Related provisions for COLL 5.2.23A

101 - 120 of 200 items.

Search Term(s)

Filter by Topics

Filter by Modules

Filter by Documents

Filter by Keywords

Effective Period

Similar To

To access the FCA Handbook Archive choose a date between 1 January 2001 and 31 December 2004 (From field only).

PERG 8.31.4GRP
For example, it may be necessary for a person referred to in PERG 8.31.3G (1) or PERG 8.31.3G (2) to advise a client to sell all his assets for tax, legal or debt reduction reasons. However, it may not be necessary for him to recommend selling some investments and not others. Whether or not this is the case will depend on the circumstances in which the advice is given.
DEPP 6.5B.4GRP
(1) If the FSA considers the figure arrived at after Step 3 is insufficient to deter the individual who committed the breach, or others, from committing further or similar breaches then the FSA may increase the penalty. Circumstances where the FSA may do this include:(a) where the FSA considers the absolute value of the penalty too small in relation to the breach to meet its objective of credible deterrence;(b) where previous FSA action in respect of similar breaches has failed
PERG 9.11.1GRP

Table There are some frequently asked questions about the application of the definition of an open-ended investment company in the following table. This table belongs to PERG 9.2.4 G (Introduction).

Question

Answer

1

Can a body corporate be both open-ended and closed-ended at the same time?

In the FSA's view, the answer to this question is 'no'. The fact that the investment condition is applied to BC (rather than to particular shares in, or securities of, BC) means that a body corporate is either an open-ended investment company as defined in section 236 of the Act or it is not. Where BC is an open-ended investment company, all of its securities would be treated as units of a collective investment scheme for the purpose of the Act. A body corporate formed in another jurisdiction may, however, be regarded as open-ended under the laws of that jurisdiction but not come within the definition of an open-ended investment company in section 236 (and vice versa).

2

Can an open-ended investment company become closed-ended (or a closed-ended body become open-ended)?

In the FSA's view, the answer to this question is 'yes'. A body corporate may change from open-ended to closed-ended (and vice versa) if, taking an overall view, circumstances change so that a hypothetical reasonable investor would consider that the investment condition is no longer met (or vice versa). This might happen where, for example, an open-ended investment company stops its policy of redeeming shares or securities at regular intervals (so removing the expectation that a reasonable investor would be able to realise his investment within a period appearing to him to be reasonable). See also PERG 9.7.5 G.

3

Does the liquidation of a body corporate affect the assessment of whether or not the body is an open-ended investment company?

The FSA considers that the possibility that a body corporate that would otherwise be regarded as closed-ended may be wound up has no effect at all on the nature of the body corporate before the winding up. The fact that, on a winding up, the shares or securities of any investor in the body corporate may be converted into cash or money on the winding up (and so 'realised') would not, in the FSA's view, affect the outcome of applying the expectation test to the body corporate when looked at as a whole. The answer to Question 4 explains that investment in a closed-ended fixed term company shortly before its winding up does not, in the FSA's view, change the closed-ended nature of the company. For companies with no fixed term, the theoretical possibility of a winding up at some uncertain future point is not, in the FSA's view, a matter that would generally carry weight with a reasonable investor in assessing whether he could expect to be able to realise his investment within a reasonable period.

4

Does a fixed term closed-ended investment company become an open-ended investment company simply because the fixed term will expire?

In the FSA's view, the answer to this is 'no'. The termination of the body corporate is an event that has always been contemplated (and it will appear in the company's constitution). Even as the date of the expiry of the fixed term approaches, there is nothing about the body corporate itself that changes so as to cause a fundamental reassessment of its nature as something other than closed-ended. Addressing this very point in parliamentary debate, the Economic Secretary to the Treasury stated that the "aim and effect [of the definition] is to cover companies that look, to a reasonable investor, like open-ended investment companies". The Minister added that "A reasonable investor's overall expectations of potential investment in a company when its status with respect to the definition is being judged will determine whether it meets the definition. The matter is therefore, definitional rather than one of proximity to liquidation". (Hansard HC, 5 June 2000 col 124).

5

In what circumstances will a body corporate that issues a mixture of redeemable and non-redeemable shares or securities be an open-ended investment company?

In the FSA's view, the existence of non-redeemable shares or securities will not, of itself, rule out the possibility of a body corporate falling within the definition of an open-ended investment company. All the relevant circumstances will need to be considered (see PERG 9.6.4 G, PERG 9.2.8.8G and PERG 9.8.9 G). So the following points need to be taken into account.

  • The precise terms of the issue of all the shares or securities will be relevant to the question whether the investment condition is met, as will any arrangements that may exist to allow the investor to realise his investment by other means.
  • The proportions of the different share classes will be relevant to the impression the reasonable investor forms of the body corporate. A body corporate that issues only a minimal amount of redeemable shares or securities will not, in theFSA's view, be an open-ended investment company. A body corporate that issues a minimal amount of non-redeemable shares or securities will be likely to be an open-ended investment company. A body corporate that falls within the definition of an open-ended investment company is likely to have (and to be marketed as having) mainly redeemable shares or securities. However, whether or not the body corporate does fall within the definition in any particular case will be subject to any contrary indications there may be in its constitutional documents or otherwise.
  • Where shares or securities are only redeemable after the end of a stated period, this factor will make it more likely that the body corporate is open-ended than if the shares or securities are never redeemable.

6

Does "realised on a basis calculated wholly or mainly by reference to..." in section 236(3)(b) apply to an investor buying investment trust company shares traded on a recognised investment exchange because of usual market practice that the shares trade at a discount to asset value?

In the FSA's view, the answer is 'no' (for the reasons set out in PERG 9.9.4 G to PERG 9.9.6 G).

7

Does the practice of UK investment trust companies buying back shares result in them becoming open-ended investment companies?

In the FSA's view, it does not, because its actions will comply with company law: see section 236(4) of the Act and PERG 9.6.5 G.

8

Would a body corporate holding out redemption or repurchase of its shares or securities every six months be an open-ended investment company?

In the FSA's view a period of six months would generally be too long to be a reasonable period for a liquid securities fund. A shorter period affording more scope for an investor to take advantage of any profits caused by fluctuations in the market would be more likely to be a reasonable period for the purpose of the realisation of the investment (in the context of the 'expectation' test, see PERG 9.8 and, in particular, PERG 9.8.9 G which sets out the kind of factors that may need to be considered in applying the test).

9

Would an initial period during which it is not possible to realise investment in a body corporate mean that the body corporate could not satisfy the investment condition?

In the FSA's view, the answer to that question is 'no'. In applying the investment condition, the body corporate must be considered as a whole (see PERG 9.6.3 G). At the time that the shares or securities in a body corporate are issued, a reasonable investor may expect that he will be able to realise his investment within a reasonable period notwithstanding that there will first be a short-term delay before he can do so. Whether or not the 'expectation test' is satisfied will depend on all the circumstances (see PERG 9.8.9 G).
DTR 2.2.6GRP
It is not possible to prescribe how the reasonable investor test will apply in all possible situations. Any assessment should take into consideration the anticipated impact of the information in light of the totality of the issuer's activities, the reliability of the source of the information and other market variables likely to affect the relevant financial instrument in the given circumstances. However, information which is likely to be considered relevant to a reasonable investor's
BIPRU 3.7.2RRP

This table belongs to BIPRU 3.7.1 R

[Note: BCD Annex II]

Category

Item

Percentage

Full risk

Guarantees having the character of credit substitutes

Credit derivatives

Acceptances

Endorsements on bills not bearing the name of another credit institution

Transactions with recourse

Irrevocable standby letters of credit having the character of credit substitutes

Assets purchased under outright forward purchase agreements

Forward deposits

The unpaid portion of partly-paid shares and securities

Asset sale and repurchase agreements as defined in Article 12(3) and (5) of the Bank Accounts Directive

Other items also carrying full risk

100%

Medium risk

Documentary credits issued and confirmed (see also medium/low risk).

Warranties and indemnities (including tender, performance, customs and tax bonds) and guarantees not having the character of credit substitutes.

Irrevocable standby letters of credit not having the character of credit substitutes.

Undrawn credit facilities (agreements to lend, purchase securities, provide guarantees or acceptance facilities) with an original maturity of more than one year.

Note issuance facilities (NIFs) and revolving underwriting facilities (RUFs).

50%

Medium/low risk

Documentary credits in which underlying shipment acts as collateral and other self-liquidating transactions.

Undrawn credit facilities (agreements to lend, purchase securities, provide guarantees or acceptance facilities) with an original maturity of up to and including one year which may not be cancelled unconditionally at any time without notice or that do not effectively provide for automatic cancellation due to deterioration in a borrower's creditworthiness.

20%

Low risk

Undrawn credit facilities (agreements to lend, purchase securities, provide guarantees or acceptance facilities) which may be cancelled unconditionally at any time without notice, or that do effectively provide for automatic cancellation due to deterioration in a borrower's creditworthiness. Retail credit lines may be considered as unconditionally cancellable if the terms permit the firm to cancel them to the full extent allowable under consumer protection and related legislation.

0%
MIPRU 3.1.1RRP
2This chapter applies to a firm with Part IV permission to carry on any of the activities:(1) insurance mediation activity;(2) home finance mediation activity;1unless any of the following exemptions apply:1(3) in relation to insurance mediation activity, this chapter does not apply to a firm if another authorised person which has net tangible assets of more than £10 million provides a comparable guarantee; for this purpose:(a) if the firm is a member of a group in which there
BIPRU 7.1.5GRP
Positions in instruments which are non-trading book items should be treated under BIPRU 3 (Standardised credit risk), BIPRU 4 (The IRB approach) or BIPRU 13 (Financial derivatives, SFTs and long settlement transactions) unless deducted as an illiquid asset. If they fall into BIPRU 7.1.3R(2) or (3) they also give rise to a PRR charge.
COLL 6.6A.4RRP
An authorised fund manager of a UCITS scheme or a UK UCITS management company of an EEA UCITS scheme must:(1) ensure a high level of diligence in the selection and ongoing monitoring of scheme property, in the best interests of the scheme and the integrity of the market;(2) ensure it has adequate knowledge and understanding of the assets in which any scheme it manages is invested;(3) establish written policies and procedures on due diligence and implement effective arrangements
REC 2A.3.2GRP

The guidance in relation to the recognition requirements in the sections of REC 2 listed in Column A of the table below applies to an RAP in relation to the equivalent RAP recognition requirements listed in Column C and (if shown) with the modifications in Column B.

Table: Guidance on RAP recognition requirements

Column A

REC 2 guidance which applies to an RAP

Column B

Modification to REC 2 guidance for an RAP

Column C

Relevant RAP recognition requirement

REC 2.2.2 G to REC 2.2.7 G (Relevant circumstances and Outsourcing)

Reg 13

REC 2.3.3 G to REC 2.3.9 G (Financial resources)

Reg 14

REC 2.4.3 G to REC 2.4.6 G (Suitability)

In addition to the matters set out in REC 2.4.3 G to REC 2.4.6 G, the FSA will have regard to whether a key individual has been allocated responsibility for overseeing the auction platform of the UK recognised body.

Reg 15

REC 2.5.3 G to REC 2.5.20 G (Systems and controls and conflicts) and REC 2.5A (Guidance on Public Interest Disclosure Act: Whistleblowing)

Reg 16 and 17(2)(f)1

REC 2.6.26 G to REC 2.6.34 G (Safeguards for investors)

Reg 17

REC 2.7.3 G to REC 2.7.4 G (Access to facilities)

The FSA shall have regard to whether an RAP provides access to bid at auctions only to those persons eligible to bid under article 18 of the auction regulation.

Reg 17(2)(a) and1 20

REC 2.8.3 G to REC 2.8.4 G (Settlement and clearing services)

Reg 17(2)(d) and 21

REC 2.9.3 G to REC 2.9.4 G (Transaction recording)

Reg 17(2)(e)

REC 2.10.3 G to REC 2.10.4 G (Financial crime and market abuse)

Reg 17(2)(g)

REC 2.11.3 G to REC 2.11.4 G (Custody)

REC 2.11.4 G is replaced with the following for an RAP:

Where an RAP arranges for other persons to provide services for the safeguarding and administration services of assets belonging to users of its facilities, it will also need to satisfy the RAP recognition requirement in regulation 17(2)(h) of the RAP regulations (see REC 2A.2.1 UK).

Reg 17(2)(h)

REC 2.12.11 G to REC 2.12.12 G (Availability of relevant information)

REC 2.12.11 G to REC 2.12.12 G are replaced with the following for an RAP:

REC 2.12.11 G

In determining whether appropriate arrangements have been made to make relevant information available to persons engaged in dealing in auction products, the FSA may have regard to:

(1) the extent to which auction bidders are able to obtain information in a timely fashion about the terms of those auction products and the terms on which they will be auctioned, either through accepted channels for dissemination of information or through other regularly and widely accessible communication media;

(2) what restrictions, if any, there are on the dissemination of relevant information to auction bidders; and

(3) whether relevant information is, or can be, kept to restricted groups of persons in such a way as to facilitate or encourage market abuse.

REC 2.12.12 G

An RAP does not need to maintain its own arrangements for providing information on the terms of auction products to auction bidders where it has made adequate arrangements for other persons to do so on its behalf or there are other effective and reliable arrangements for this purpose.

Reg 17(2)(c)

REC 2.13.3 G to REC 2.13.6 G (Promotion and maintenance of standards)

Reg 18

REC 2.14.3 G to REC 2.14.6 G (Rules and consultation)

Reg 19

REC 2.15.3 G to REC 2.15.6 G (Discipline)

Reg 22

REC 2.16.3 G to REC 2.16.4 G (Complaints)

Reg 23
REC 2.9.3GRP
In determining whether a UK recognised body has satisfactory arrangements for recording the transactions effected on, or cleared or to be cleared by means of, its facilities, the FSA may have regard to:(1) whether the UK recognised body has arrangements for creating, maintaining and safeguarding an audit trail of transactions for at least three years (five years in respect of transactions carried out by members who are not incorporated in the United Kingdom if the UK recognised
FEES 6.7.6RRP
If a firm ceases to be a participant firm or carry out activities within one or more sub-classes4 part way through a financial year4 of the compensation scheme:4(1) it will remain liable for any unpaid levies which the FSCS has already made on the firm; and41(2) the FSCS may make one or more levies4 upon it (which may be before or after the firmhas ceased to be a participant firm or carry out activities within one or more sub-classes,4 but must be before it ceases to be an authorised
BIPRU 5.7.3RRP
Where a firm buys credit protection through a total return swap and records the net payments received on the swap as net income, but does not record offsetting deterioration in the value of the asset that is protected (either through reductions in fair value or by an addition to reserves), the credit protection must not be recognised as eligible.[Note: BCD Annex VIII Part 1 point 31]