Examining Compliance Requirements for Family Office Investment Funds under Alternative Investment Fund Managers
In the world of wealth management, the regulatory treatment and categorization of family offices differ significantly between the United States and Europe, particularly regarding the Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive (AIFMD) and the involvement of external capital.
In the United States, family offices are generally exempt from registration with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, provided they meet the criteria set forth in the "family office rule." This rule restricts family offices to managing only the wealth of family members, effectively excluding external capital. Therefore, U.S. family offices operate largely outside the scope of typical fund regulations, offering a lighter regulatory burden.
In contrast, European regulations under the AIFMD explicitly govern managers of Alternative Investment Funds (AIFs), including structures that might be used by family offices if they manage external capital. The AIFMD requires registration, authorization, and compliance with investor protection, transparency, and reporting standards for entities managing external funds.
However, pure single-family offices with no external investors are generally not captured by AIFMD. Once external capital is introduced, or if family offices operate structures open to outside investors, they likely fall under the AIFMD regime, requiring authorization as an Alternative Investment Fund Manager, with all accompanying regulatory obligations including reporting, risk management, and depositary oversight.
This contrasts with the U.S., where the involvement of external capital generally removes the family office exemption altogether, pushing such entities into regulated investment adviser status.
Europe also lacks a single defining legal framework for family offices, relying on a patchwork of national laws and EU regulations. This complex regulatory environment often complicates cross-border operations.
The evolution of U.S. family offices to resemble hedge funds could potentially contribute to systemic risks. The trend of hedge funds transitioning to the family office model has been observed since 2015, with some well-known former hedge fund managers returning capital to their outside investors and managing their money under the family office model due to increased transparency, disclosure, and regulatory compliance costs.
In Europe, this trend is also becoming apparent. Multi-family family offices, which manage the wealth of multiple families, are very likely to be caught by AIFMD. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and not necessarily those of AlphaWeek or The Sortino Group.
Reproduction of the article is subject to certain conditions and requires written permission from the publisher. This guest article for Hedge Funds is under the copyright of The Sortino Group Ltd.
[1] European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), "Q&A on AIFMD," 2018. [5] European Fund and Asset Management Association (EFAMA), "AIFMD Overview," 2021.
Family offices in the United States can manage only the wealth of family members without external capital, as they are exempt from registration with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. On the other hand, in Europe, regulations under the Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive (AIFMD) govern the managers of Alternative Investment Funds (AIFs), and family offices may be subject to these regulations if they manage external capital. Therefore, investing in family offices can follow different regulatory paths depending on their location, with technology playing a crucial role in managing and complying with these regulations across various jurisdictions.
