Related provisions for BIPRU 2.2.62
1 - 16 of 16 items.
(1) BIPRU 2.2.49 G to BIPRU 2.2.70 G set out guidance for:(a) a bank or building society;(b) an asset management firm; and(c) a securities firm;whose activities are either simple or moderately complex.(2) BIPRU 2.2.49 G to BIPRU 2.2.70 G provide examples of the sorts of risks which such a firm might typically face and of stress tests or scenario analyses which it might carry out as part of its ICAAP.(3) The material on securities firms is also relevant to a commoditiesfirm.
As an asset manager's mandates become more complex, the risk of it failing to comply fully with the terms of its contracts increases. In the event of such failure, a firm can be exposed to substantial losses resulting from customers' claims and legal actions. Although the FSA would expect an asset manager to have in place adequate controls to mitigate that risk, it may also like to consider the potential cost to it should customers claim that it has not adhered to mandates. Past
In relation to the issues identified in BIPRU 2.2.63 G, an asset manager should consider, for example:(1) the direct cost to it resulting from fraud or theft;(2) the direct cost arising from customers' claims and legal action in the future; an asset manager could consider the impact on its financial position if a legal precedent were to encourage its customers to take legal action against that firm for failing to advise correctly on a certain type of product; the relevance of
The FSA expects an asset manager to consider the impact of economic factors on its ability to meet its liabilities as they fall due. An asset manager should therefore develop scenarios which relate to its strategic and business plan. An asset manager might therefore consider:(1) the effect of a market downturn affecting both transaction volumes and the market values of assets in its funds; in assessing the impact of such a scenario, an asset manager may consider the extent to
A firm must include only the following types of undertaking in a UK consolidation group or non-EEA sub-group for the purposes of this chapter:(1) a BIPRU firm;(2) an institution;(3) a financial institution;(4) an asset management company;(5) a financial holding company; and(6) an ancillary services undertaking.
A firm may, having first notified the FSA in writing in accordance with SUP 15.7 (Form and method of notification), exclude an institution, asset management company, financial institution or ancillary services undertaking that is a subsidiary undertaking in, or an undertaking in which a participation is held by, the UK consolidation group or non-EEA sub-group if the balance sheet total of that undertaking is less than the smaller of the following two amounts:(1) 10 million Euros;(2)
Article 73(1) of the Banking Consolidation Directive allows the FSA to decide to exclude an institution, financial institution, asset management company or ancillary services undertaking that is a subsidiary undertaking in, or an undertaking in which a participation is held by, the UK consolidation group or non-EEA sub-group for the purposes of this chapter in the following circumstances:(1) where the head office of the undertaking concerned is situated in a country outside the
A firm will not be a member of a non-EEA sub-group unless it is1 also a member of a UK consolidation group. So the first step is to identify each undertaking in the firm'sUK consolidation group that satisfies the following conditions:(1) it isan institution, financial institution or asset management company whose head office is outside the EEA (a third country banking or investment services undertaking);(2) one of the following applies:(a) it is a subsidiary undertaking of a BIPRU
The firm should then identify each undertaking in the firm'sUK consolidation group that satisfies the following conditions:(1) it is an institution, financial institution or asset management company whose head office is outside the EEA (a third country investment services undertaking);(2) one of the following applies:(a) it is a subsidiary undertaking of a financial holding company in that UK consolidation group; or(b) a financial holding company in that UK consolidation group
(1) Subject to BIPRU 3.2.35 R, and with the exception of exposures giving rise to liabilities in the form of the items referred to in BIPRU 3.2.26 R, a firm is not required to comply with BIPRU 3.2.20 R (Calculation of risk weighted exposures amounts under the standardised approach) in the case of the exposures of the firm to a counterparty which is its parent undertaking, its subsidiary undertaking or a subsidiary undertaking of its parent undertaking provided that the following
If the Part IV permission of a firm contains a requirement obliging it to comply with this rule with respect to a third-country banking and investment group of which it is a member, it must comply, with respect to that third-country banking and investment group, with the rules in Part 2 of GENPRU 3 Annex 2, as adjusted by Part 3 of that annex.
(1) In accordance with Article 30 of the Financial Groups Directive (Asset management companies), this rule deals with the inclusion of an asset management company that is a member of a financial conglomerate in the scope of regulation of financial conglomerates. This rule does not apply to the definition of financial conglomerate.(2) An asset management company is in the overall financial sector and is a regulated entity for the purpose of:(a) GENPRU 3.1.26 R to GENPRU 3.1.36
Application of different sections of SUP 16 (excluding SUP 16.13 and SUP 16.15)27
If a firm has an investment firm consolidation waiver, it must ensure that any financial holding company in the UK consolidation group or the non-EEA sub-group that is the UKparent financial holding company in a Member State of a CAD investment firm in the UK consolidation group or non-EEA sub-group has capital resources, calculated under BIPRU 8.4.12 R, in excess of the sum of the following (or any higher amount specified in the investment firm consolidation waiver):(1) the sum
(1) 7An authorised fund manager should not invest the scheme property of a UCITS scheme in units of a closed end fund for the purpose of circumventing the investment limits set down in this section.(2) When required to assess whether the corporate governance mechanisms of a closed end fund in contractual form are equivalent to those applied to companies, the authorised fund manager should consider whether the contract on which the closed end fund is based provides its investors
In the FSA's view, Type A wholesale funding is likely to include at least funding which:(1) is accepted from a credit institution, local authority, insurance undertaking, pension fund, money market fund, asset manager (including a hedge fund manager), government-sponsored agency, sovereign government, or sophisticated non-financial corporation; or(2) is accepted through the treasury function of a sophisticated non-financial corporation which may be assumed to respond swiftly to
(1) To the extent that its IRB permission permits this, a firm permitted to use the IRB approach in the calculation of risk weighted exposure amounts and expected loss amounts3 for one or more IRB exposure classes may apply the standardised approach in accordance with this rule.3(2) A firm may apply the standardised approach to the IRB exposure class referred to in BIPRU 4.3.2 R (1) (Sovereigns) where the number of material counterparties is limited and it would be unduly burdensome
(1) 8This rule applies to:(a) an authorised fund manager (other than an EEA UCITS management company) of an AUT or an ICVC where such AUT or ICVC is a UCITS scheme or a non-UCITS retail scheme; and(b) a UK UCITS management company providing collective portfolio management services for an EEA UCITS scheme from a branch in another EEA State or under the freedom to provide cross border services.(2) The authorised fund manager has the power to retain the services of any person to