AGEFI Luxembourg - avril 2024

AGEFI Luxembourg 28 Avril 2024 Fonds d’investissement S elonAzad Zangana (cf. portrait), Senior European Economist & Strategist chez Schroders, la Banque d'Angleterre, plus prudente et désireuse d'observer de nouveaux signes de reflux durable de l'infla- tion, est moins susceptible d'être la première à réduire ses taux. La Banque d'Angleterre (BoE), la Réservefédéraleaméricaine(Fed) et la Banque centrale euro- péenne (BCE) ont chacune laissé leurs taux inchangés. Et à l'issue de leurs réunions de politiquemonétaire, les marchés s'attendent désormais de plus en plus à ce que toutes les trois abais- sent leurs taux en juin. Pour sa part, le Comité de politique monétaire (MPC) de la Banque d'Angleterre a décidé jeudi 21 mars de maintenir le taux directeur britannique inchangé à 5,25%pour le huitièmemois consécutif. Comme dans la zone euro et aux États-Unis, l'infla- tion ralentit au Royaume-Uni, mais le comité reste à l'affût de signes confirmant son refluxdurablevers le niveau cible. L'inflation annuelle au Royaume-Uni, à l'aune de l'indice des prix à la consommation, est passée d'un pic de 11,1% en octobre 2022 à 3,4% au mois de février. Il s'agit du plus faible rythme de hausse des prix depuis septembre 2021. La pression incitant laBoE à réduire ses taux d'intérêt s'accroît Alors que l'économie britannique est en récession, laBoE fait l'objet d'une pression croissante l'inci- tant à entamer l'assouplissement de sa politique. Après avoir laissé entendre dans un premier temps que les taux d'intérêt étaient voués à rester élevés pour unepériodeprolon- gée, le discours duMPC est passé à un scénario dans lequel les taux sont sus- ceptibles de baisser, tout en restant restrictifs. Toutefois, bien que leMPC ait pris acte de l'apaise- ment à court terme des pressions inflationnistes dans le compte-rendu de sa dernière réunion, il a également indiqué que les indicateurs de persis- tancede l'inflation restaient élevés. Dans l'ensemble, la décision de maintenir les taux inchangés n'est pas une surprise, et bien que le compte rendu du MPC laisse entrevoir une baisse des taux à plus courte échéance, rienne laisse présager d'un assou- plissement imminent. Le vote des membres du MPC a lui aussi légèrement évolué, le seul qui parmi eux prônait jusqu'ici un relèvement des taux s'étant désormais joint au consensus favorable au maintien des taux inchangés. Dans le même temps, un seul membre du comité composé de neuf personnes a voté (encore une fois) en faveur d'une réduction. Les anticipations du marché concernant lapremière baissedes tauxd'in- térêt sont passées ces dernières semaines d'août à juin, l'inflation étant ressortie inférieure aux prévi- sions de la BoE. Les prévisions de Schroders tablaient sur une baisse des taux d'intérêt de la BoE à partir de mai, mais il semble que cette dernière attende de déceler de nou- veaux signes confirmant l'apaisement des pressions inflationnistes, notamment dans le secteur des ser- vices. La prudence duMPC pourrait signifier que la première baisse interviendra unmois plus tard, c'est àdireenjuin,commel'anticipentactuellementlaplu- partdesacteursdumarché.Dèslors,nousavonséga- lement ajusténos prévisions etmisons désormais sur une première baisse en juin. Les marchés financiers semblent également se rallier au scénariod'unepremière baissedes tauxde laBCE et de laFedaumoisde juin. Schroders tablait sur une réduction des taux de la BCE en mars, un scénario quis'estrévélétropprécocesuiteaurésultatducomité de politique monétaire du Conseil des gouverneurs de la BCEplus tôt enmars. Malgré les projections de la BCE anticipant un retour de l'inflation au niveau cible à l'horizon de deux ans, le conseil a décidé d'attendre la disponibilité de nou- velles données confirmant le caractère durable de l'apaisement de l'inflation. Lorsde la sessiondeques- tions-réponsesdurantladernièreconférencedepresse de la BCE, sa présidente Christine Lagarde a laissé entendre que bien plus de données seraient disponi- blesd'icilaréuniondejuin,signeleplusfortàcestade que juin est perçu comme lemois décisif. En conséquence, nos prévisions mises à jour tablent sur une baisse des taux d'intérêt de la BoE et de la BCEenjuin,enphaseavecnosprévisionsconcernant la Fed, lesquelles sont confortées par le résultat de la réunion du FOMC qui s'est tenue le 25 mars. Nous continuons d'anticiper quatre baisses des taux de la BCE cette année pour un total de 100 points de base (pb), tandis que la BoE et la Fed devraient réduire leurs tauxde 75 pb chacune selonnos prévisions. La BoE, la BCE et la Fed procéderont-elles toutes les trois à leur première baisse des taux d'intérêt en juin ? By François MASQUELIER, Chair of ATEL R e-REFIT of EMIR? Even- tually, maybe not. We all knowwhy the European Commission had to review EMIR in what some are calling EMIR 3. The context and the problems, in another field of financial instru- ments, different fromOTC de- rivatives, encountered by certain energy companies during the post-Covid cri- sis prompted the European legislator to reconsider EMIR, which in any case, like any measure, would have been subject to review. Even if the tar- get was not the right one, they thought of reviewing and tightening EMIR. Fortunately, European treasurers managed to make it clear that these were bad ideas and pushed to preserve the sta- tus quo achieved by EMIR refit. "You don't change a winning team"... The best is (often) the enemy of good, a common-sense proverb when it comes to financial regulation Of course, it is customary to review regulations regularly, every three years, to ensure that they remain appropriate, effective, and relevant. EMIR is now in its third iteration...already. Time goes by and EMIR, especially since its "refit", has proved its resilience and effectiveness. Treasurers saw no reason to change it. However, economic circumstances and the problems of some energy companies in certain countries, short of liquidity to finance their collateral on hedging pro- ducts on regulated markets, prompted ESMA and the European Commission to become concerned about the situation and to want to review EMIR (which affects OTC, without collateral). To answer to the question: “why?” would be difficult. The story went from there, and poli- ticians wanted to act and show that they had taken the problem in hand. Unfortunately, they couldn't do so at the expense of the poor corporates (i.e. the "real economy"). That's why the voice of the cor- porates, represented by EACT, was so important and vital to the discussions. What might have been... The final texts on EMIR 3.0 (Regulation and Directive) as negotiated in trilogues were appro- ved atAmbassadors’ level (COREPER) inCouncil – paving theway for formal adoption of the agree- ment. It seems that the final provisions are ulti- mately favorable to treasurers, and that the changes initially anticipated or feared have been overlooked. It could have been a lot more compli- cated than what is likely to emerge from this review of EMIR. As a reminder, the stumbling blocks were: (1) the risk, for a few unfortunate words, of no longer being able to hedge centrally on behalf of a subsidiary and (2) finally, the obli- gation to report inter-company transactions, by withdrawing the exemption proposed/offered to treasurers (on request). The risk of losing delega- tion to banks. Many people focused on the third point, whereas the other three were just as impor- tant, if not more so. We also need to mention the definition of “hed- ging” and the “threshold” fixed could be reviewed and challenged by ESMA. So far, they have not been changed. However, we can suspect that it should come soon and the definition of hedging (whichwe consider as treasurers shouldbe aligned to IFRS9) could be challenged and restricted or that the requirements to justify the “hedging” qualifi- cation could be reinforced significantly. We must remain cautious as it is a never-ending story with financial regulations… Measures eventually proposed: - EUwill maintain the possibility for NFC to claim the hedging exemption at the group level (Article 10.3) – as per the current EMIR framework. - EUwill keep the intragroup reporting exemption for both NFC+ and NFC- (Article 9.1) as per the current EMIR framework – while introducing a new reporting obligation for NFC+, whereby the EU parent of an NFC+ which uses the intragroup exemption must report the latter’s net aggregate positions, everyweek, by class of derivatives to the national supervisor. - EUwill maintain the current regime for the dele- gation of reporting to banks by NFCs (Article 9) – where the liability for the reported information remains with the bank. What will be the next steps? Although due to be approved without discussion, I seems that some Member States intervened to raise objections, in principle to the failure of the final trilogue agreement to align with the negotia- tingmandate given to theBelgianPresidency regar- ding the proportionality framework for the active account requirement (changes in the trilogue text reflected in line 97 of the latest 4CT – Art. 7a(1) – change the functioning and scope of the Council’s proportionality framework). Nevertheless, it was understood the Belgian Presidencyhas not signaledany intention to change the text presented to Ambassadors – and the text will nowproceed to Lawyer Linguists for cleaning up ahead of final formal adoption in Council. The next key political step will be achieving sign- off from the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON) in the European Parliament. It therefore looks like EMIR reviewwill be finalized soon and before next Commission and Parliament election. The sign-off was expected for end of April 2024. Wait and see but let’s stay relea- sed, we have avoided a worse case scenario given hard advocacy from the treasury associations and EACT. A great achievement, we must admit. This proves that treasurers must remain vigilant, as legislative changes are not always rational or logical. However, they can have a significant impact on our peers. Failure to do so could lead to less favorable andmore restrictive regulations.We can therefore only praise the excellent work carried out by the European treasurers' association, with the support of its advisors. EMIR 3, eventually not a revolution for corporates Interview with Nicoletta MORSUT, Conducting Officer, FARAD I.M. F ARADI.M. offers specialized asset management services to institutio- nal clientswith the support of third-party advisors. Through advisory execution (ADEX), it integrates asset management with consultancy ser- vices, providing tailored solutions for high-profile clientele. This approach emphasizes customization, making it ideal formeeting the specific needs of institutional partners’ end customers. What distinguishing characteristics does this service offer? ADEX (Advisory Execution Service), is a unique asset management service tailored to institutional partners. It allows FARADI.M.’s teamtooffer high- value expertise by collaboratingwith external advi- sorswhilekeepingdirect accountability for portfoliomanagement. ADEX integrates pure asset man- agement with advisory services, providing customized solutions to institutional partners and inde- pendent consultants. Its open ar- chitecture approach grants access to portfolio management specialists, ensuring tailored solutions for the specific needs of our institutional partners and customers. What is the main value added by FARADI.M.? The main value added by FARAD I.M. is an efficient process in a fully compliant frame- work able to match client’s risk pro- file and investment policywith portfolio proposals and subsequent allocations. FARAD I.M. proposes a solid operational excel- lence in terms of investment compliance controls, transaction execution and followup, reporting and transparency. Could you provide a summary of the investment processmanagedby FARADI.M.? FARAD I.M. manages the investment process in two phases. Initially, in the contractual phase, FARAD I.M. and the advisor formalize their part- nership through a cooperation agreement. The ad- visor is then officially appointed case by case. In the operational phase, adedicatedoperatingmemoran- dum outlines the workflow for advice generation, evaluation, and execution. This phase includes pre- trade checks, trade executionandendswith theup- dates of the allocation. During the entire process, alignment with the client’s investment objectives and risk profile is guaranteed. Conclusion ADEXisasuccessasitallowsadvisorstoreducetheir costs on one side and to remain actively involved in theportfolioallocationconstructionof their clients on other side. FARAD I.M. has the CSSF license, the op- erational team, the IT tools & the control functions in place to implement suchaprocess. Thanks to the op- erational excellenceof FARADI.M. doing this for 15+ years,ADEXensuresalignmentwithclientneedsina fully compliant structure. TailoredWealth Management Solutions: ADEX www.FARAD-IM.com