As the second-largest fund market in the world after the USA, Luxembourg has earned itself a reputation for stability, a business-friendly environment and excellence in the provision of services to the investment management industry. The world’s leading asset managers have chosen Luxembourg as a centre for their international fund ranges, and Luxembourg regulated funds are now distributed in more than 80 countries throughout the world. Luxembourg had approximately EUR5.5 trillion in assets under management (AUM) in regulated funds as of 31 May 2024.
Since the first Undertakings for Collective Investment in Transferable Securities (UCITS) Directive in 1985, Luxembourg has been at the forefront of the implementation of European financial legislation, showing an ability to evolve and adapt quickly to changing requirements. There now exists a wide choice of vehicles, allowing managers to structure a fund (both alternative investment funds (AIFs) and retail funds) in Luxembourg that best suits their own needs as well as the needs of their investors.
The success of Luxembourg as a financial centre is testament to the strong regulatory and operational environment that Luxembourg has created. Its willingness to adapt to change will ensure that, over the coming years, the industry will continue to thrive.
In addition, to illustrate some recent trends, and given Luxembourg’s status as a leading private markets hub, it is well positioned for 2025 to capitalise on the new European long-term investment fund (ELTIF) 2.0 structure, regulated per ELTIF regulatory technical standards (RTS) as referenced in 4. Legal, Regulatory or Tax Changes, and the burgeoning worldwide trends of retailisation in private markets. Out of 132 ELTIFs as of September 2024, 84 are domiciled in Luxembourg, holding EUR7.7 billion in AUM (as of the end of 2023). Finally, the trend of more sustainable funds in Europe that are domiciled in Luxembourg keeps evolving. This trend towards more sustainable investing is expected to continue during 2025, as the AUM of asset managers with sustainable funds domiciled in Luxembourg jumped 12.3% from 2022 to the end of June 2024.
The principal legal vehicles used to set up alternative funds in Luxembourg are the following.
RAIFs, Part II UCIs, SIFs, SICARs and SLPs that have designated an AIFM established in the European Economic Area (EEA) can market their shares, units or limited partnership interests to professional investors throughout the EEA, pursuant to the specific notification procedure provided for by the Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive (AIFMD).
Each Part II UCI, SIF, SICAR and RAIF may be established as an umbrella fund, allowing the creation of multiple compartments. This option is not available to the unregulated SLP.
Any such vehicle set up in the form of an FCP issues units. Those in corporate form issue shares, and those in the form of partnerships issue limited partnership interests.
The Part II UCI, the SIF and the SICAR are subject to authorisation by the CSSF prior to establishment. An application file must be submitted to the CSSF consisting of at least the following documents (there are certain ancillary documents, and the CSSF may always request further information):
The RAIF is not subject to approval by the CSSF, but the following documents will still be required:
The SLP is frequently structured as an unregulated AIF, which is not authorised and not regulated by the CSSF. There is no requirement to have an offering document, though one is frequently prepared for marketing reasons. The limited partnership agreement is the key document for an SLP. Given that there is no approval process at the CSSF, the set-up time is shorter for the RAIF and the SLP.
However, for all vehicles, time for due diligence performed by the service providers as well as time to complete bank account opening processes needs to be factored into the establishment process.
The largest set-up costs are generally legal costs, though service providers also sometimes charge a set-up or onboarding fee. In addition, there are fees payable to the CSSF for regulated funds. For a Part II UCI, SIF and SICAR, the CSSF charges an examination fee and an annual fee for its supervisory activity. The fee amount differs depending on whether the fund is a standalone or an umbrella fund, and on whether it is self-managed or not. For example, the examination fee for a standalone Part II UCI, SIF or SICAR is EUR4,650, whereas for an umbrella fund it is EUR9,250.
The liability of an investor is generally limited to its commitment or subscription to the fund. In the case of an AIF in the form of an SCA, SCSP or SCS, there will always be an unlimited partner, which is generally an entity controlled by the fund initiators and usually referred to as the general partner. The general partner has unlimited and joint and several liability for all the obligations of the fund.
For a Part II UCI, SIF, RAIF or SICAR, a prospectus or offering document and an audited annual report must be made available to investors. A PRIIPs KID must also be made available if the fund is to be marketed to retail investors. The Part II UCI must also prepare a semi-annual report.
For an SLP, there are no specific disclosure requirements unless it has appointed a fully authorised AIFM, in which case it is obliged to also prepare audited annual accounts.
Pursuant to the AIFMD, certain disclosures must be made to investors in the offering documents of those funds managed by an AIFM.
In addition, regulated vehicles (SIF, SICAR and Part II UCI) are subject to periodic reporting to the CSSF for statistical and oversight purposes.
Finally, any AIFs managed by an AIFM will be indirectly subject to the Annex IV reporting requirements, with reports to be submitted to the CSSF pursuant to the AIFMD.
There has been an increased demand for access to AIFs in recent years. Investors are seeking more diversification than that offered by retail funds. Well-informed and institutional investors represent the majority of the investors in AIFs in Luxembourg, though there has been a trend towards retailisation of AIFs.
The legal structure used by alternative fund managers in Luxembourg will depend on the type and location of the investors, as well as the nature of the investment. SIFs, SICARs and RAIFs are intended for well-informed investors, and Part II UCIs are often used if there is an intention to target retail investors.
Increasingly, unregulated RAIFs or SLPs (managed by an authorised AIFM) are used as they offer more certainty in terms of time to market.
SIFs, SICARs and RAIFs are restricted to investment by well-informed investors. The Part II UCI can be marketed to both professional and retail investors in Luxembourg. There are no restrictions under Luxembourg law on who the limited partnership interests of an SLP can be sold to. However, for marketing in other jurisdictions, the AIFMD marketing passport will only allow marketing of the interests in an SLP to professional investors.
Pursuant to the Law of 12 July 2013 on AIF managers (the “AIFM Law”), authorised AIFMs established in Luxembourg, in another EEA member state or in a third country are authorised to market AIFs they manage to retail investors in Luxembourg, provided certain conditions are met, as follows.
The regulatory regime applicable to an AIF differs depending on the type of fund. All AIFs are indirectly subject to the provisions of the AIFM Law. The extent to which the AIFM Law is applicable depends on whether they are managed by a fully authorised AIFM or a registered AIFM.
The Part II UCI is subject to investment restrictions and risk diversification rules arising from the Law of 17 December 2010 on undertakings for collective investment (the “UCI Law”) and various implementing CSSF circulars. For example, generally, a Part II UCI cannot:
These general investment restrictions do not apply to Part II UCIs that are fund-of-fund structures if the investment funds in which the Part II UCI shall invest are open-ended and themselves subject to similar general investment restrictions. In addition, these general investment restrictions do not apply to Part II UCIs that are mainly investing in either venture capital or real estate or are pursuing alternative investment strategies.
Part II UCIs may in principle borrow the equivalent of up to 25% of their net assets without restriction as to the intended use thereof.
Part II UCIs that are mainly investing in real estate may borrow the equivalent of up to an average of 50% of the valuation of all their properties.
Borrowings of Part II UCIs that are mainly pursuing alternative investment strategies (hedge funds) may be up to 400%.
For SIFs, there are no asset restrictions, but the SIF may not invest more than 30% of its assets or commitments in securities of the same type issued by the same issuer.
A RAIF that has chosen the SIF regime is subject to similar rules.
A SICAR is obliged to invest its funds in assets representing risk capital but is not subject to any diversification rules. A RAIF that has chosen the SICAR regime is subject to the same rules.
In general, an SLP is not subject to any investment restrictions or risk diversification rules.
AIFs may choose one of the EU labels, such as European venture capital fund (EUVECA), European social entrepreneurship fund (EUSEF) or ELTIF, in which case they will also be governed by the rules applicable to those regimes.
Luxembourg AIFs may be managed by an AIFM based in a member state of the EEA. If an AIFM established in another member state intends to market units or shares of an EEA AIF that it manages to professional investors in Luxembourg, the competent authorities of the home member state of the AIFM must transmit the notification file to the CSSF.
For RAIFs, SIFs, SICARs and Part II UCIs, the respective depositary must either have its registered office in Luxembourg or have a branch there if its registered office is in another EU member state. The central administration of these entities must be located in the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg.
CSSF Circular 22/811 clarified that foreign investment fund managers with the appropriate licence may act as administrator for non-regulated funds in Luxembourg (eg, SLPs).
Part II UCIs, SIFs or RAIFs established in the form of an FCP must appoint a Luxembourg AIFM.
AIFs in corporate or partnership form can appoint an AIFM established anywhere in the EEA.
To manage a Luxembourg fund, such AIFMs must provide a notification to their home supervisory authority, who will transmit it to the CSSF.
The portfolio management of Luxembourg AIFs can be delegated to managers situated in third countries, provided that in the case of regulated funds such delegation is subject to the prior approval of the CSSF.
AIFMs that intend to delegate to third parties the task of carrying out functions on their behalf must notify the supervisory authorities of their home member state before the delegation arrangements become effective.
The approval process usually takes between three to six months and is dependent on several factors. These include:
Pursuant to the AIFM Law, an AIFM established in another member state that is pre-marketing, or intending to pre-market, an AIF to professional investors in Luxembourg must notify the supervisory authority of its home country (the CSSF in the case of Luxembourg AIFMs), including:
Information presented to potential professional investors in the context of pre-marketing cannot:
The AIFM must ensure that professional investors do not acquire units or shares in an AIF through pre-marketing, and that investors contacted as part of pre-marketing may only acquire units or shares in that AIF after the formal marketing notification.
Any subscription by professional investors, within 18 months of the AIFM having begun pre-marketing, to units or shares of an AIF referred to in the information provided in the context of pre-marketing, or of an AIF established as a result of the pre-marketing, shall be considered to be the result of marketing and shall be subject to the applicable notification procedures (see 2.3.8 Marketing Authorisation/Notification Process).
AIFMs marketing AIFs in Luxembourg must comply with the provisions of the AIFMD. Where another firm is marketing in Luxembourg, it could be considered to be carrying out an activity of the financial sector and should thus be licensed or otherwise authorised to do so pursuant to the Law of 5 April 1993 on the financial sector. Firms from other EU member states with the appropriate licence pursuant to the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID) would be authorised to carry out distribution activities in Luxembourg.
All marketing communications will need to comply with the requirements of Article 4 of Regulation 2019/1156 on facilitating cross-border distribution of collective investment undertakings. CSSF Circular 22/795 stipulates that Luxembourg AIFMs must provide the CSSF with information regarding marketing communications, and the CSSF will conduct testing to verify their compliance with the applicable requirements under Article 4.
SIFs, SICARs and RAIFs are reserved for and can only be marketed to well-informed investors in Luxembourg. Well-informed investors are institutional investors, professional investors or any other investors who meet the following conditions:
Part II UCIs can be marketed to any type of investors (both retail and well-informed investors).
In addition to the foregoing restrictions, EEA AIFs managed by an authorised AIFM can be marketed to professional investors in Luxembourg pursuant to Article 32 of the AIFMD.
As previously discussed, in certain circumstances authorised AIFMs may market non-Luxembourg AIFs to retail investors in Luxembourg.
EuVECAs and EUSEFs, governed by Regulation (EU) No 345/2013 and Regulation (EU) No 346/2013, respectively, can be marketed to professional investors and other investors, provided that each investor (noting that such funds could take one of the available forms of fund in Luxembourg like SICAR or SIF):
ELTIFs, which are AIFs that could take the form of one of the available funds in Luxembourg, are, depending on the rules that they comply with, potentially available to be marketed to both retail and professional investors upon notification in accordance with Article 32 of the AIFMD.
An AIFM wishing to market to professional investors in Luxembourg must submit a notification to the competent authorities of its home member state (the CSSF for Luxembourg AIFMs) in respect of each EEA AIF that it intends to market. This does not apply to Luxembourg AIFMs marketing Luxembourg regulated funds. The notification must comprise certain information, including:
The competent authorities of the home member state of the AIFM should, no later than 20 working days after the date of receipt, transmit the complete notification file to the CSSF. From the date of notification of such transmission, marketing can begin.
Those AIFMs wishing to market non-Luxembourg AIFs to retail investors must follow the detailed rules laid down in CSSF Regulation 15-03 on the marketing of foreign AIFs to retail investors in Luxembourg. Prior to marketing its units or shares to retail investors in Luxembourg, any foreign AIF must have obtained an authorisation for such marketing by the CSSF.
Material Changes
In the event of a material change in the information contained in its original marketing notification file, an AIFM must provide written notice of this change to its home state competent authority (the CSSF in the case of Luxembourg AIFMs), by resubmitting a marked-up version of the original notification file indicating the proposed changes.
All material changes planned by the AIFM must be notified to the CSSF at least one month before implementing the change, or immediately after an unplanned change has occurred.
De-Notification
An AIFM may de-notify arrangements made for marketing as regards units of shares of some or all of its AIFs in Luxembourg, if the following conditions are met:
The de-notification procedure is carried out through the home supervisory authority of the AIFM, which then informs the CSSF.
However, if an AIFM intends to cease the marketing of its non-Luxembourg AIF to retail investors in Luxembourg, it must inform the CSSF about whether Luxembourg investors are still invested in the AIF.
SIFs, SICARs and RAIFs are intended for well-informed investors that are able to adequately assess the risks associated with an investment in such vehicles.
Part II UCIs can be marketed to retail investors, but the applicable investment restrictions, in addition to the fact that they are supervised by the CSSF, adds to investor protection.
The fact that all AIFs bar the unregulated SLP must appoint a depositary and an auditor provides additional protection for investors.
Any AIF managed by an authorised AIFM needs to provide audited annual accounts that, in the case of regulated AIFs, need to be provided to the CSSF. The CSSF is also made aware of the content of the management letters.
Additionally, such funds are required to disclose certain information to investors pursuant to the rules of the AIFMD and inform investors of any changes thereto. The AIFMD imposes rules on preferential treatment of investors and disclosure thereto, and the valuation of an AIF’s assets must be carried out in accordance with such rules.
AIFMs are also required to have risk management, liquidity management and conflict of interest policies in place, all of which serve to add to the protection of investors.
Part II UCIs must, in addition, produce a half-yearly report for submission to the CSSF.
All of the regulated funds are subject to regular reporting to the CSSF, to enable it to carry out its supervisory function.
In the case of a dispute with a Part II UCI, a retail investor can request the CSSF to impartially intervene for an out-of-court resolution, though its out-of-court decision is not binding on the parties.
In accordance with CSSF Circular 24/856, which replaces CSSF Circular 02/77 from 1 January 2025, AIFs that are regulated entities must have in place policies and procedures to deal with net asset value (NAV) calculation errors, investment breaches and other errors. Such policies and procedures are in place to ensure protection of investors in the case of errors and the correction of such errors.
The CSSF takes a practical approach. They can be approached for face-to-face meetings, particularly in relation to a new entry to the market or in relation to new projects. As regards ongoing matters, they can be reached by phone or email. The CSSF has also set up an electronic platform to facilitate the exchange of documents and information.
See 2.3 Regulatory Environment for further discussion on investment restrictions, borrowing restrictions and risk diversification rules applicable to Luxembourg AIFs.
AIFs managed by a fully authorised AIFM, and SIFs, SICARs and Part II UCIs that do not have an AIFM, must appoint a depositary acting in the interests of investors and providing services as required by the respective product laws as well as the AIFM Law (ie, safekeeping of assets, cash monitoring and monitoring of compliance with the legal and regulatory framework). Depositaries must be credit institutions established in Luxembourg and have a specific licence granted by the CSSF in order to carry out such business or be so-called depositary-lites, which may be appointed for certain types of AIFs that do not hold financial instruments and must be held in custody.
AIFs must have an AML policy and comply with the AML Law for their business relationships (including for their investors).
Asset valuation of AIFs must be done in accordance with the laws applicable to them, as well as in accordance with the AIFM Law where the AIFs are managed by a fully authorised AIFM.
In accordance with CSSF Circular 24/856, AIFs that are regulated entities must have in place policies and procedures to deal with NAV calculation errors, investment breaches and other errors.
Luxembourg AIFs frequently borrow either for bridging finance, working capital purposes or, in the case of some funds, leverage.
While there are lenders on the Luxembourg market, lenders are often from outside Luxembourg.
There are no borrowing restrictions applicable to SIFs, SICARs, RAIFs or SLPs, though pursuant to the AIFMD there are rules around disclosing the maximum amount of leverage. Part II UCIs are subject to borrowing restrictions (generally 25% of NAV, though in the case of hedge funds this can be increased).
The lender will generally take security. The type of security will depend on the type of borrowing and types of assets involved. Security over undrawn commitments and pledges over Luxembourg bank accounts are often seen.
Part II UCI, SIF and RAIF-SIF
The Part II UCI, SIF and RAIF-SIF are exempt from net wealth tax, municipal business tax and corporate income tax. Luxembourg withholding tax does not apply to distributions made by the SIF to investors. These entities also benefit from a value added tax (VAT) exemption on management services.
A SIF and RAIF-SIF are subject to subscription tax at an annual rate of 0.01% based on their NAV. There are however several categories of exemptions. Part II UCIs are subject to a subscription tax at an annual rate of 0.05% of the NAV, reduced to 0.01% or exempted in certain conditions.
In addition, the SIF, RAIF-SIF and Part II UCI in the form of a SICAV or SICAF may benefit from the double tax treaties that have been concluded by Luxembourg. The SIF, RAIF-SIF or Part II UCI in the form of an FCP do not, in principle, have access to double tax treaties.
To encourage investment into ELTIFs, the Law of 21 July 2023 modernising the Luxembourg fund toolbox (the “Modernising Law”) provides that RAIFs, Part II UCIs and SIFs (or sub-funds thereof) authorised as ELTIFs are exempt from subscription tax.
SICAR and RAIF-SICAR
The tax regime applicable to a SICAR and a RAIF-SICAR will depend on the legal form adopted. Those taking a corporate form are fully taxable entities (corporate income tax and municipal business tax) but benefit from an exemption for income derived from transferable securities and income from cash held for a maximum period of one year prior to its investment in risk capital. Those taking the form of an SCS or SLP are tax-transparent under Luxembourg law.
Luxembourg withholding tax does not apply to distributions made by these entities to investors. These entities also benefit from a VAT exemption on management services.
The SICAR and RAIF SICAR are not subject to an annual subscription tax. They are however subject to a minimum amount of annual net wealth tax.
SICARs and RAIF SICARs in corporate form have full access to double tax treaties from a Luxembourg perspective. Those in the form of SLPs, or SCSs and RAIFs in the form of an FCP, do not.
SLP
An SLP is tax-transparent and is not subject to subscription tax, net wealth tax or withholding tax. Corporate income tax is not applicable. Municipal business tax of 6.75% (for an SLP registered in Luxembourg City) may be applicable if the SLP carries out, or is deemed to carry out, a commercial activity.
SLPs do not benefit from the EU Parent-Subsidiary Directive and have no access to double tax treaties signed by Luxembourg.
UCITS funds and undertakings for collective investment subject to Part II of the UCI Law (Part II UCIs – together with UCITS funds, the “retail funds”) are the two main investment funds for retail investors.
Retail funds are subject to direct supervision by the CSSF and require prior CSSF approval before they can be set up.
A retail fund may be set up as a standalone fund or an umbrella fund. However, the umbrella fund structure is most often used as it is cost-effective if several sub-funds are launched.
Each retail fund may issue classes and sub-classes of shares (or units depending on the legal form chosen; see 3.2.2 Legal Structures Used by Fund Managers), enabling the retail fund’s shares to be adapted to the needs of its investors and its sponsor.
UCITS Funds
UCITS funds are highly regulated investment vehicles that can be easily marketed to retail investors in the EEA thanks to the EU passport, but also to professional and institutional investors.
Stringent diversification rules are laid down by the UCI Law. In particular, a UCITS fund may invest no more than 10% of its assets in transferable securities (which must be listed on a regulated market) or money market instruments issued by the same body, and specific restrictions apply to index funds, holdings of other funds, use of financial derivative instruments and deposits. Leverage is restricted, and a UCITS fund must be an open-ended fund – ie, investors must be able to redeem.
Part II UCIs
Although Part II UCIs always qualify as AIFs, they are open to retail investors.
Part II UCIs are subject to a less stringent diversification policy than UCITS:
However, Part II UCIs remain subject to the supervision of the CSSF.
Part II UCIs are not entitled to the European UCITS passport for distribution to retail investors in the EEA, but they can rely on the AIFMD marketing passport if they fall under the scope of the full AIFMD regime.
Retail funds must be authorised and supervised during their lifetime by the CSSF.
A retail fund set up in contractual form as an FCP shall only be authorised if the CSSF has approved its management company, which must be based in Luxembourg.
A retail fund set up in corporate form and appointing a management company or AIFM shall only be authorised if the CSSF has approved the management company or AIFM (if a Luxembourg entity), or if the relevant management company or AIFM has notified pursuant to the management passport. Where the management company or AIFM delegates portfolio management, the entity to whom they have delegated is subject to the approval of the CSSF.
Directors (who must be of sufficiently good repute and be sufficiently experienced) and other service providers of retail funds are subject to the approval of the CSSF.
The application is carried out online on a CSSF portal and requires the provision of, inter alia, the following documents:
Once the application is complete, the authorisation process for a retail fund will range between three and six months. The actual length and cost depend mainly on the complexity of the investment strategy, the completeness of the application file and whether or not it is a first-time fund.
The largest set-up costs are generally legal fees, though service providers also sometimes charge a set-up or onboarding fee. In addition, there are fees payable to the CSSF for regulated funds. The CSSF charges an examination fee and an annual fee for its supervisory activity of retail funds. The fee amount differs depending on whether the retail fund is a standalone or an umbrella fund, and on whether it is self-managed or not. For example, the examination fee for a standalone retail fund is EUR4,650, whereas for an umbrella fund it is EUR9,250.
Regardless of the legal form or structure, investors in retail funds are only liable up to the amount of their contributions.
UCITS Funds
UCITS funds must publish a prospectus that includes the information necessary for investors to be able to make an informed investment decision and containing at least the information listed in Schedule A of Annex I of the UCI Law, as well as information about the remuneration policy. The prospectus must be kept up to date.
In addition, a three-page PRIIPs KID (or a two-page KIID under UCITS Directive 2009/65 for UCITS funds exclusively distributed to professional investors) summarising the key elements of the prospectus must be issued and kept up to date.
The following reports must be produced:
Part II UCIs
As with UCITS, Part II UCIs must also publish a prospectus that includes the information necessary for investors to be able to make an informed investment decision and containing at least the information listed in Schedule A of Annex I of the UCI Law. The prospectus must be kept up to date.
In addition, a three-page PRIIPs KID summarising the key elements of the prospectus must be issued if the Part II UCI is marketed to retail investors.
The following reports must be produced:
The majority of retail fund investors are located outside Luxembourg.
All types of investors invest in retail funds (retail, professional and institutional investors).
Usually, a retail fund is set up in the contractual form of an FCP or a SICAV (ie, a corporate entity with variable capital). UCITS funds that are SICAVs have to take the form of an SA. However, the Modernising Law has extended the choice of legal forms for Part II UCI to include not only entities in the form of an SA but also those in the form of an SCA, SCS, SCSp, société coopérative organised as an SA or Sàrl. In the case of a Part II UCI, it is also possible to opt for an investment company with fixed capital (SICAF) in any of the same corporate forms.
There are no restrictions – all investors (ie, retail, professional and institutional investors investing for their own account and/or on behalf of retail investors) can invest in retail funds.
Non-Luxembourg investment funds that do not qualify as UCITS funds can be marketed to retail investors in Luxembourg provided that the provisions of CSSF Regulation 15-03 are complied with and the CSSF has authorised them; if such funds qualify as ELTIFs, CSSF Regulation 15-03 does not apply but rather the rules applicable under the ELTIF regulation.
UCITS Funds
Eligible assets are restricted to transferable securities admitted on a regulated market, investment funds, financial derivative instruments, cash and money market instruments.
Risk diversification requirements for UCITS funds include the following:
A UCITS fund cannot borrow more than 10% of its assets on a temporary basis.
Uncovered short positions are not allowed, but a UCITS fund can pursue a long-short investment strategy and achieve short exposure synthetically through the use of financial derivative instruments.
Various liquidity monitoring requirements are provided for.
Part II UCIs
The Part II UCI is subject to investment restrictions and risk diversification rules arising from the UCI Law and various implementing CSSF circulars. For example, generally a Part II UCI cannot:
These general investment restrictions do not apply to Part II UCIs that are fund-of-fund structures, if the investment funds in which the Part II UCI shall invest are open-ended and themselves subject to similar general investment restrictions. In addition, these general investment restrictions do not apply to Part II UCIs that are either mainly investing in venture capital or real estate or are pursuing alternative investment strategies.
Part II UCIs may in principle borrow the equivalent of up to 25% of their net assets without restriction as to the intended use thereof.
Part II UCIs that are mainly investing in real estate may borrow the equivalent of up to an average of 50% of the valuation of all their properties.
Borrowings of Part II UCIs that are mainly pursuing alternative investment strategies (hedge funds) may be up to 400%.
The depositary, administrative agent, registrar and transfer agent, and approved statutory auditor of a retail fund must be established in Luxembourg and are all subject to regulation in Luxembourg.
The management company of a UCITS fund can be established in the EEA unless the fund is an FCP, in which case the management company must be established in Luxembourg. The AIFM of a Part II UCI can be established in the EEA unless the Part II UCI is an FCP, in which case the AIFM must be established in Luxembourg.
Portfolio managers and investment advisers located in third countries can provide advisory or portfolio management services, but this is subject to the CSSF’s authorisation of any delegated portfolio management function.
UCITS funds in the form of an FCP must have their management company established in Luxembourg. The same applies to Part II UCIs established in the form of an FCP.
UCITS funds that are SICAVs and are not self-managed may have their management company established elsewhere in the EEA.
An AIFM from any jurisdiction in the EEA can be appointed to manage a Part II UCI unless the Part II UCI is an FCP. Those AIFMs established elsewhere than in Luxembourg need to notify their home supervisory authorities of their intention to manage a Luxembourg fund. Those authorities will in turn notify the CSSF.
The portfolio management of Luxembourg retail funds can be delegated to managers situated in third countries provided that such delegation is subject to the prior approval of the CSSF.
For retail funds, the process for obtaining regulatory approval depends on the complexity of the investment policy, the completeness of the file that has been submitted and whether or not it is a first-time fund. Generally, the time ranges from three to six months.
Pre-marketing to Luxembourg retail investors is not allowed for UCITS funds and AIFs.
No notification or authorisation is required for the marketing of Luxembourg UCITS funds or Part II UCIs in Luxembourg.
A UCITS fund located in another EEA country may be marketed in Luxembourg as soon as the home supervisory authority has duly notified the CSSF of the intended marketing. Such EEA UCITS funds must provide facilities in Luxembourg to facilitate the processing of subscription and redemption orders, and the provision of information. They need not appoint a third party or have a physical presence in Luxembourg (ie, facilities can be provided via the internet).
An AIF located in a country other than Luxembourg may be marketed to Luxembourg retail investors in accordance with the provisions of CSSF Regulation 15-03, provided that, inter alia:
Retail funds and AIFs marketed in Luxembourg to retail investors must provide these investors with a PRIIPs KID.
All marketing communications will need to comply with the requirements of Article 4 of Regulation 2019/1156 on facilitating cross-border distribution of collective investment undertakings. CSSF Circular 22/795 requires investment fund managers to provide the CSSF with information regarding marketing communications. The CSSF will conduct testing to verify the compliance of such marketing communications with the requirements applicable under Article 4.
Closed-ended funds marketed to Luxembourg retail investors must generally issue a prospectus in accordance with EU Regulation 2017/1129 on the prospectus to be published when securities are offered to the public or admitted to trading on a regulated market.
Retail funds can be marketed to all investors located in Luxembourg, whether retail, professional or institutional.
However, a number of rules stemming from the MiFID may nevertheless restrict the marketing of retail funds through MiFID-regulated firms, as the investor profile of a retail investor must be in line with the type of retail fund being marketed (eg, it is not appropriate to advise a retail investor with a conservative risk profile to invest in a fund presenting higher risk).
Notification or authorisation is required by the CSSF prior to the marketing of non-Luxembourg retail funds taking place.
In the case of cross-border marketing of a UCITS fund, the notification process described in the foregoing must be complied with, and in the case of marketing a foreign investment fund that is not a UCITS fund, there is an authorisation process to be complied with in accordance with CSSF Regulation 15-03.
Change in the Content of the UCITS Fund Marketing Notification Letter
Where an amendment has an impact on the notification letter sent to the CSSF via the UCITS fund’s home supervisory authority, at the time when the UCITS fund intended to market its units in Luxembourg or regarding a change in the share classes to be marketed in Luxembourg, the UCITS fund must directly inform the CSSF before implementing this amendment.
De-Notification
Investment fund managers may de-notify arrangements made for marketing as regards units or shares of some or all of their UCITS funds and/or AIFs marketed in Luxembourg, provided that:
The de-notification procedure is carried out through the home supervisory authority, which then informs the CSSF. However, if an AIFM intends to cease the marketing of its non-Luxembourg AIF to retail investors in Luxembourg, it must inform the CSSF as to whether Luxembourg investors are still invested in this AIF.
Other Ongoing Requirements
Please refer to 3.3.10 Investor Protection Rules regarding reporting and other requirements.
To ensure compliance with the regulatory framework and to detect any potential non-compliance, retail funds must produce the following reports:
In addition, UCITS funds must provide the CSSF with a semi-annual risk report, and their management companies must have a remuneration policy and procedures designed to prevent conflict of interests and discourage risk-taking inconsistent with the risk profile of the managed UCITS fund.
Furthermore, retail funds must appoint a custodian bank acting in the interests of investors and providing services as required by the UCI Law – ie, safekeeping of assets, cash monitoring and monitoring of retail funds’ compliance with the legal and regulatory framework. The appointment of a custodian bank is ultimately intended to ensure protection of the fund’s assets.
In the case of a dispute with a retail fund, a retail investor can contact the CSSF in order for the CSSF to impartially intervene for an out-of-court resolution, but its out-of-court decision is not binding on the parties.
Finally, NAV calculation errors and investment breaches are highly monitored by auditors and the CSSF, and incoming and redeeming investors are to be compensated in the case of negative consequences of such errors. CSSF Circular 24/856 sets out the rules to be followed in this regard from 1 January 2025.
The CSSF takes a practical approach. New Luxembourg market participants can have a face-to-face meeting with CSSF officials to present their projects, better understand the CSSF’s expectations and ask questions.
Formalities and filings with the CSSF are mainly done through an online platform, though during an authorisation process, the CSSF can be contacted via telephone and email.
Retail Funds
Please refer to 3.1.4 Disclosure Requirements and 3.3.1 Regulatory Regime regarding investment restrictions on retail funds.
Retail funds must appoint a custodian bank acting in the interests of investors and providing services as required by the UCI Law – ie, safekeeping of assets, cash monitoring and monitoring of retail funds’ compliance with the legal and regulatory framework. Custodian banks must be credit institutions established in Luxembourg and have a specific licence granted by the CSSF in order to carry out this business.
Retail funds admitted to trading on the Luxembourg Stock Exchange are subject to the Law of 11 January 2008 on transparency requirements (implementing Directive 2004/109/EC of 15 December 2004 on the harmonisation of transparency requirements in relation to information about issuers whose securities are admitted to trading on a regulated market and amending Directive 2001/34/EC), and to the Law of 23 December 2016 on market abuse (stemming from Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 of 16 April 2014 on market abuse).
Retail funds must have an AML policy and comply with the AML Law with respect to their business relationships (including their investors). In addition, each retail fund has to have in place policies to deal with NAV calculation errors, investment breaches and other errors as referred to in 3.3.10 Investor Protection Rules.
UCITS Funds
Asset valuation of a UCITS fund must be done in accordance with the UCI Law, which provides that listed securities should be valued at the last known stock exchange quotation unless not representative. Non-listed securities or listed securities for which the market price is not representative should be valued on the basis of the probable realisation value.
Management companies must have policies in place to prevent insider dealing and the misuse of confidential information by one of their employees or service providers.
Uncovered short positions are not allowed, but a UCITS fund can pursue a long-short investment strategy and achieve short exposure synthetically through the use of financial derivative instruments.
Part II UCIs
Asset valuation of Part II UCIs must be done in accordance with the UCI Law (which provides that the valuation must be based on fair value unless the constitutional documents provide otherwise). Part II UCIs also need to value assets in compliance with the AIFM Law if managed by an authorised AIFM.
Authorised AIFMs of Part II UCIs must have policies in place to prevent insider dealing and the misuse of confidential information by one of their employees or service providers.
Part II UCIs may have uncovered short positions.
UCITS Funds
A UCITS fund may borrow (i) on a temporary basis provided that such borrowing represents no more than 10% of its assets, or (ii) to enable the acquisition of immovable property essential for the direct pursuit of its business and representing no more than 10% of its assets. Borrowing under (i) and (ii) shall not exceed 15 % of its assets in total. Generally, borrowing is used to finance redemption requests, not to invest.
UCITS funds may invest in derivative financial instruments, which can provide leverage, and can enter into back-to-back loans to acquire foreign currencies.
For the foregoing transactions, a UCITS fund may provide security, such as a pledge on the securities it owns, as collateral.
Securities lending transactions, as well as repurchase agreement transactions and reverse repurchase agreement transactions, can only be used by UCITS funds for the purpose of efficient portfolio management.
Part II UCIs
A Part II UCI may borrow money or securities up to 25% of its NAV on a permanent basis. However, this cap may increase depending on the investment strategy, being:
A Part II UCI may invest in derivative financial instruments, which can provide leverage, but it cannot borrow to finance margin deposits.
A Part II UCI is authorised to enter, as a borrower, into securities lending transactions with first-class professionals specialised in this type of transaction.
For the foregoing transactions, a Part II UCI may pledge its own securities as collateral.
Equity bridge financing can be used if the Part II UCI in question operates on a commitment basis.
UCITS funds and Part II UCIs are exempt from net wealth tax, corporate income tax and municipal business tax. UCITS funds and Part II UCIs are subject to an annual subscription tax of 0.05% of the NAV (paid quarterly), reduced to 0.01% in certain specific cases-
The Modernising Law amended the UCI Law by regulating a full exemption for the subscription tax stated in the new Article 175 for:
In addition, retail funds may benefit from reduced subscription tax rates on the portion of their net assets, or a compartment thereof, invested in economic activities that qualify as environmentally sustainable within the meaning of the Taxonomy Regulation (“qualifying activities”) (Regulation (EU) 2020/852 of 18 June 2020 on the establishment of a framework to facilitate sustainable investment, and amending Regulation (EU) 2019/2088). For instance, the tax rate is reduced to 0.04% if the retail fund invests at least 5% of its net assets in qualifying activities.
Furthermore, the annual subscription tax will be reduced to zero in the case of institutional money market cash funds, special pension funds, exchange-traded funds (ETFs) and microfinance funds, and for retail funds investing in other Luxembourg funds that are already subject to a subscription tax. These exemptions apply to the whole retail fund, the sub-fund or the class of shares qualifying for the exemption.
Investors located outside Luxembourg are not subject to Luxembourg capital gains tax.
Luxembourg withholding tax does not apply to distributions made by these entities to investors. These entities also benefit from a VAT exemption on management services.
These entities may not benefit from the EU Parent-Subsidiary Directive. In addition, these entities in a corporate form may benefit from the double tax treaties that have been concluded by Luxembourg.
At the European level, Directive (EU) 2024/927 amending the AIFMD Directive (AIFMD II) was published on 26 March 2024. It entered into force on 16 April 2024, and EU members states have two years to transpose it. The level 2 measures and guidelines are expected to be adopted during 2025 on specific topics that will have an impact on the fund regulatory environment in Luxembourg, in particular in relation to: (i) liquidity management tools, (ii) supervisory reporting, (iii) delegation, (iv) ESG, (v) leverage, (v) loan originating funds, (vi) white-labelling (or the use of third-party AIFMs/management companies), (vii) information on costs charged to investors, and (viii) alignment of the list of permitted functions/services that an AIFM/management company can perform.
On 25 October 2024, the European Commission adopted Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2024/2759, supplementing the revised ELTIF 2.0 regime (ELTIF RTS). The ELTIF RTS aim to make ELTIFs a more effective tool for channelling long-term investments, with a particular focus on: (i) the requirements for an ELTIF’s redemption policy and liquidity management tools, (ii) proposed methods to determine the minimum percentage of liquid assets that ELTIFs can use to satisfy redemptions, (iii) the circumstances for the matching of transfer requests of units or shares of the ELTIF, and (iv) certain elements of the costs disclosure. ELTIFs authorised before 10 January 2024 (the date of entry into force of the ELTIF 2.0 regime) and opting to remain subject to the former ELTIF regime remain subject to Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/480.
Finally, at the Luxembourg level, on 11 December 2024 the Luxembourg Parliament adopted Bill of Law No 8411, introducing changes designed to make Luxembourg more attractive and more competitive, and to reduce the tax burden on individuals. This law amended Articles 175 and 176 of the UCI Law to grant an exemption from the annual subscription tax for actively managed UCITS ETFs. The provisions of the law relating to the subscription tax exemption will apply from the first day of the quarter following the publication of the law in the Luxembourg Official Journal. This measure aims to strengthen Luxembourg’s position as Europe’s leading hub for traditional investment funds by making it more competitive and appealing in the growing European and international UCITS ETF markets.
11 rue du Château d’Eau
L-3364 Leudelange
Luxembourg
+352 260 251
+352 260 259 99
marketing@bsp.lu www.bsp.luIntroduction
As expected, 2024 proved as busy as the previous year on the regulatory front. Several industry-shaping regulatory projects that were in the pipeline for some time reached fruition during 2024, so much so that we will only be able to focus on a few of those in this edition of Norton Rose Fulbright’s annual update. Many of these new regulations are set to come into full force (or close) in 2025. Although the industry has been preparing for these regulations ahead of their implementation, there is a big difference between theory and reality when it comes to applying EU-spanning regulatory frameworks in a fluid industry such as the investment funds industry. Hence, we expect to see interesting challenges for the industry and (hopefully) useful guidance on the regulatory front over 2025.
Trends
Farewell AIFMD, welcome AIFMD 2
Following several years of legislative process, the final legislative text of the long-awaited European Directive (Directive (EU) 2024/927 of 13 March 2024 – the Final Text), amending Directive 2011/61/EU of 8 June 2011 on Alternative Investment Fund Managers (AIFMs) (AIFMD) and its associated annexes (the revised AIFMD, AIFMD 2) and Directive 2009/65/EC of 13 July 2009 on Undertakings for Collective Investment in Transferable Securities (UCITS) (UCITS Directive), has been published in the Official Journal of the EU (on 26 March 2024) and subsequently entered into force (on 15 April 2024), proposing a series of targeted amendments to the AIFMD and the UCITS Directive.
EU member states are required to implement such changes into their own laws within two years from the entry into force of the Final Text.
Focusing here on AIFMD 2, the key changes will be around the governance of AIFMs, loan originating funds (LOFS; with, amongst others, rules around closed- versus open-ended funds, leverage and risk retention), delegation, reporting and disclosure requirements, requirements around fund expenses, tax and AML requirements for third-country entities.
The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) has been tasked with drafting technical standards and guidelines to implement some of the new rules (eg, the AIFMD 2 expansion of the existing liquidity requirements for AIFMs managing open-ended alternative investment funds (AIFs)) (with deadlines spanning from April 2025 to 2027).
One of the most discussed novelties of AIFMD 2 is the creation of a framework applicable specifically to AIFs that originate loans as the principal investment strategy (LOFs), hence regulating the underlying product through their managers.
The end goal of that new LOF regime is worthy, though: facilitating private credit activity in Europe by adding loan origination to the list of permitted ancillary activities an AIFM may undertake under its EU-wide AIFMD management passport. But while the recitals to the Final Text suggest the intention to create such a cross-border lending passport, it lacks explicit operative provision to this effect, and it remains to be seen throughout the transposition period of the Final Text how each member state’s legislator will effectively facilitate the activity in its jurisdiction.
In the meantime, some of the complex requirements under AIFMD 2 may already apply to funds qualifying as LOFs and may already raise question marks as to their interpretation and practical implementation (in particular around the leverage limits and calculation as well as around the risk retention requirements).
A lot of discussions on the practicality of the new concepts that AIFMs will have to navigate can be expected in the coming years.
Finally, and as expected, the Final Text makes various amendments to the UCITS Directive for alignment with those in AIFMD 2, where relevant (save for those on LOFs, which remain reserved for AIFs).
The EU AML Package: the adventure begins
Close to three years after its unveiling, the last three pillars of the European Commission’s paradigm shift for combating money laundering (anti-money laundering (AML)) and terrorism financing (countering the financing of terrorism (CFT)), in the form of its ambitious legislative package to strengthen EU AML and CFT rules (the AML Package), was published in the Official Journal of the EU on 19 June 2024 following its adoption by the European Council. The aim and content of the AML Package is to remedy the gaps in the fifth AML Directive of 2018, which was not implemented equally and in full by all member states. The AML Package also seeks to address the lack of serious consequences in the event of non-compliance, the first pillar of which, Regulation (EU) 2023/1113 of 31 May 2023 on information accompanying transfers of funds and certain crypto-assets (a recast of Regulation (EU) 2015/847 of 20 May 2015 on information accompanying transfers of funds), had been already published in the Official Journal of the EU in June 2023 (together with the Markets in Crypto Assets Regulation, or MiCAR, the first package of European legislation that has been enacted to regulate cryptocurrencies and related services) and will start to apply in a few days, as of 30 December 2024.
Those three remaining pillars of the AML Package are:
Both the sixth AML Directive and the EU Single Rulebook Regulation came into force 20 days after their publication in the Official Journal of the EU. In terms of application, the sixth AML Directive will have to be transposed into local law by EU member states by 10 July 2027 (at which point the current fouth AML Directive, as amended by the sixth AML Directive, will be repealed), with some items of this sixth AML Directive being subject to earlier transposition deadlines (ie, with respect to the beneficial owner register) and one being subject to a later transposition deadline (ie, with respect to a single access point for real estate information). The EU Single Rulebook Regulation will apply from 10 July 2027 (except for some football-related provisions, which will come into effect at a later date).
One of the most significant changes of the AML Package is the creation of the AAMLC and its ambition of a unified AML/CFT supervisory approach. The AAMLC will seat in Frankfurt and Main in Germany and assume most of its tasks and powers by 1 July 2025, although its direct supervision power will only commence in 2028.
Preparing the Digital Operational Resilience Act
The innovative regulatory framework addressing the risks posed by the digital transformation of financial services (as well as the increase in volume and severity of cyber-attacks within the sector), the Digital Operational Resilience Act – known under the widely used acronym DORA (ie, Regulation (EU) 2022/2554 of 14 December 2022) – entered into force on 16 January 2023 and is fast approaching the start of its application (and enforcement) period, commencing on 17 January 2025.
DORA has required a long preparation period for all in-scope entities as well as deep fine-tuning by the European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs), which culminated with the adoption by the European Commission, on 23 October 2024 and 24 October 2024, of regulatory technical standards (RTS) and implementing technical standards (ITS) based on the ESAs’ draft published earlier this year (through two delegated regulations supplementing DORA), namely:
It is now up to the Council of the EU and the European Parliament to scrutinise these two delegated regulations for a maximum of three months, after which, absent objection, they will be published in the Official Journal of the EU and enter into force 20 days later.
However, the European Commission has yet to adopt two sets of RTS: the first on the criteria for determining the composition of the joint examination team and the second on thread-lead penetration testing, the ESA’s drafts of which were published on 17 July 2024, as well as one set of ITS on the register of information (which is likely to stem from the expressed divergences concerning the latter between the ESAs and the European Commission regarding the inclusion of a European unique identifier for financial entities, where the European Commission seems to still favour the more traditional legal entity identifier (LEI) code, at least as an option, when identifying ICT third-party service providers registered in the EU).
The European long-term investment fund RTS finally cross the line
On 19 July 2024, a rarely seen ping-pong match between ESMA and the European Commission on the draft RTS under version 2.0 of Regulation (EU) 2015/760 on European long-term investment funds (ELTIFs) (as amended by Regulation (EU) 2023/606 of 15 March 2023 – ie, ELTIF 2.0), came to an end.
The legislative process between ESMA and the European Commission has been unusually lengthy. It started in December 2023 with the first version of the RTS published by ESMA, upon which both institutions kept passing the buck, with the European Commission giving ESMA an unusual six-week ultimatum to amend its draft to address the European Commission’s concerns (in particular the need to provide ELTIF managers with greater flexibility in terms of liquidity management). This was followed by the publication of an ESMA opinion in April 2024 setting out a number of changes to the draft RTS, and the European Commission circulating in essence its own draft for internal consultation, which was finally approved in July 2024. With the lapse of the three-month scrutiny period, the RTS were published in the Official Journal of the EU on 25 October 2024 in the form of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2024/2759 of 19 July 2024 (the ELTIF 2.0 RTS) and came in force the day after. The ELTIF 2.0 RTS supplement Articles 9(3), 18(6), 19(5), 21(3) and 25(3) of ELTIF 2.0, bringing much needed specifications concerning their application.
The two core subjects dealt with by ELTIF 2.0 are liquidity and redemption. Under ELTIF 2.0, an ELTIF manager may permit investors to redeem their participation during the life cycle of the ELTIF under certain conditions, provided that the manager demonstrates that the ELTIF has an “appropriate redemption policy and liquidity management tools that are compatible with the long-term investment strategy of the ELTIF” and that it provides a list of information to the competent authority of the ELTIF at the time of authorisation, as listed in Article 4 of the ELTIF 2.0 RTS. While the ELTIF 2.0 RTS do not specify the length of the minimum holding periods prior to redemption requests, they do require the ELTIF manager to determine a minimum holding period based on:
Furthermore, the maximum percentage of liquid assets that can be used for redemption requests is required to be calibrated by the ELTIF manager at its discretion, on the basis of one of two sets of factors set out in the ELTIF 2.0 Annexes (ie, on the basis of either the ELTIF’s redemption frequency and notice period or its redemption frequency and minimum percentage of liquid assets).
In addition, the ELTIF 2.0 RTS define:
All in all, the ELTIF 2.0 RTS tackle most of the problems raised by their first iteration, and the road is now clear for ELTIFs to move forward in their 2.0 format.
The much-needed revamp of Commission de Surveillance du Secteur Financier Circular 02/77
In 2002 – ie, more than 20 years ago, Commission de Surveillance du Secteur Financier (CSSF) established its framework on the protection of investors in case of net asset value (NAV) calculation error and correction of the consequences resulting from non-compliance with the investment rules applicable to undertakings for collective investment (UCI) – under CSSF Circular 02/77 – and it has been clear that the industry evolved in different directions during this period. Many significant milestones have changed the landscape of UCI. These milestones include the implementation of Directive 2009/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 on the co-ordination of laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to UCI in transferable securities, the implementation of Directive 2011/61/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2011 on Alternative Investment Fund Managers, and the emergence of new products such as specialised investment funds (SIFs), ELTIFs, European venture capital funds (EuVECAs), the European social entrepreneurship fund (EuSEF) and money market funds (MMFs).
These new products, and the evolution of related industries in Luxembourg, came with a growing investor base, thus increasing investors’ exposure to the risks and consequences of NAV calculation errors and non-compliance with the relevant investment rules for UCIs. This was something the CSSF was very aware of, resulting in it updating the CSSF Circular 02/77 framework through active communication with the industry, conducting inspections and issuing fines. But one should not forget the key aim of the framework set by CSSF 02/77, which was to ensure that investors have confidence in UCIs – something that controls, sanctions and a fragmented framework do not foster. Thus, it was time to consolidate and clarify the rules and bring more things within their scope to reflect the reality of the industry. As a result, CSSF Circular 24/856, published on 28 March 2024, sets a high bar for the industry by, among other things, approaching compliance and investor protection as a collaborative and proactive exercise that concerns all those involved with a particular UCI. It reinforces the methodologies for correction, prevention and rectification of NAV calculation errors – and for non-compliance with the investment rules and other errors (including tolerance thresholds) – and it addresses a broader spectrum of operational risks.
CSSF Circular 24/856 is also key for investors in UCIs as it provides explicit guidelines for compensation and cost bearing in relation to NAV calculation errors, non-compliance with the investment rules and other errors, including incorrect fee payments and investment allocation errors. This new Circular will certainly require UCIs to update their NAV calculation procedures, enhance their internal controls and ensure that proper internal training on these new rules is provided.
It is also important to note that, when it comes to NAV calculation errors, CSSF Circular 24/856 distinguishes between open- and closed-ended UCIs, taking into account the fact that such errors have more significance for opened-ended UCIs, which normally calculate their NAV on a daily basis, allowing investors to enter or exit on any day. CSSF Circular 24/856 does not require closed-ended UCIs to notify the CSSF of NAV calculation errors (as they are exempt though certain of the guidelines set out in Chapter 4 of CSSF Circular 24/856, which should be followed by closed-ended UCIs). However, other types of error (eg, incorrect fee payments) must be reported to the CSSF by closed-ended UCIs, and all errors (even if not reportable to the CSSF) must be corrected.
The increased oversight of NAV calculation errors, the change in rules effected by CSSF Circular 24/856 (which will come into effect on 1 January 2025) and increased scrutiny by the CSSF, coupled with an ongoing agitated economic environment, may lead to such errors being detected and reported more frequently in the future, with high levels of compensation being paid to investors when these errors are material in the spirit of ensuring investors receive due compensation and protection.
Beware “green” names for investment funds
In May 2024, ESMA published its eagerly anticipated final guidelines on using environmental, social and governance (ESG) or sustainability-related terms in fund names. In August 2024, ESMA published the official translations of the guidelines, which means that they will apply from 21 November 2024. Asset managers should therefore be taking urgent steps to ensure compliance. Investor demand for investment funds that incorporate ESG factors has grown and will continue to grow in the future. In this context, the name of a fund is important as it is usually the first attribute thereof that investors see, with the potential to have a significant impact on their investment decisions. Financial services regulators are aware of this and have concerns regarding the risks of greenwashing from this point of view. On 31 May 2022, ESMA issued a supervisory briefing on sustainability risks and disclosures in investment management (the “Briefing”), containing inter alia principles-based guidance on fund names with ESG and sustainability-related terms. The Briefing was issued under Article 29(2) of the Regulation establishing ESMA, meaning that it was intended to promote common supervisory approaches and practices, but it was not binding with member state competent authorities (national competent authorities (NCAs)) nor subjected to a comply-or-explain mechanism.
Almost six months later, ESMA followed up the Briefing with a consultation on draft guidelines on using ESG or sustainability-related terms in fund names (the “Consultation”). The draft guidelines contained more specific guidance on the issue compared to the supervisory briefing.
The Consultation closed on 23 February 2023, with ESMA expecting to issue the final guidelines relatively quickly thereafter, by Q2/Q3 2023. However, given the significant amount of feedback from the market, the publication of the final guidelines (the “Guidelines”) was delayed until 14 May 2024. The Guidelines were issued under Article 16 of the Regulation establishing ESMA meaning that, unlike the Briefing, NCAs are subject to a comply-or-explain mechanism.
The Guidelines introduce quantitative thresholds (eg, the proportion of ESG-related investments and/or sustainable investments) that will apply as a condition for funds using ESG and/or sustainability related terms in their names, as well as minimum safeguards (including the exclusion criteria defined in Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/1818 of 17 July 2020), depending on the type of terms used by a fund in its name. The Guidelines apply to:
There remain some uncertainties around the exact scope of application of the final guidelines, which will require further clarification by ESMA. These include:
Also, in terms of scope, it is worth noting that the Guidelines do not capture all the financial products captured by Regulation (EU) 2019/2088 of 27 November 2019 (the “Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation” (SFDR)), which has a much broader scope, leaving a gap between the two.
As for the content of the Guidelines, funds are bracketed into three categories depending on the type of terms used in their name, with each of these categories sharing a common requirement: 80% of the relevant fund’s investments should be used to meet environmental or social characteristics, or sustainable investment objectives, in accordance with the binding elements of the investment strategy disclosed in Annexes II and III of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2022/1288, which supplements the SFDR. In addition, depending on the category (or combination thereof) in which a relevant fund’s name falls, Climate Transition Benchmark (CTB) exclusions and/or Paris-Aligned Benchmark (PAB) exclusions must be applied.
On 21 August 2024, ESMA published the Guidelines on its website in all EU official languages, starting the clock as to when they apply such that:
Finally, it should be kept in mind that ESMA highlights in the Guidelines that “it should be noted that these guidelines have been designed in light of the current legislative framework. ESMA will review the guidelines, if necessary, in case of any update of the relevant legislation”.
In Luxembourg, the CSSF opted for the application of the Guidelines, publishing on 21 October 2024 the related CSSF Circular 24/863 and thereby implementing the Guidelines into the Luxembourg regulatory framework.
Conclusion
The fund industry is growing and evolving into a more mature industry – which is in the process of being shaped progressively by the various regulatory initiatives mentioned above – with the end goal of making the industry stronger and more harmonised.
But the fund industry is at the same time being shaken by surrounding economic and political turmoil: as ever, market players will have no choice but to continue navigating these troubled waters, which will see both challenges and opportunities. We therefore hope that the implementation of these regulatory initiatives is both pragmatic and practical.
16 Boulevard Royal
L-2449
Luxembourg
+352 285 7391
+352 285 739 201
alfia.sadykova@nortonrosefulbright.com www.nortonrosefulbright.com