AIFM-direktivet och dess inverkan på aktiebolagsrätt och regleringen av fonder i Sverige
(2013) JURM02 20132Department of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- I april 2009 presenterade den europeiska kommissionen det först utkastet för vad som slutligen skulle bli ”alternative investment fund managers” (AIFMD) direktivet. Från början utsattes direktivet för kritik. Direktivets mål är att reglera den inre marknaden för AIF: er (alternativa investeringsfonder). Efter tillägg och omskrivningar antogs slutligen direktivet av Europaparlamentet och Europarådet i juni 2011. Från och med den 22 juli 2013 är direktivet nu lag i Sverige. Alternativa investeringsfonder är en övergripande benämning på en stor samling olika fonder som inkluderar, men inte begränsas till, hedgefonder, råvarufonder och private equity-fonder. Mycket av kritiken kommer också från detta faktum, att fonder som fungerar på olika... (More)
- I april 2009 presenterade den europeiska kommissionen det först utkastet för vad som slutligen skulle bli ”alternative investment fund managers” (AIFMD) direktivet. Från början utsattes direktivet för kritik. Direktivets mål är att reglera den inre marknaden för AIF: er (alternativa investeringsfonder). Efter tillägg och omskrivningar antogs slutligen direktivet av Europaparlamentet och Europarådet i juni 2011. Från och med den 22 juli 2013 är direktivet nu lag i Sverige. Alternativa investeringsfonder är en övergripande benämning på en stor samling olika fonder som inkluderar, men inte begränsas till, hedgefonder, råvarufonder och private equity-fonder. Mycket av kritiken kommer också från detta faktum, att fonder som fungerar på olika sätt och har olika användningar nu har samlats under ett enda reglerande direktiv. Några av de nya kraven är att AIF: er nu kräver tillstånd, och fondförvaltare underställs en mängd nya krav på till exempel informationsgivning och belåningsgrader.
Med det här arbetet vill jag analysera och kommentera på de effekter som AIFM-direktivet och den nya lagen kan tänkas ha på regleringen av fonder i Sverige, med ett fokus på hur den nya regleringen kan tänkas samspela med den redan existerande svenska lagstiftningen, främst aktiebolagsrätten. De typer av fonder som påverkas av den nya lagen är väldigt olika, och det finns en reell rädsla för att den nya lagen gapar efter för mycket, och att den kommer passa vissa typer av fonder bättre än andra. De slutsatser jag kommer fram till i det här arbetet är att direktivet, och därför den nya lagen, inte tar tillräckligt stor hänsyn till de skillnader som finns mellan de olika AIF: erna och att som en konsekvens av den påskyndade lagstiftningsprocessen för just det här direktivet, är direktivet och lagen ibland både bristande och otydlig. Vidare har jag funnit att den nya lagstiftningens effekt på svensk aktiebolagsrätt är liten, mest på grund av regerings vägran att införa öppna aktiebolagsbaserade fonder i svensk rätt. (Less) - Abstract
- In April 2009 the European Commission presented the first draft of what would eventually become the alternative investment fund managers directive. From the beginning, the directive was subject to criticism. The goal of the directive is to regulate the internal market for AIF: s (alternative investment funds). After amendments and rewrites the European parliament and the European council finally adopted the directive in June of 2011. As of the 22 of July 2013 this directive is now law in Sweden. Alternative investment funds are an umbrella term for a vast array of different funds including, but not limited to, hedge funds, commodity funds and private equity funds. Most of the criticism of the directive stems from this fact that funds that... (More)
- In April 2009 the European Commission presented the first draft of what would eventually become the alternative investment fund managers directive. From the beginning, the directive was subject to criticism. The goal of the directive is to regulate the internal market for AIF: s (alternative investment funds). After amendments and rewrites the European parliament and the European council finally adopted the directive in June of 2011. As of the 22 of July 2013 this directive is now law in Sweden. Alternative investment funds are an umbrella term for a vast array of different funds including, but not limited to, hedge funds, commodity funds and private equity funds. Most of the criticism of the directive stems from this fact that funds that operate in different ways and for different purposes are bunched together under one single regulatory directive. Some of the new requirements are that AIF: s now requires authorization, and the managers are subject to a host of new requirements concerning, for instance, leverage and transparency.
With this thesis I aim to analyse and expound on the effects this directive, which is now as I’ve stated above law, might have on the regulation of funds in Sweden, with an eye to how this new legislation will work together with extant Swedish law, especially corporate law. The types of funds affected by this new law are very different from each other, and there is a real fear that this law has to wide a grasp, and that it will fit some types of funds better than others. The conclusions I reach in this thesis are that the directive, and thusly the new law, does not pay sufficient heed to the differences between the various AIF: s and that as a consequence of the hasty legislative process for this particular directive, the text of the directive and the law is at times both faulty and unclear. I have also found that the new law does not have any profound effects on Swedish corporate law, mostly stemming from the fact that the Swedish government has proved unwilling to accept open corporate based funds in Swedish law. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/4230817
- author
- Mollstedt, Gustaf LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- The AIFM-directive and its impact on corporate law and the regulation of funds in Sweden
- course
- JURM02 20132
- year
- 2013
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- Associationsrätt, Finansrätt, EU-rätt
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 4230817
- date added to LUP
- 2014-01-21 06:40:31
- date last changed
- 2014-01-21 06:40:31
@misc{4230817,
abstract = {{In April 2009 the European Commission presented the first draft of what would eventually become the alternative investment fund managers directive. From the beginning, the directive was subject to criticism. The goal of the directive is to regulate the internal market for AIF: s (alternative investment funds). After amendments and rewrites the European parliament and the European council finally adopted the directive in June of 2011. As of the 22 of July 2013 this directive is now law in Sweden. Alternative investment funds are an umbrella term for a vast array of different funds including, but not limited to, hedge funds, commodity funds and private equity funds. Most of the criticism of the directive stems from this fact that funds that operate in different ways and for different purposes are bunched together under one single regulatory directive. Some of the new requirements are that AIF: s now requires authorization, and the managers are subject to a host of new requirements concerning, for instance, leverage and transparency.
With this thesis I aim to analyse and expound on the effects this directive, which is now as I’ve stated above law, might have on the regulation of funds in Sweden, with an eye to how this new legislation will work together with extant Swedish law, especially corporate law. The types of funds affected by this new law are very different from each other, and there is a real fear that this law has to wide a grasp, and that it will fit some types of funds better than others. The conclusions I reach in this thesis are that the directive, and thusly the new law, does not pay sufficient heed to the differences between the various AIF: s and that as a consequence of the hasty legislative process for this particular directive, the text of the directive and the law is at times both faulty and unclear. I have also found that the new law does not have any profound effects on Swedish corporate law, mostly stemming from the fact that the Swedish government has proved unwilling to accept open corporate based funds in Swedish law.}},
author = {{Mollstedt, Gustaf}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{AIFM-direktivet och dess inverkan på aktiebolagsrätt och regleringen av fonder i Sverige}},
year = {{2013}},
}