Publications
& Policy

Guidelines on sound variable remuneration will apply to all MiFID investment firms, although some rules will be waived below a defined threshold. In this response we reiterate the importance of protecting the carried interest model while flagging some technical concerns we have with some sections of the Guidelines, including on the definition of the thresholds.

As investors in innovative and high-growth companies and start-ups we believe it was necessary to position ourselves on the issue. We support and welcome the EC’s ambitions and 2030 digital targets, and we want to make sure that the PE/VC industry is seen as key enabler of the digital transformation. Moreover, we want to ensure that the EC makes creating the right policy and tax environment to allow the digital transformation one of its priorities as these will be essential in achieving the 2030 digital targets.

In our response we highlight the need for the collection of financial and environmental data in a harmonised way whilst ensuring that this is of the highest quality and foremost reliable. Moreover, we also point out the need of correctly assessing the costs for data providers. We believe is necessary to ensure that no further administrative burden or duplication of information requirements arise as a result of the establishment of the ESAP.

In this letter, Invest Europe expresses its concerns about the draft RTS under SFDR that were published by the European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) on 4 February. In particular, we shed light on issues of potential overreach by the ESAs and/or divergence from the Level 1 legislation.

In this consultation response, we have shared our views on the European Commission's Initiative on Sustainable Corporate Governance. Particular areas of focus were directors’ duty of care and due diligence duty. We stressed that while there are a number of good principles behind the idea put forward by the European Commission – such as holding directors accountable for creating real long-term value – it would create significant uncertainties and risks, if directors could be held to account by all different kinds of stakeholders, with no clear prioritisation on how they should weight all the different stakeholders’ interests.

In this response we have expressed our concerns that ESMA has not taken proper account of the differences between the overwhelmingly institutional AIF industry and the retail fund industry, with respect to their respective distribution models. Concretely, ESMA has made some assumptions about the application of MiFID rules in the institutional marketplace which are not necessarily correct. This is particularly relevant in the context of: (i) the categorisation of AIF marketing as a MiFID investment service or activity; and (ii) the disclosure of information on past and expected future performance.

Ahead of the fast approaching application date (10 March 2021), Invest Europe has been in contact with the European Commission to express its concerns about some of the grey areas around SFDR, including the scope of Article 8 and the public disclosures pursuant to Article 10 by private funds.

In this consultation response, Invest Europe reiterates that there is no need for a re-opening of the AIFMD because of a variety of factors. In addition, any changes to the AIFMD regime would lead to additional costs and (administrative) burden for the industry as members will need to re-adapt and get to grips with new requirements. If necessary, improvements to the AIFMD regime can be sought via Level 2 or 3 measures, or in the context of other legislative reviews.

The European Long Term Investment Funds (ELTIF) framework, if not currently successful, has the potential to become a relevant tool in the future if it appropriately takes into consideration the needs of private equity managers. In this response we detail which changes would increase the take-up of this voluntary retail passport: broadened eligible assets, opening to fund-of-funds and requirements that are more tailored to the specificities of long-term, closed-ended funds.

Over the years EU Risk Finance Guidelines allowed many start-ups and scale-ups to benefit from state aid support. While we note that the current regime is broadly appropriate, we suggest in this response a few changes that could be introduced to the Guidelines to make it easier for innovative companies to be eligible when owned by private equity.

In this short response we express our concerns with several of the changes suggested by EIOPA to the criteria defining the ability of insurers to set up long-term equity portfolios (Art 171a of Delegated Regulation). These portfolios are subject to more appropriate capital charges for investments such as those made in private equity and venture capital funds.

Invest Europe contributed to AFME's report tracking the recent progress of the Capital Markets Union (CMU) project through seven Key Performance Indicators (KPIs).

Invest Europe has produced a private equity data reporting guidance, based on the standard reporting template TPT 5.0. It is intended to help private equity managers to report data to their insurance investors in accordance with the new reporting requirements.