The purpose of this thesis is to investigate whether Danish tax and company regulations impose non EU compliant restrictions on the accessibility of the Danish market to foreign UCITS regulated collective investment schemes. The thesis builds on the hypothesis that the market share of the foreign collective investment schemes in the Danish market is relatively low compared to the situation in other EU member states, which is initially tested and verified, and that part of the reason for this situation is to be found in the Danish tax and company regulation and the requirements and limitations imposed hereby. Hence, the thesis presents the EU and its purpose, and identifies and examines the relevant framework and detailed regulation in the EU set forth to secure the fulfilment of the overall purpose of creating and maintaining an open market. The concepts of free movement of services, capital and payments as well as UCITS and the relevant rules and regulation regarding purpose, structure, organization, management, administration, investment limitations, marketing, reporting and approval are presented, and the framework and relevant limitations imposed hereby on the national implementation of rules and regulations are examined. The thesis examines how Danish company regulations implements the rules imposed through UCITS and whether Danish implementation is in line with UCITS. The thesis concludes that although most EU regulation is complied with, the investment limitation rules in some cases provide broader limitations than required by UCITS. It is concluded that although the limitations could result in unfair competition, this is not a practical result. The thesis examines how Danish tax regulations on collective investment schemes are constructed, and whether these impose limitations on access to the Danish market. It is found that Danish regulations make some structures more attractive than others, and in order to obtain this attractiveness the collective investment schemes have both to adhere to certain investment limitations and provide extensive reporting to Danish authorities. These limits and this reporting are not included in the general EU framework rules and are administratively complex to manage. It is concluded that especially the reporting requirements impose a practical barrier to the Danish market. Member states can be allowed to impose such a barrier, but it cannot go beyond what is needed to fulfil its purpose. It is found that this can be argued to be the case as the reporting is more granular than strictly needed. To provide further background to the understanding of the framework and regulation set forth by the EU regulation, the thesis examines 4 relevant verdicts by the EU court and puts into perspective how these can be related to the findings so far. The verdicts support the conclusions. It is concluded that Danish regulation is one of the reasons for the low market share of the foreign collective investment schemes in the Danish market.
|Uddannelser||Cand.merc.aud Regnskab og Revision, (Kandidatuddannelse) Afsluttende afhandling|