Search results for

Banji Adenusi In May 2014, the Nigerian Securities and Exchange Commission issued new rules to address the influx of offshore mutual funds and collective investment schemes (CISs) soliciting investment from investors in Nigeria. The Rules on Approval of Foreign Collective Investment Schemes 2014 aims to bring foreign CISs (registered and regulated under the relevant foreign jurisdiction) which are seeking investments from Nigeria under the jurisdiction of the SEC. As part of requirements for eligibility to solicit investments, foreign CISs that have no intention of listing on the Nigerian exchanges are required to invest no less than 20% of the fund's total assets in Nigeria (Rule 2g). Obviously, the key consideration is the retention of a minimum level of investment within the Nigerian market, and by extension the reduction of capital flight. Equally, the foreign operator is required to appoint a representative in Nigeria for the life of the fund approved in Nigeria. This appointed representative can either be a duly registered fund manager with whom the foreign operator may enter into a representative agreement, or a freshly incorporated representative entity registered with SEC (Rule 3b). Solicitation of investments in the fund is then carried on through the representative (Rule 4). Where the foreign operator elects to incorporate a vehicle for the purposes of registration with the SEC, such local incorporation throws up a host of regulatory compliance requirements, including licensing with the Nigerian Investment Promotion Council and compliance with the various applicable tax regimes.

The first sukuk issued by a non-Muslim country bolsters London’s plan Islamic finance hub plans

Political concern and misunderstandings could threaten the budding US rental securitisation industry before it has a chance to take off.

Last month UK Chancellor George Osborne said he was confident Europe could achieve a framework for sorting out bank resolution within six months. But to meet this ambitious timetable, the region's policy-makers must resolve several key issues.

What reforms must PM Narendra Modi prioritise to kick-start the investment cycle

A former CFIUS representative explains the realities of filing with the body. Applicants should treat the process like a confession, not a deposition

Dealmaking is bouncing back, driven by sustainable and strategic transactions. But the new risks inherent in large-cap deals could rain on Europe's M&A parade

Kyriacos Kourtelos In 2009, the EC proposed a directive on Alternative Investment Fund Managers (AIFMs). The proposed directive aimed to ensure a high level of investor protection by setting out a common framework for the authorisation and supervision of AIFMs in the EU. Further, it aimed to provide robust and harmonised regulatory standards for all AIFMs within its scope and to enhance the transparency of AIFMs' activities and improve disclosure to stakeholders. In 2010, a political agreement was reached by the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers on Directive 2011/61/EU on Alternative Investment Fund Managers (AIFMD), which amended directives 2003/41/EC and 2009/65/EC and regulations EC 1060/2009 and EU 1095/2010. As the AIFMD adopts a phased approach to the implementation, it affects European Economic Area (EEA) and non-EEA fund managers differently. Nonetheless, becoming fully authorised under the AIFMD may allow certain fund managers to undertake management and marketing activities throughout the whole of the EU. Member states were required to transpose the AIFMD into national law by July 22 2013. Cyprus was the second member state to harmonise its legislation with the AIFMD, with the enactment of the Alternative Investment Fund Managers Law of 2013 (Law 56(I)/2013 – the Law), which was published in the Official Gazette of the Republic on July 5 2013. The Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission (CySEC) was appointed as the relevant supervisory authority under the law. The AIFMD and the law are complemented by three EC regulations that have direct effect, namely:

Carlos Fradique-Mendez Ana María Rodríguez As the IMF has pointed out, a country's position on anti-money laundering and terrorism financing may facilitate its integration into the global financial system and strengthen governance and fiscal administration. In line with this, Colombia has made recent developments regarding anti-money laundering and terrorism financing. In a new regulation for companies in the real sector of the economy, the Colombian Superintendence of Companies has set out certain obligations that must be observed by all legal entities that, as of December 31 2013, had an income exceeding 160,000 monthly minimum legal salaries (approximately $49 million). Before the issuance of Regulation 304, regulations against money laundering and terrorism financing (ML/TF) were focused on some specific industries of the economy (such as the financial sector, football clubs, courier and mailing entities, gamble and games entities, gold exporting and importing entities, securities transportation, and custom agencies). Apart from the financial sector, other industries had not been heavily regulated, meaning that existing regulations were not comprehensive and neglected to address important matters. This resulted in the Colombian authorities being urged to update the standards and introduce new rules to act against ML/TF.

The news that London has finally issued its maiden sukuk has everyone excited that Islamic finance could become a viable option for corporates in the western world. However, alongside the jubilation comes another round of inevitable discussions about competition between finance centres vying to gain the biggest slice of the lucrative shariah market.