Related provisions for PERG 9.8.6

1 - 20 of 26 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 9.9.2GRP
In the FCA view, this means that the reasonable investor must be satisfied that what he will get when he realises his investment is his proportionate share in the value of BC's underlying assets, less any dealing costs. In other words, that he is satisfied he will get net asset value. The investment condition focuses on the way the body corporate operates over time, and not by reference to particular issues of shares or securities (see PERG 9.6.3 G (The investment condition (section
PERG 9.9.3GRP
For the 'satisfaction test' to be met, there must be objectively justifiable grounds on which the reasonable investor could form a view. He must be satisfied that the value of BC's property will be the basis of a calculation used for the whole, or substantially the whole, of his investment. The FCA considers that the circumstances, or combination of circumstances, in which a reasonable investor would be in a position to form this view include:(1) where the basis of net asset valuation
PERG 9.9.4GRP
PERG 9.9.3 G (2)and PERG 9.9.3 G (3) refer to circumstances where the reasonable investor may be satisfied that he can realise his investment at net asset value because of arrangements made to ensure that the shares or securities trade at net asset value on a market. There may, for example, be cases of market dealing where the price of shares or securities will not depend on the market. An example is where BC or a third party undertakes to ensure that the market value reflects
PERG 9.9.5GRP
However, where there is a market, the FCA does not consider that the test in section 236(3)(b) would be met if the price the investor receives for his investment is wholly dependent on the market rather than specifically on net asset value. In the FCA's view, typical market pricing mechanisms introduce too many uncertainties to be able to form a basis for calculating the value of an investment (linked to net asset value) of the kind contemplated by the satisfaction test. As a
PERG 9.9.6GRP
The fact that the definition must be applied to BC as a whole (see PERG 9.6.3 G (The investment condition (section 236(3) of the Act): general)) is also relevant here. So, for example, in a take-over situation the fact that a bidder may be willing to provide an exit route for an investment at net asset value will be irrelevant within the context of the definition. This is so even if an investor invests in particular shares or securities in the knowledge or expectation or in anticipation
PERG 9.8.5GRP
The use of an expectation test ensures that the definition of an open-ended investment company is not limited to a situation where a holder of shares in, or securities of, a body corporate has an entitlement or an option to realise his investment. It is enough if, on the facts of any particular case, the reasonable investor would expect that he would be able to realise the investment. The following are examples of circumstances in which the FCA considers that a reasonable investor
PERG 9.6.1GRP
If BC comes within the definition of a collective investment scheme, the third element in determining whether it is an open-ended investment company is whether the 'investment condition' is satisfied. This condition is that, in relation to BC, a reasonable investor would, if he were to participate in the scheme:(1) expect that he would be able to realise his investment in the scheme, within a period appearing to him to be reasonable; his investment would be represented, at any
PERG 9.6.4GRP
In the FCA's view, and within limits, the investment condition allows for the possibility that a body corporate that is an open-ended investment company may issue shares or securities with different characteristics. Some shares or securities may clearly satisfy the condition whereas others may not. The FCA considers that a reasonable investor contemplating investment in such a body corporate may still take the view, looking at the body corporate overall, that the investment condition
PERG 9.7.3GRP
The reasonable investor is a hypothetical investor. The implications of this are that the test does not relate to actual investment by a particular person at a particular time or in relation to a particular issue of any class of shares or securities. In the FCA's view, what underlies the test is what a reasonable investor would think he was getting into if he were contemplating investment in a particular body corporate. In addition, because the investor is hypothetical, the investment
COBS 4.12.4RRP
  1. (1)

    3The restriction in COBS 4.12.3 R does not apply if the promotion falls within an exemption in the table in (5) below in accordance with (3)13.

  2. (2)

    A firm13 may communicate an invitation or inducement to participate in an unregulated collective investment scheme without breaching the restriction on promotion in section 238 of the Act if the promotion falls within an exemption in the table in (5) below in accordance with (3)13.

  3. (3)

    A promotion falls within an exemption in the table in (5) below if13:

    1. (a)

      it is made to or directed at only those recipients whom the firm has taken reasonable steps to establish are persons in the middle column of the table; and13

    2. (b)

      where the third column of the table refers to the need for a preliminary assessment of suitability, that assessment is undertaken before the promotion is made to or directed at the recipient13.

  4. (4)

    A firm may rely on more than one exemption in relation to the same invitation or inducement.

  5. (5)

    Title of Exemption

    Promotion to:

    Promotion of a non-mainstream pooled investment which is:

    1. Replacement products and rights issues

    A person who already participates in, owns, holds rights to or interests in, a non-mainstream pooled investment that is being liquidated or wound down or which is undergoing a rights issue. [See Note 1.]

    1. A non-mainstream pooled investment which is intended by the operator or manager to absorb or take over the assets of that non-mainstream pooled investment, or which is being offered by the operator or manager of that non-mainstream pooled investment as an alternative to cash on its liquidation;

    or

    2. Securities offered by the existing non-mainstream pooled investment as part of a rights issue.

    2. Certified high net worth investors

    An individual6 who meets the requirements set out in COBS 4.12.6 R, or a person (or persons) legally empowered to make investment decisions on behalf of such individual6.

    Any non-mainstream pooled investment the firm considers is likely to be suitable for that individual6, based on a preliminary assessment of the client's profile and objectives.

    [See COBS 4.12.5G (2).]

    3. Enterprise and charitable funds

    A person who is eligible to participate or invest in an arrangement constituted under:

    (1) the Church Funds Investment Measure 1958;

    (2) section 96 5or 100 of the Charities Act 2011;

    (3) section 25 of the Charities Act (Northern Ireland) 1964;

    (4) the Regulation on European Venture Capital Funds (‘EuVECAs’) or the RVECA Regulation (‘RVECAs’)1112; or

    (5) the Regulation on European Social Entrepreneurship Funds (‘EuSEFs’) or the SEF Regulation (‘SEFs’)1112.

    Any non-mainstream pooled investment which is such an arrangement.

    4. Eligible employees

    An eligible employee, that is, a person who is:

    (1) an officer;

    (2) an employee;

    (3) a former officer or employee; or

    (4) a member of the immediate family of any of (1) - (3), of an employer which is (or is in the same group as) the firm, or which has accepted responsibility for the activities of the firm in carrying out the designated investment business in question.

    1. A non-mainstream pooled investment, the instrument constituting which:

    A. restricts the property of the non-mainstream pooled investment, apart from cash and near cash, to:

    (1) (where the employer is a company) shares in and debentures of the company or any other connected company; [See Note 2.]

    (2) (in any case), any property, provided that the non-mainstream pooled investment takes the form of:

    (i) a limited partnership, under the terms of which the employer (or connected company) will be the unlimited partner and the eligible employees will be some or all of the limited partners; or

    (ii) a trust which the firm reasonably believes not to contain any risk that any eligible employee may be liable to make any further payments (other than charges) for investment transactions earlier entered into, which the eligible employee was not aware of at the time he entered into them; and

    B. (in a case falling within A(1) above) restricts participation in the non-mainstream pooled investment to eligible employees, the employer and any connected company.

    2. Any non-mainstream pooled investment, provided that the participation of eligible employees is to facilitate their co-investment:

    (i) with one or more companies in the same group as their employer (which may include the employer); or

    (ii) with one or more clients of such a company.

    5. Members of the Society of Lloyd’s

    A person admitted to membership of the Society of Lloyd's or any person by law entitled or bound to administer his affairs.

    A scheme in the form of a limited partnership which is established for the sole purpose of underwriting insurance business at Lloyd's.

    6. Exempt persons

    An exempt person (other than a person exempted only by section 39 of the Act (Exemption of appointed representatives)) if the financial promotion relates to a regulated activity in respect of which the person is exempt from the general prohibition.

    Any non-mainstream pooled investment.

    7. Non-retail clients

    An eligible counterparty or a professional client.

    Any non-mainstream pooled investment in relation to which the client is categorised as a professional client or eligible counterparty.

    [See Note 4.]

    8. Certified sophisticated investors

    An individual6 who meets the requirements set out in COBS 4.12.7 R, including an individual who is legally empowered (solely or jointly with others) to make investment decisions on behalf of another person who is the firm'sclient6.

    Any non-mainstream pooled investment.

    9. Self-certified sophisticated investors

    An individual6 who meets the requirements set out in COBS 4.12.8 R, including an individual who is legally empowered (solely or jointly with others) to make investment decisions on behalf of another person who is the firm'sclient6.

    Any non-mainstream pooled investment the firm considers is likely to be suitable for that client, based on a preliminary assessment of the client's profile and objectives.

    [See COBS 4.12.5G (2)]

    10. Solicited advice

    Any person.

    Any non-mainstream pooled investment, provided the communication meets all of the following requirements:

    (a) the communication only amounts to a financial promotion because it is a personal recommendation on a non-mainstream pooled investment;

    (b) the personal recommendation is made following a specific request by that client for advice on the merits of investing in the non-mainstream pooled investment; and

    (c) the client has not previously received a financial promotion or any other communication from the firm (or from a person connected to the firm) which is intended to influence the client in relation to that non-mainstream pooled investment. [See Note 3.]

    11. Excluded communications

    Any person.

    Any non-mainstream pooled investment, provided the financial promotion is an excluded communication.

    [See COBS 4.12.12 G and COBS 4.12.13 G.]

    12. [deleted]11

    13. US persons

    A person who is classified as a United States person for tax purposes under United States legislation or who owns a US qualified retirement plan.

    Any investment company registered and operated in the United States under the Investment Company Act 1940.

    The following Notes explain certain words and phrases used in the table above.

    Note 1

    Promotion of non-mainstream pooled investments to a category of person includes any nominee company acting for such a person.

    Note 2

    A company is 'connected' with another company if:

    • they are both in the same group; or
    • one company is entitled, either alone or with another company in the same group, to exercise or control the exercise of a majority of the voting rights attributable to the share capital, which are exercisable in all circumstances at any general meeting of the other company or of its holding company.

    Note 3

    A person is connected with a firm if it acts as an introducer or appointed representative for that firm or if it is any other person, regardless of authorisation status, who has a relevant business relationship with the firm.

    Note 4

    In deciding whether a promotion is permitted under the rules of this section or under section 238 of the Act, firms may use the client categorisation regime that applies to business other than MiFID or equivalent third country business. (This is the case even if the firm will be carrying on a MiFID activity at the same time as or following the promotion.)
DTR 5.3.3BUKRP
6The TD Major Holdings Regulation provides that:Recital 4The disclosure regime for financial instruments that have a similar economic effect to shares should be clear. Requirements to provide exhaustive details of the structure of corporate ownership should be proportionate to the need for adequate transparency in major holdings, the administrative burdens those requirements place on holders of voting rights and the flexibility in the composition of a basket of shares or an index.
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 FCA'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 FCA'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 FCA 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 FCA'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 FCA 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 FCA'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 FCA'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 FCA'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 theFCA'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 FCA'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 FCA'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 FCA'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 FCA'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).