Fund Structuring across the EU: “Why my jurisdiction is better than yours!”

Register here

Whether or not BREXIT is to blame, assets are being relocated and a number of European jurisdictions are seeing an influx of funds. As each European country has their own regulations, it seems that some countries may be changing their legislation to be more competitive!

Join us for a highly interactive session where we will bring a selection of panelists from different EU jurisdictions to make the case for “their” jurisdiction and “compete” against each other by comparing the pros and cons to convince the audience why their country is more attractive to invest, based on 3 scenarios we selected.

Scenario I: The US is a fertile market for investment in venture capital, private equity and publicly traded stocks and investments.  Foreign investors however, are rightly concerned about US tax and litigation entanglements.  One structure that facilitates these investments is to use a “blocker” entity that invests in the US and into which the non-US investors invest.

Issues encountered in this scenario:
● US withholding tax and FATCAUS estate and gift taxes and state inheritance taxes
● US accreditation and qualified investor requirements
● US AML and privacy rules
● Access to the US legal system for redress and resolution of claims
● US limitations on the use of finders and other unlicensed market participants

Scenario II: US investment managers see investment opportunities in the EU and UK, in both publicly traded securities and private placements

Issues encountered in this scenario:
● EU/UK taxes on returns — availability of treaties and reclaim procedures (US mutual funds will often shy away from EU investing because of the gauntlet they must run to secure tax reclaims).
● EU and local rules on private investment are confusing (to US investors)
● French (and other proposed EU) transaction taxes:  too much friction?

Scenario III: US investment managers see untapped markets in the EU to sell their US-based/managed investment strategies (such strategies may be US based and/or have a global footprint).

Issues encountered in this scenario:
● Reverse solicitation — does it work?
● Internet solicitation — where is the “line”?
● GDPR is incompatible with US SEC recording keeping rules applicable to US registered advisers.
● AIFMD/MFID Rules and use of Irish, Lux, or Cyprus pools and managers (with US advisers) to passport into Europe; the future of the UK in this regard?

Our panel will discuss what the applicable rules are, what the quantitative impact of the indigenous taxes is and what the costs for compliance are. If you are a fund manager or working with investors across Europe and the US this is a discussion not to be missed.

SPEAKERS:
● Raffaele Sansone, Associate, GIANNI, ORIGONI, GRIPPO, CAPPELLI & PARTNERS
● Jad Nader, Partner, NAUTADUTILH
● Greg Nowak, Partner, PEPPER HAMILTON (Moderator)
● Conor Durkin, Partner, MASON HAYES & CURRAN

TIME (EDT):
5:30 PM – 6:00 PM – Check in/Networking
6:00 PM – 7:30 PM – Program
7:30 AM – 8:00 PM – Networking

FEES:
EACCNY Member: Free
Non- EACCNY Member: Free