Search 
  Advanced
   
Knowledge
   
Author: Susan Gordon
Service Area: Financial Services
Date: November 2002
Country: Hong Kong

 

Funds & Financial Services Newsletter
Issue No.18 November 2002

SUMMARY OF CONTENTS

CHINA ANNOUNCES QFII SCHEME

On 7 November 2002 Beijing announced the Qualified Foreign Institutional Investors (QFII) rules which will allow access to the PRC A-share market, exchange traded government bonds, convertible bonds and corporate bonds to the following qualifying institutions:

  • foreign fund managers with over five years' experience;

  • insurance companies with over 30 years' experience with paid up capital of US$1 billion;

  • foreign brokerages with over 30 years' experience with paid up capital of US$1 billion; and

  • commercial banks which rank within the top 100 in the world by total assets.

In addition, all these institutions must have over US$10 billion under management.

Foreign investors will be required to deposit their funds into special yuan accounts at approved custodian banks. Foreign banks (with paid up capital of US$1 billion) whose branches have continuously operated in China for over three years may apply to become custodian banks. To attract medium to long term investments, priority consideration will be given to close-ended China funds or institutions whose pension funds, insurance funds or mutual funds have shown good investment records in other markets.

Qualifying institutions must appoint PRC securities companies to conduct securities trading activities and may appoint such securities companies for investment management. An investment amount quota system will be set up and qualifying institutions are required to apply for quotas, which are transferrable to other qualifying institutions. In addition there are lock-up periods (three years for close-ended China funds and one year for other qualifying institutions) for remittance of principal by the qualifying institutions. The State Administration for Foreign Exchange may adjust the periods for remittance of principal and profits according to China's foreign exchange balance.

Back to Top

UPDATE ON DEVELOPMENT IN THE PRC FUND MANAGEMENT INDUSTRY

With the rules for the establishment of Fund Management Companies with Foreign Investment having come into effect on 1 July 2002, the longawaited establishment of the first Sino-foreign joint venture fund management companies is close to becoming a reality. The China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) has approved the preparation of the establishment of a number of joint ventures and it is expected that further approvals will be announced shortly.

There is a two stage approval process with an initial 'preparatory' approval being given, the second stage involving an application to commence business once the preparation has been completed. The new fund management companies will then have to apply for approval of their first funds before these can be launched.

The initial joint ventures receiving first stage approval have been formed through the establishment of a new fund manager rather than by way of the acquisition of a stake in an existing PRC fund management company. Negotiations with the multiple shareholders in existing PRC fund management companies, together with completion of comprehensive due diligence, appear to be taking longer than negotiations to form a new entity with only one (or a few selected) PRC partner(s). Foreign investors may also find it easier to obtain an acceptable level of management control when negotiating the establishment of a new entity.

Other developments in the PRC funds industry include the prospect that the Securities Investment Funds Law will be passed in the near future. The scope of the law has been narrowed in recent drafts so that the law will not apply to venture capital and private equity funds.

Back to Top

SINGAPORE CONSULTATION ON NEW RETAIL HEDGE FUND GUIDELINES

The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) has announced that it will issue new guidelines for retail hedge funds by the end of this year. The new guidelines will be of interest to fund managers wishing to roll out retail hedge funds in Singapore. They will not apply to products offered to institutional and sophisticated investors as restricted schemes.

Under the proposed new guidelines, the previous required minimum subscription level (S$100,000) will be reduced to zero for capital-guaranteed hedge funds and S$20,000 for 'funds of hedge funds'. The minimum subscription level for other hedge funds will remain at S$100,000 per investor. The reforms mean that hedge funds will no longer be the domain of the wealthy.

The changes come as a result of discussions between the MAS and the industry and recognise the varying degrees of risk associated with different hedge fund products. They are also part of a broader push by the Singapore Government to foster the development of hedge funds and the financial services industry in general in Singapore.

The new guidelines also impose enhanced disclosure obligations for both retail hedge fund prospectuses and marketing materials. The guidelines have not yet been finalised and the deadline for comments on a public consultation paper has only recently closed.

Back to Top

SINGAPORE INTRODUCES COOLING-OFF PERIODS FOR COLLECTIVE INVESTMENT SCHEMES CONSTITUTED AS UNIT TRUSTS

To support the implementation of the Securities and Futures Act and the Financial Advisers Act (the remaining provisions of which came into operation on 1 October 2002), the MAS has released a package of notices and guidelines which will be phased in over the next year. The notices and guidelines detail new requirements under the new legislation and include administrative procedures and criteria for the grant of licences, 'know your client' and record keeping standards, requirements on information to clients and product information disclosure and guidelines on standards of conduct for financial advisers.

The package also includes a notice which implements cooling-off periods for individual investors in unit trusts. Listed unit trusts are exempt from the new requirements. The move comes as a result of increased concern over pressure selling and mis-selling.

Under the changes, which will take effect from 1 April 2003, investors will have seven days from the date of entering into a purchase agreement within which to exercise a right of cancellation. Refunds will be made at the dealing price immediately following receipt of the cancellation request. Where values have increased, only the amount originally invested must be refunded. Any excess must be retained in the unit trust. Refunds, though, must be made without any deduction for commissions or front-end load fees, and without penalty for terminating the investment prematurely.

Back to Top

NEW TAX EXEMPTIONS FOR VENTURE CAPITAL INVESTMENT IN AUSTRALIA

Australia is about to introduce new tax exemptions for venture capital investments designed to benefit and attract overseas private equity funds, financial investors and pension funds. The concessions will make investment in Australia more attractive to overseas markets and will apply to Australian venture capital limited partnerships, broadly along the lines of established limited partnership structures, Australian venture capital funds of funds and tax exempt residents of certain jurisdictions. The exemptions include tax flow-through of profits and losses of investment vehicles, to the underlying investors. It appears that the Australian Government has also accepted in principle that the 'carry' on a fund manager's portion of an investment should be taxed under capital gains tax rules rather than treated as income. As the capital gains tax rate for investments held for more than 12 months is half the top marginal income tax rate, this would be a big boost for the industry.

Back to Top

HONG KONG'S PROPOSED HEDGE FUNDS REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

The Securities and Futures Commission's (SFC) Consultation Paper on Guidelines on Hedge Funds Reporting Requirements drew a large number of submissions from fund managers, law firms (including Deacons) and industry groups. SFC authorised hedge funds will be required to comply with these Guidelines once they are finalised. The Guidelines are in addition to the disclosure requirements for traditional funds set out in Appendix E of the Code on Unit Trusts and Mutual Funds. With the first hedge funds expected to be authorised before the end of this year, the SFC should present its conclusions and the final Guidelines shortly. The key features of the proposed Guidelines and industry concerns and suggestions in relation to these features were:

  • Adoption of international accounting standards (IAS) for all hedge funds' financial reports: In order to promote consistency and enable meaningful comparison of hedge funds, the Guidelines propose that annual and semiannual financial reports be prepared using IAS. In the majority of the submissions to the Consultation Paper, concern was expressed that existing hedge funds which originate from the United States and which apply US GAAP would be discouraged from seeking authorisation in Hong Kong due to the additional costs associated with producing two sets of reports. It was suggested that the SFC should consider permitting exemptions to IAS, particularly for US GAAP as it is widely recognised as an acceptable accounting standard.

  • Quarterly reports to be issued in both English and Chinese one month after the relevant quarter-end: Many believed that it would be difficult for both single strategy hedge funds and funds of hedge funds to meet the time frame for quarterly reports. In addition there was concern that in general it would be too burdensome for managers to prepare reports in Chinese within the proposed one month time frame. It was suggested that the reporting deadline for quarterly reports be extended to 45-60 days after the relevant quarter-end and it was also suggested that the SFC require quarterly reports to be produced only in English.

  • Detailed portfolio review including performance and risk measures:

    - Disclosure of the top 10 holdings of a fund:
    There were objections to this requirement in a number of submissions on the grounds that such disclosure would be irrelevant and possibly misleading to investors since the information may be outdated by the time investors receive it. Alternative risk and return statistics were suggested in the submissions.

    - Disclosure of the Sharpe ratio as a performance statistic: In several submissions it was noted that the Sharpe ratio may be misleading to investors because it does not measure the downside risk of a fund. It was suggested that managers should be required to provide a footnote explaining its limitations or provide additional indicators of risk adjusted returns.

Back to Top

NEW EXEMPTIONS FOR SHORT SELLING IN HONG KONG

The Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) has gazetted rules (Rules) which introduce new exemptions for sections 80 and 80B of the Securities Ordinance (these exemptions are identical to those made under the Securities and Futures Ordinance, which has not yet come into force). The Rules will become effective on 15 November 2002. Section 80 prohibits uncovered short selling. The Rules extend the current exemptions from section 80 to all categories of market makers registered with the Stock Exchange and the Futures Exchange in the performance of market making obligations and hedging of market making positions. Section 80B sets out reporting and record keeping requirements for covered short selling transactions and the Rules introduce alternative means for sellers placing short selling orders pursuant to a stock borrowing and lending agreement to comply with section 80B. The SFC has advised that it will issue a revised Guidance Note on Short Selling Reporting and Stock Lending Record Keeping Requirements later this year.

Back to Top

ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING AND ANTI-TERRORISM MEASURES

Financial institutions in Hong Kong should be reviewing their money laundering procedures in light of the enactment of the United Nations (Anti-Terrorism Measures) Ordinance. Certain provisions of this Ordinance came into effect in August this year. The Ordinance makes financing of terrorists a criminal offence and requires the reporting of knowledge or suspicion of terrorist financing to the relevant authorities. The Financial Action Task Force also issued specific guidance in detection of terrorist financing by financial institutions in April this year. Regulatory authorities in Hong Kong circulate lists of terrorist suspects and non co-operative countries and territories to financial institutions.

Proposed rules in the United States will also have an impact on local and offshore hedge funds' anti-money laundering measures. The USA PATRIOT Act (which came into law in October 2001) contains provisions requiring financial institutions to establish anti-money laundering programs and in September 2002 the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network of the Treasury Department issued proposed rules extending the anti-money laundering program requirements to 'unregistered investment companies' including US hedge funds and certain offshore (non-US) funds. Offshore funds accepting a single US investor will be potentially subject to these rules.

Back to Top

HONG KONG SECURITIES AND FUTURES ORDINANCE UPDATE

In this issue we highlight the draft Financial Resources Rules (draft FRRs) under the new regime and also discuss practical considerations arising from the Securities and Futures Ordinance's (SFO) single licensing regime.

Financial Resources Rules: Essentially the draft FRRs were prepared to follow the Financial Resources Rules under the present securities regime, subject to some amendments including:

  • where a corporation is licensed for more than one regulated activity it will only need to comply with the highest of all applicable liquid capital and paid up share capital requirements.

  • it is proposed to replace the net tangible asset requirement for investment advisers with a liquid capital requirement. Following the consultation on the draft FRRs the SFC agreed that the transitional period for compliance by existing investment advisers would be six months after the SFO comes into force.

  • exempt dealers and exempt investment advisers that are not authorised institutions are required to comply with the FRRs within a six month period after the SFO comes into force (amended from three months, following the consultation). The draft FRRs also contain transitional provisions requiring sole proprietors and partnerships to comply with the 'paid-up share capital' requirement in relation to their capital accounts until such time as these persons have completed the process of incorporating and obtaining their new licences.

New SFO Licensing Regime: Practical Considerations and Corporate Restructuring: It will be necessary for all entities which are currently either registered or exempted from registration to apply to the SFC for a new licence during the two year transitional period commencing immediately after the SFO enactment date. Failure to apply for a new licence before the expiry of the transitional period will result in the deemed licensee ceasing to be licensed to carry on SFC regulated activities. The SFC is offering financial incentives for licensees to submit their application within the first year of the transitional period.

Under the existing licensing regime, an entity wishing to carry on different categories of regulated activities must obtain separate licences for each category of activity. With the availability of a 'single licence' under the new regime corporate groups with several entities holding duplicate licences may consider consolidating their businesses under one corporate entity holding a single licence covering multiple activities. There will be administrative and regulatory cost benefits for such a single licence company, including a saving in overall capital requirements.

There are, however, a number of other considerations and costs related to the implementation of a restructuring, including transfer issues in relation to client and other third party contracts (which may require novation depending on the terms of these contracts); employment issues; and potentially greater commercial and reputational risk with a single licence entity. Finally, other industry rules which are applicable to specific businesses and which restrict certain intermediaries to carrying on only one type of business will also need to be amended in order for those intermediaries to benefit from the single licence regime. For example, currently fund managers of authorised unit trusts or mutual funds must be engaged primarily in the business of fund management; stock exchange and futures exchange participants are required under the applicable exchange rules to carry on only securities dealing or futures dealing, respectively. It is not yet clear whether these provisions will be amended once the SFO is in force.

Back to Top

FINANCIAL SERVICES GROUP EXPANDS

We have recently expanded our team with the recruitment of a professional support lawyer, Nicky Won, and two paralegals, Peter Poon and Naomi Killough. Nicky is assisting us with enhancing our online knowhow database and in preparing client updates on topical issues. Nicky has had over nine years' legal experience advising on financial services regulations and corporate finance matters as well as general corporate advice. She has worked in private practice in Hong Kong and as Asian regional in-house counsel for a full service stockbroking group.

Naomi is a recent graduate of a US law school and is qualified to practise in Texas. Peter holds an MBA degree and has over 18 years' experience in the funds and financial services industry, including over 11 years' experience with the SFC handling applications for authorisation of investment products.

Deacons Financial Services Group from left to right: 
Naomi Killough, Nicky Won, Peter Poon, Cynthia Chung, Martin Lister, Michael Cheng, Susan Gordon, Scott Carnachan, Taylor Hui, Rory Gallaher, Janet Corstorphin, Jeremy Lam, Surine Li, Yvonne Chan, Stephanie Tsang, Karen Kaur, Christy Ho, Alwyn Li, Marie-Louise Li.

 

Whilst every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of this publication, it is intended to provide general guidance and not definitive legal advice.

Back to Top