compliance Association
      2. RCA Curricula and initiatives for alternative investment firms
      3. Meet the regulators and Sr. Fellows
    8. Certified Investment Fund Director programme
    9. Services to Start-up Managers
    10. Glossary
  8. Events
    1. AIMA Events
      1. AIMA Annual Conference
        1. AIMA 25th Anniversary AGM & Annual Conference
      2. AIMA's Global Policy and Regulatory Forum
        1. 2015 Forum - Review
        2. 2015 Forum - Photos
        3. 2015 Forum - Agenda
        4. 2015 Forum - Sponsors and Supporting Organisations
    2. AIMA webinars
    3. Industry events
  9. Media
    1. Press Releases & Statements
    2. AIMA's blog
    3. Media Coverage
      1. Articles by AIMA
        1. Archive
      2. AIMA in the news
      3. Video interviews
      4. Industry news
    4. Media Contacts
    5. Press Materials

Sub Menu

  1. Education
    1. AIMA Journal
    2. Bibliography
    3. CAIA Designation
    4. Research
    5. Roadmap to Hedge Funds
    6. AIMA's Investor Steering Committee Paper
    7. Glossary
  2. Regulatory, Tax, Policy & Government Affairs
    1. AIMA Position Papers
    2. AIMA Responses
      1. Australian Tax Office
      2. Authority for the Financial Markets
      3. Committee of European Banking Supervisors
      4. Committee of European Securities Regulators
      5. Commodity Futures Trading Commission
      6. Dubai Financial Services Authority
      7. European Commission
      8. European Securities and Markets Authority
      9. Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority
      10. Financial Services Authority (UK)
      11. Financial Services and the Treasury Bureau
      12. Guernsey Financial Services Commission
      13. HM Revenue & Customs
      14. HM Treasury
      15. Independent Commission on Banking
      16. IOSCO
      17. Monetary Authority of Singapore
      18. Securities and Exchange Board of India
      19. Securities and Exchange Commission (USA)
      20. Securities and Futures Commission
      21. Singapore Exchange
      22. The Takeover Panel
      23. US House of Representatives / Senate
      24. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
      25. Financial Stability Oversight Council
      26. Financial Stability Board
      27. US Treasury
      28. Internal Revenue Service
      29. US Federal Reserve
      30. Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA)
      31. Council of European Union
      32. Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing
      33. House of Lords
    3. AIMA Summaries
      1. CESR
      2. European Commission
      3. Financial Services Authority (UK)
      4. HM Revenue & Customs
      5. HM Treasury
      6. IOSCO
      7. Securities and Exchanges Commission
      8. FSOC
      9. CFTC
    4. Guidance Notes
    5. Jurisdictional Resource
    6. AIMA Noticeboard
      1. EU Directive on Alternative Investment Fund Managers
      2. FSA Remuneration Code
      3. Short Selling
      4. US Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act
      5. UK Stewardship Code
      6. Securities Law Directive
      7. EU Directive on Alternative Investment Fund Managers - Level II
      8. EU Directive on Markets in Financial Instruments (MiFID)
      9. International Financial Centres
      10. Bribery Act
      11. Market Abuse Directive
      12. MF Global
      13. FATCA
      14. FTT
      15. Other Tax Issues
    7. AIMA Regulatory Update
  3. Sound Practices
    1. Due Diligence Questionnaires
    2. Guides to Sound Practices
  4. Start-Up Service Providers
  5. Useful Websites