Reporting obligations for prime brokers - AIFMD Provision: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{aifmdanat|DR91|}} | {{aifmdanat|DR91|}} | ||
===Applies to full {{aifmdprov|depositary}} [[delegation]]s of the safe-keeping function...=== | ===Applies to full {{aifmdprov|depositary}} [[delegation]]s of the safe-keeping function...=== | ||
Relevant where a {{aifmdprov|depositary}} delegates the custody/safekeeping function under Art {{aifmdprov|21(8)(a)}} to a {{aifmdprov|prime broker}}. Sets out the reporting that {{aifmdprov|prime broker}} acting as a delegated custodian has to make to the {{aifmdprov|depositary}}. It is the {{aifmdprov|AIFM}}’s responsibility to make sure this happens, and yes, it seems to be one of those regulations imposing an obligation on the parties to have a | Relevant where a {{aifmdprov|depositary}} delegates the custody/safekeeping function under Art {{aifmdprov|21(8)(a)}} to a {{aifmdprov|prime broker}}. Sets out the reporting that {{aifmdprov|prime broker}} acting as a delegated custodian has to make to the {{aifmdprov|depositary}}. It is the {{aifmdprov|AIFM}}’s responsibility to make sure this happens, and yes, it seems to be one of those regulations imposing an obligation on the parties to have a [[contract]] to do something, rather than simply mandating it as a matter of compulsory regulation. There should be a name for regulations like this. Other than just “bone-headed”, of course. | ||
===...does ''not'' apply to [[depo lite]]s=== | ===...does ''not'' apply to [[depo lite]]s=== | ||
''Not'' relevant in a [[depo-lite]] situation (which applies to certain {{aifmdprov|Non-EU AIF}}s, where there is not a {{aifmdprov|depositary}} in the first place, and delegation is not happening. When you think about it, it ''can’t'' really apply to a depo lite, since by definition there is no {{aifmdprov|depositary}} for the {{aifmdprov|prime broker}} to make any of these reports ''to''. | ''Not'' relevant in a [[depo-lite]] situation (which applies to certain {{aifmdprov|Non-EU AIF}}s, where there is not a {{aifmdprov|depositary}} in the first place, and delegation is not happening. When you think about it, it ''can’t'' really apply to a depo lite, since by definition there is no {{aifmdprov|depositary}} for the {{aifmdprov|prime broker}} to make any of these reports ''to''. |
Latest revision as of 13:29, 14 August 2024
AIFMD Anatomy™
view template
|
Applies to full depositary delegations of the safe-keeping function...
Relevant where a depositary delegates the custody/safekeeping function under Art 21(8)(a) to a prime broker. Sets out the reporting that prime broker acting as a delegated custodian has to make to the depositary. It is the AIFM’s responsibility to make sure this happens, and yes, it seems to be one of those regulations imposing an obligation on the parties to have a contract to do something, rather than simply mandating it as a matter of compulsory regulation. There should be a name for regulations like this. Other than just “bone-headed”, of course.
...does not apply to depo lites
Not relevant in a depo-lite situation (which applies to certain Non-EU AIFs, where there is not a depositary in the first place, and delegation is not happening. When you think about it, it can’t really apply to a depo lite, since by definition there is no depositary for the prime broker to make any of these reports to.
Don’t put this in the prime brokerage agreement
Assiduous lawyers might want this put in your prime brokerage agreement. Seeing as the natural counterparties to this agreement are the PB, on one hand, and the depositary or AIFM on the other hand (neither of which is likely to be a party to the prime brokerage agreement - usually that is the PB and the AIF itself), try to resist this.