Mediaboss Marketing

23 July 2021

Ganado Advocates

To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

The distribution of funds on a cross-border basis within theEuropean Union (the "EU") is the next important topic ofthe year for EU fund managers. The relatively new 'CBDFframework', which will come into force on 2 August 2021, willimpact alternative investment fund managers ("AIFMs") andUCITS management companies ("UCITS ManCos") as they willhave to ensure that marketing communications produced for fundsunder their management are compliant with this new framework. Thisarticle is aimed at: (i) providing a brief overview of the CBDFframework; and (ii) discussing the main challenges which AIFMsand/or UCITS ManCos may face once the framework is brought intoeffect.

Overview of the CBDF Framework

The 'CBDF Framework' is an EU legislative frameworkintended to facilitate the cross-border distribution of funds inthe EU by removing barriers to create a more competitive EUinvestment landscape. It is made up of two main legislativeinstruments - Directive (EU) 2019/1160 (the "Directive")and Regulation (EU) 2019/1156 (the "Regulation")supplemented by a Commission Delegated Regulation 2021/955 andguidelines issued by the European Securities and Markets Authority("ESMA") published on 27 May 2021. Most of thesubstantial provisions will apply as of 2 August 2021.

As a framework, it forms part of the capital markets union, aflagship initiative of the European Commission intended tostrengthen the European capital markets, which seeks to harmonisenational processes for the verification of marketing material bycompetent authorities and enables ESMA to monitor investment fundsmore closely. It allows managers to test the market and assess theappetite of potential investors for new investment strategies.Consistency regarding the way regulatory fees are determined willalso be introduced.

The main provisions of the CBDF Framework can be grouped underthe following five headings:

Main Challenges

The CBDF Framework is helpful to managers in certain respects,yet particular provisions require further clarification. The newrules will compel managers to decide whether to actively promote anew fund to potential investors or to rely on the reversesolicitation rule, but not to depend on both. The new frameworkindirectly imposes an 18-month ban on reverse solicitation if fundmanagers decide to pre-market a fund or sub-fund as a subscriptionwithin an 18-month period after the pre-marketing start date willautomatically be deemed to be marketing, triggering notificationrequirements. This is quite an unfavourable provision for fundmanagers. It is also unclear whether this automatic rule appliesonly within the member state where pre-marketing takes place orwhether it bans reverse solicitation anywhere within the EU.

Another provision that may be an issue for certain fund managersis the 36-month ban on pre-marketing of a de-notified fund withinthe member state. Managers are interested in launchingsuccessor/continuation funds, which increased in popularity in theprivate equity space over the pandemic, maybe hit by this avoidableharsh rule.

All the above could cause confusion and potentially damage EUinvestment. The industry hopes that national legislators andregulators tasked with the job of transposing the Directive intotheir respective national laws, by 2 August 2021, clarify thechallenges highlighted above by adopting narrow interpretations onthe bans. This may however result in differing views being adoptedby different member states which goes against the spirit of theCBDF Framework. Eventually, EU policymakers may need to revisit therules to resolve the issues altogether, as otherwise, barrierswithin the EU will continue to be present, compelling the EU toregress in its progress towards expanding the EU single market andcreating a capital markets union.

This article was first published in The Times ofMalta.

The content of this article is intended to provide a generalguide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be soughtabout your specific circumstances.

POPULAR ARTICLES ON: Finance and Banking from European Union

Read more:
Cross-Border Distribution Of Funds In The European Union - Finance and Banking - European Union - Mondaq News Alerts

He did not want to die until Brexit was reversed. These words were spoken at the funeral last week of my dear friend and former Observer colleague Dick Leonard.

Dick died a month ago at the ripe old age of 90. The speaker was his widow, Irne Heidelberger-Leonard, before a group of mourners who included the Labour leader Keir Starmer, to whom Dick had been something of a political mentor.

Dicks devotion to the European cause was such that he jeopardised his political career he was parliamentary private secretary to the Labour cabinet minister Anthony Crosland from 1970 to 1974 when he joined 68 other Labour rebels, led by Roy Jenkins, in voting in 1971 in favour of joining the European community, against Labour policy at the time. Yes, Labours attitude towards what is now the EU has always been a rollercoaster ride, and here we go again, with prominent Labour politicians lamely accepting a Brexit that is manifestly a disaster and needs to be reversed.

Why, even that prominent culprit and architect of the lying Leave campaign appeared to be having second thoughts about it all in his BBC Two interview last week. Is Brexit a good idea? No one on Earth knows, averred the shameless Dominic Cummings. Indeed, said the prime ministers former best friend, it was perhaps perfectly reasonable to say Brexit was a mistake.

Ill say it is perfectly reasonable. Many of us here on Earth know that only too well. But Cummings almost indicating that in delivering Brexit for Johnson he was merely acting in the capacity of a hired mercenary also told us that anyone convinced that Brexit was a good thing must have a screw loose.

The media are now replete daily with disaster stories. The Northern Ireland protocol is unworkable. The egregious Brexit minister Lord Frost makes this country a laughing stock every time he says the deal that the UK signed up to for the short-term political convenience of Johnson should be renegotiated on the grounds that the EU is being wait for it unreasonable! He calls to mind the Groucho Marx quip: These are my principles. And if you dont like them well, I have others.

One begins to wonder whether Cummings now thinks that, on top of all the other well-publicised prime ministerial gaffes, the chaos of Brexit may contribute to Johnsons downfall a significant signpost being the way freedom day on 19 July swiftly turned into fiasco day in the same week that the Northern Ireland crisis became wholly manifest. In the former case it did not need footballers to embarrass the government: just the chief executive of Marks & Spencer.

But back to my late friend Dick Leonard, with whom I often worked covering European matters when he was based in Brussels. Many of the problems brought about by the Brexiters might have been avoided if they had consulted the invaluable guides to the EU he jointly wrote for the Economist and later the publishers Routledge. In the 2016 edition of The Routledge Guide to the European Union, the authors Dick and another EU expert, Robert Taylor observed of the impending UK referendum: Not everybody would accept that it would be a win-win situation for both Britain and the EU if voters choose to remain, but it will assuredly be a lose-lose one if they decide to quit.

If the Brexiters had consulted the guide, they could have discovered what the customs union and the single market actually were, and what making the crass decision to abandon the hard-won privileges of membership would entail (privileges won, in the case of the single market, not least by their ostensible political heroine Margaret Thatcher). It beggars belief that, after the deed was done and the cabinet Brexiters were faced with reality, they had to have both institutions explained to them by our former ambassador to the EU, Sir Ivan Rogers.

Alas, as that astute observer Denis MacShane a former Labour minister for Europe recently pointed out, Johnson needs a permanent war with the EU to prove that the Battle of Brexit is not over. This in the name of a country that went to war in 1939 to save Europe, and whose prime minister, Winston Churchill, even proposed, in 1940, what would have in effect been a political union of the UK and France.

Above all, says MacShane who probably coined the term Brexit and certainly forecast the result of the referendum Johnson wants the main opposition, Labour, to say nothing about Brexit.

But the time has assuredly come, and those words of our friend Dick Leonards widow he did not want to die until Brexit was reversed will, I hope, stiffen Starmers resolve.

Read more from the original source:
Labour must say it out loud: Brexit needs to be reversed - The Guardian

As the first director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) who came up through the ranks, I have a clear understanding of what ICEs congressionally-mandated mission is, how its staff perform their national security work, and the need for clear priorities regarding immigration enforcement.

There are many threats and attempts to make America less safe, less secure, and less free. The hostile rhetoric towards law enforcement in general is at peak highs. The movement to abolish and defund police has already resulted in unprecedented crime in our largest cities. This desire to reject law and order, open our borders to public safety threats and disease, and to tolerate rampant illegal immigration is an attack on our safety and security, not to mention our freedom.

The Biden administration has nominated the Sheriff of Harris County, Texas, Ed Gonzalez, as the next ICE Director. As someone who sat in that chair and as someone who enforced immigration law for nearly 35 years as a border patrol agent and an ICE special agent, I can say without hesitation that Gonzalez is the wrong guy for the job.

His policies and rhetoric demonstrate very clearly his opposition to enforcing our nations immigration laws as currently written and enacted. This administration has already hobbled ICE and drastically reduced its arrest authority, which has resulted in the lowest numbers of arrests and removals in the history of the agency. This administration attempts to ignore federal law and fails to enforce any meaningful immigration law either on the border or within our country. Based on his time as Harris County sheriff, Gonzalez has given every indication that he agrees with these policies.

Our border is also in the middle of an unprecedented crisis, with the number of border apprehensions at an all-time high and that doesnt count the illegal aliens who escape apprehension every day. Yet ICE has the lowest number of arrests in its history. This isnt by accident, mismanagement, or incompetence: It is by design.

In the midst of the current border crisis and rise in crime across our country, ICE needs a strong and experienced leader at the helm. Gonzalez is neither of those things.

Just one month into office as Harris County sheriff, Gonzalez ended the countys nine-year 287(g) partnership with ICE, which provided for the safe removal of criminal aliens from communities.

He was a strong opponent of SB4, which banned sanctuary cities in Texas and required local officials to cooperate with federal immigration authorities. Gonzalez wrote op-eds in opposition; one can only imagine his policies on the ground.

When we fail to enforce the rule of law, criminal illegal aliens are undeterred from entering the country. The lack of border and immigration enforcement only drives more vulnerable people to put themselves at the mercy of criminal cartels, risking rape, robbery, and death.

This lack of enforcement results in continued human trafficking operations and drug smuggling, allowing drug cartels to make millions of dollars a day at the expense of our communities and taxpayers. Ending critical partnerships like 287(g) that are essential to keep communities safe was nothing more than a political move and showed total disregard for public safety and officer safety. Despite what Gonzalez has said in confirmation hearings, his actions indicate he does not believe in coordination of immigration enforcement to protect our nation from terrorists and drug smugglers.

Gonzalez was a vocal critic of ICE and enforcement of our federal immigration laws, despite having no experience in immigration or federal law enforcement. He is wholly unprepared to lead ICE.

Gonzalez running ICE would not only kill what little morale remains in ICE, but would render the agency inert, without actually disbanding it. His confirmation would mean there will be no meaningful enforcement of our nations immigration law, and that will result in more people coming illegally into the U.S.

The Senate should stand firm in favor of public servants who will restore our security and secure our borders.

Tom Homan is the former acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement and a senior fellow at theImmigration Reform Law Institute.

Follow this link:
Ed Gonzalez is the wrong pick to lead ICE | TheHill - The Hill

Congressman Mike Johnson talks about the news that ICE has bussed Haitian immigrants to Shreveport the news that there may be more to come.

More than 75 Haitian immigrants were dropped off late last week by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Shreveport officials say there may be more busloads to come.

Buses carrying the Haitians left them at downtown's SporTran Terminal. The arrival of the immigrants came with little or no warning to city government.

"This is a crisis," says Johnson, saying that he and Shreveport Mayor Adrian Perkins heard the news of the buses about the same time. "I told the mayor that he needs to call the White House and get President Biden's attention, like I and my Republican colleagues are trying to do. We could fix this mess today, but President Biden and his administration are doubling down on...their crazy policies."

Here's what Johnson told KEEL News on Monday morning:

"We're going to continue to see this surge of immigrants and illegal aliens dropped all over the country for the foreseeable future until the White House reverses course.

I was told by ICE that these people have been in custody for some time. They (ICE) got an inexplicable order from Washington to empty out the facilities."

The Congressman then expresses more frustration that, with the COVID Delta variant surging, nothing is know about the medical conditions of those being turned loose. "The (ICE) don't know anything. They told me that almost none of the people that their dropping off speak English, most have no money and no plans once they arrive at these destinations like Shreveport...or wherever else they're going. They have no picture ID, no verification of identity. Their not COVID tested when they come across the border. This is a crisis. There's no law and order and it look intentional."

Look: How Shreveport-Bossier Has Changed from 2007 to Now

Could This Empty Building Be the New Shreveport Police Headquarters?

View post:
Over 75 Illegal Immigrants Dropped in Shreveport, More on the Way - News Radio 710 KEEL

London At least 430 migrants and asylum seekers crossed the English Channel to reach the U.K. on Monday, the highest number to make the dangerous journey from Europe ever recorded, according to reports. The record daily crossings came as U.K. lawmakers debated an immigration bill that would make attempting the crossing even to make a legitimate asylum claim a crime.

The Nationality and Borders Bill, proposed by Prime Minister Boris Johnson's government and currently under consideration by parliamentarians, would continue to grant access to the U.K.'s asylum system for those who make authorized arrivals, on an airplane with a travel visa, for instance. But any person attempting to make an unauthorized entry into the U.K., like by crossing the English Channel on a small boat, would not be eligible for asylum in Britain, could be sent for processing to a "safe third country," and could face up to four years in jail.

Nearly 8,000 people have reached the U.K. in small boats so far this year, most coming ashore along the southern English coast, according to the BBC.

The Refugee Council, a British charity that works with asylum seekers and refugees, says between 9,000 and 21,600 people who currently qualify for refugee status no longer would if the law is passed.

"What the U.K. have attempted to do is to discourage people from entering the U.K. to claim asylum," Andy Hewett, Head of Advocacy at the Refugee Council, told CBS News. "If every other country in the world, certainly if every other Western country in the world, followed suit with similar legislation, then that completely undermines the 1951 Refugee Convention, the whole notion of responsibility-sharing, and our obligations under the convention that we should recognize people in need of protection."

Hewett said the bill would create a two-tier system, where some pre-authorized asylum seekers would have access to the refugee system while others who make unauthorized journeys to Britain would not.

Trending News

"The new Nationality & Borders Bill includes sweeping penalties for refugees who arrive spontaneously in the UK," the United Nations refugee agency in the U.K. said on Twitter. "The UK risks breaching commitments under the Refugee Convention that clearly protect the universal right to seek asylum and for refugees to access basic rights."

"There is an unacceptable rise in dangerous small boat crossings across the channel because of a surge in illegal migration across Europe," the U.K. Home Office said in a statement. "People should claim asylum in the first safe country they reach and not risk their lives making these dangerous crossings. We are continuing to pursue the criminals behind these illegal crossings."

Dr. Waheed Arian, a medical doctor who came to Britain as a refugee and has worked on the front line of the COVID-19 pandemic, published an open letter on Tuesday opposing the bill.

"Under this Government's proposed plans, I would not have been given the chance to become an NHS doctor, let alone learn English or study medicine at Cambridge University. I would have been classed as an 'illegal arrival', denied access to the asylum system, prosecuted for breaking the law, and summarily removed from the country," Arian wrote.

He's calling on British lawmakers to vote against the legislation.

"A person fleeing war or persecution will be criminalized if their arrival is not pre-authorized through, for example, a resettlement scheme. Most people running for their lives don't have the 'luxury' of requesting pre-approval. In Afghanistan, there was no 'legal' escape route available to me. I know too well that when your life is in danger, you don't stop moving until you feel safe," Arian wrote.

The proposed legislation has echoes of U.S. immigration policy under former President Trump, who sought to restrict asylum eligibility for those arriving at the border with Mexico.

The Trump administration tried to disqualify people who entered the U.S. without permission from getting asylum, and it also instituted a short-lived "zero tolerance" policy under which it criminally prosecuted people for entering without permission. If parents received criminal charges, they were separated from their children. A court struck down the first part of the policy, while the latter practice, which led to the separation of thousands of migrant families, was discontinued in the wake of mass public outcry.

Under Mr. Trump, the U.S. also brokered "safe third country" agreements with Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador in a bid to re-route asylum-seekers to these countries. Those deals have been scrapped by the Biden administration.

Camilo Montoya-Galvez contributed to this report.

See more here:
Record number of migrants and asylum seekers reach U.K. by boat in a single day - CBS News