Setting up an alternative investment fund in Europe : a comparison of national maturity on countries

Abstract

It has been the aim of the European Commission for years to have UCITS Funds and NONUCITS funds to be regulated under two separate directives. As a result of this, on 22nd July 2013, the Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive (AIFMD) came into force with the main scope of regulating Alternative Investment Funds (AIFs). This meant that there wasn’t the need of having such type of funds licensed under the UCITS Directive. Subsequently, after this relentless amount of effort and after especially witnessing the harsh consequences of the recent financial crisis, it is essential that Alternative Fund Managers (AIFMs) and Administrators make the most out of the directive (AIFMD) such that, their decision of where to set up an AIF within EU member states promotes efficiency, consistency and effectiveness. The main aim of this study is to determine what may influence the decision of an AIF, AIFMs and Administrators to invest in one particular country instead of another. However, the broad scope of this study is to assess and analyse the level of maturity within Malta, Ireland, the United Kingdom, Luxembourg and Germany and therefore identify which country offers the most attractive environment for Alternative Investment Funds Throughout this dissertation, existing literature was analysed and assessed in order to discuss the level of different qualities within each above mentioned jurisdictions. Moreover, the creation and the use of a maturity matrix made it possible to carry out a fair and distinct comparison of the level of maturity between the chosen countries on all the specific qualities mentioned above. In this regard, Malta has been perceived as being the European Jurisdiction with the highest level of maturity.