Amendment to the rules governing the charging of fees and expenses to capital

The Financial Regulator has announced a change in its rules governing the charging of fees and expenses to capital in fixed income funds following a number of submissions from fund promoters. As a matter of law, funds are free to allocate expenses to income or capital as they choose. However, the Financial Regulator, as a matter of policy, precluded fixed income retail funds from charging fees and expenses to capital and it required that these be charged, in the first instance, to income, and only if there was insufficient income to cover these charges could they be set off against capital. The argument advanced by the Financial Regulator in support of this rule was that investors in a fund investing predominantly in debt instruments and money market instruments could not expect the same capital growth as may arise in the case of an equity fund and so the charging expenses to capital for this type of fund led to a greater risk of capital erosion.

In response to the submissions made by promoters seeking a relaxation of this policy restriction the Financial Regulator has acknowledged that the restriction is no longer necessary provided that the risks relating to the charging of fees and expenses to capital for fixed income funds are properly disclosed. With effect from 1 September 2010, all collective investment schemes will be permitted to charge fees and expenses to capital, provided that the following conditions are satisfied:

1. the articles of association or trust deed for the fund must provide expressly for the charging of fees and expenses to capital;

2. the prospectus must disclose the rationale for the policy and describe the effects of this policy, making it clear that capital may be eroded and that income will be achieved by foregoing the potential for future capital growth; and

3. the subscription application form must include a legend to the effect that unit holders should note that all or part of the fees and expenses will be charged to the capital of the fund and that this will have the effect of lowering the capital value of the investment.

In the case of fixed income funds, the following additional requirements must be satisfied:

1. a specific risk warning must be included to the effect that there will be a greater risk of capital erosion given the lack of potential for capital growth, a further warning of the likelihood that, due to capital erosion, the value of future returns would also be diminished;

2. if the priority of the fund is the generation of income rather than capital growth, this should be highlighted. Furthermore, the prospectus should include a statement that distributions made during the life of the fund must be understood by the investor as a type of capital reimbursement;

3. any income statement issued to investors where expenses have been charged to capital should include a statement to explain the effect of this accounting policy, including wording to the effect that the investor's capital amount has been reduced.

Similar statements and risk warnings should be included in the marketing documentation.

These changes are most welcome in an environment where investors are increasingly focused on receiving an income stream from their investments as the charging of expenses to capital is a way of maximising the level of distributable income in a fund.

Change in policy in relation to the use of names of sub-funds within umbrella funds

To date, the Financial Regulator has generally precluded funds from incorporating the name of an investment manager in the name of a sub-fund, except where the investment manager is part of the promoter's group.

From 1 September 2010 the Financial Regulator will allow the name of an investment manager to be included in the sub-fund's name provided that the name or brand name of the promoter is included in the name of the umbrella fund. Where a supplemental prospectus is issued in respect of a sub-fund, the promoter's name or brand name must be included on the cover of the supplemental prospectus.

This rule change is particularly important for promoters whose sub-funds are managed by a range of third party managers and who wish to identify and brand the sub-funds by reference to the names of those third party managers.

Both of these rules changes are significant and show the Financial Regulator's willingness to reconsider its rules in the light of the changing funds marketplace.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.