Publications
& Policy

This PAE Response assesses, at the request of the Commission, the combined impact of legislation on our industry and details the situation where existing rules may have a detrimental impact on private equity, venture capital and infrastructure funds without necessarily achieving their proposed objectives. Among the examples given are the absence of a passport for sub-threshold funds and the regulatory treatment of semi-professional investors.

This PAE response comments on the proposed approach taken by the ESAs to determine the Single Risk Indicator and the costs contained in the Key Information Document ("KID"). It argues that the level of risk assigned to private equity is not based on actual data and that carried interest should not be considered as a cost due to its inherent characteristics.

We responded to the consultation on the re-launch of the Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) focusing on the question of the apparent “debt equity bias”. In this paper, we explain that debt and equity are complementary rather than antagonistic and outline why any moves to limit interest deductibility would increase the cost of financing for businesses. We therefore encourage the maintenance of current rules in this area.

The European Commission Consultation on the review of EuVECA and EuSEF Regulations will precede a new legislative proposal, with the objective of increasing the take-up of the existing regime. The PAE stressed in its response the importance of maintaining the flexibility and freedom of choice of the current regime while increasing its availability for venture capital and smaller private equity managers.

Invest Europe responded to this call for evidence, in order to help EIOPA to give technical advice to the Commission on the identification and calibration of "infrastructure corporates” in Solvency II Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/35.

Invest Europe believes that all forms of infrastructure investments should be eligible for the insurance risk weighting and the assessment of an infrastructure asset’s eligibility should be based on its characteristics than on the legal/corporate form by which it is organised.

The ESMA Consultation Paper: “Guidelines on sound remuneration policies under the UCITS Directive and AIFMD” is relevant for the private equity industry as it proposes a targeted amendment to the AIFMD Remuneration Guidelines. In its response, the PAE encourages ESMA to retain its current interpretation of proportionality for private equity fund managers, allowing “neutralization” of certain remuneration rules that apply to them.

In this letter to ESMA, the PAE welcomes the publication of the European Long Term Investment Funds (ELTIF) Regulation in the Official Journal of the EU, endorses the proposed regulatory technical standards and looks forward to the availability of ELTIFs at the end of this year.

The EVCA responded on behalf of the PAE to the ESAs Technical Discussion Paper on Risk, Performance Scenarios and Cost Disclosures set in the Key Information Document (KID) for Packaged Retail Insurance-based and Investment Products (PRIIPS). This consultation was launched to prepare the drafting of regulatory technical standards on the detail of the information to be contained in the KID, including calculation of costs and the definition of the risk indicator. The Standards will therefore have an impact on private equity funds when they wish to market to retail customers.

The EIOPA Consultation Paper follows a Call for Advice from the European Commission on the identification and calibration of infrastructure investment risk categories. In the discussion paper, EIOPA examines the possibility of introducing a specific standard formula treatment for infrastructure investments in order to ensure a more risk-sensitive treatment of the asset class.

This paper addresses, at a high level, the EVCA’s position on certain technical issues concerning the introduction of a third-country passport for non-EEA AIFMs/AIFs.

This is the response to the EBA consultation paper “Draft EBA Guidelines on limits on exposures to shadow banking entities which carry out banking activities outside a regulated framework under Article 395 para. 2 Regulation (EU) No. 575/2013”. In its response, the PAE encourages the EBA to reconsider its approach and recognise that private equity funds have neither the characteristics nor the level of risks to credit institutions that would justify their identification as shadow banks

The EVCA responded on behalf of the PAE to Consultation on Public Discussion Draft BEPS Action 6: Preventing the Granting of Treaty Benefits in Inappropriate Circumstances. This is the third and final written consultation on Treaty Abuse as part of the BEPS project, further explaining why and how private equity funds should not be disadvantaged under new proposed rules.

The letter describes the EVCA and PEGCC position on the proposed assessment methodologies for identifying non-bank non-insurer global systemically important financial institutions. It discusses the reasons that private equity firms and funds are not systemically important.

This is the EVCA-PAE response to the EBA Consultation Paper “Draft Guidelines on sound remuneration policies on CRD4/CRR. While the consultation applies to credit institutions, some firms within the private equity industry, that are primarily carrying out private equity activities that are outside the scope of the CRD framework, will also have subsidiaries or affiliates that carry out additional activities and are regulated as CRD IV investment firms.