•  
• Tweet
•  
•  
•        Print
•  
•        Email
•  
•         Track Keywords

Peter Moore

Peter Moore, head of regulation & compliance for the IMS Group, comments on the suggestions made by AIMA:

“AIMA’s economic impact assessment of AIFMD implementation is an informed and timely reminder about the costs of regulatory change and that such costs are ultimately passed on to end-users which in the case of AIFMD are fund investors.

“All regulatory developments carry a cost. However, any new regulatory requirement should be directed towards an identified market failing and formulated upon an analysis that the benefits accruing from the new rules outweigh the costs of their implementation. The absence of an EU commissioned cost/benefit analysis at any stage of AIFMD’s development serves up one of the best examples of political interference with the regulatory environment. The mere perception that alternative funds presented systemic risk carried the day, on both sides of the Atlantic. Those perceptions are now adding to the cost of investing.

“While policy makers let industry participants and their customers down when they do not perform cost/benefit analysis and do not strive for consistency across regulatory regimes, industry participants can partially mitigate some of the costs of regulatory change by looking for synergy and efficiency in the systems and controls they have to meet the requirements imposed on them.” Corporate website: Source

- FG