Welcome to the series Our series of IFRS for Investment Funds publications addresses practical application issues that investment funds may encounter when applying IFRS. It discusses the key requirements and includes guidance and illustrative examples. The upcoming issues will cover such topics as fair value measurement, consolidation and IFRS 9 Financial Instruments. This series considers accounting issues arising from currently effective IFRS as well as forthcoming requirements. Further discussion and analysis about IFRS is included in our publication Insights into IFRS. In this issue: Liability vs equity classication for nancial instruments issued by investment funds Investment funds frequently issue shares or units with unique, entity-specic characteristics. As a result, a signicant effort may be required in applying the IFRS guidance to the contractual terms of these instruments to determine whether they should be classied as a liability or equity. This publication focuses on the classication of puttable instruments and instruments that impose on the entity an obligation to deliver a pro rata share of the entitys net assets only on liquidation (obligations arising on liquidation). These are the most common types of nancial instruments issued by investmentfunds. This issue covers the following issues arising from the application of IAS 32 Financial Instruments: Presentation. 1. Liability or equity? Where do you start the analysis? 2. When are puttable instruments and obligations arising on liquidation classied as equity? 3. How do you classify a component of an instrument that imposes an obligation only on liquidation? 4. How do you classify redeemable shares issued by umbrella structures? 5. When should a nancial instrument be reclassied between liability and equity? The scope of this publication is limited to non-derivative nancial instruments issued by investment funds. 2 | IFRS for Investment Funds 2012 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved. 1. Liability or equity? Where do you start the analysis? Shares or units issued by a fund are classied as a nancial liability or equity on initial recognition. The table below outlines the principal considerations for funds in determining whether an instrument meets the denition of equity or liability under the general denitions in IAS 32. Financial liability Equity Key features Contains a contractual obligation to transfer cash or other nancial assets. The contractual obligation may arise from a requirement to repay principal or to pay interest or dividends. In our view, such a contractual obligation could be established explicitly or indirectly, but it should be established through the terms and conditions of the instrument. In general, any contract that evidences a residual interest in the assets of an entity after deducting all of its liabilities. The issuer has no contractual obligation to deliver cash or another nancial asset. If settled in own equity instruments Settlement in a variable number of the entitys own equity instruments. Settlement in a xed number of the entitys own equity instruments. Features that generally point to liability or equity classication of an instrument or a component of an instrument Instruments with the following features may still be classied as equity if certain conditions are met (see Question 2): redemption is at the option of the instrument holder limited life of a fund fund liquidation is at the option of the instrument holder. Redemption is triggered by an uncertain future event that is beyond the control of both the holder and the issuer of the instrument. Non-discretionary dividends. Non-redeemable shares or units. No specic liquidation date. Discretionary dividends. Example 1 Non-discretionary dividends Fund B issues units that are not puttable and that give the unit holders a right to xed non-discretionary dividends each period and a pro rata share of the funds net assets on its liquidation. B does not have a limited life and its liquidation is not at the option of the unit holders. The units do not have any other features that would preclude equity classication. How does B classify the units? The unit issued by B is a compound instrument. The obligation to pay xed non-discretionary dividends represents a contractual obligation that is classied as a nancial liability in line with the general denitions in IAS 32. The obligation to deliver a pro rata share of Bs net assets only on its liquidation is classied as equity because the liquidation is neither certain to happen nor beyond the control of B. However, if there were no mandatory dividend requirement and dividends were entirely at the discretion of B, then the units would be classied wholly as equity providing all other criteria were met. IFRS for Investment Funds | 3 2012 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved. An entity assesses the substance of a contractual arrangement, rather than its legal form, when determining whether an instrument meets the denition of a nancial liability or equity. As a result, it is possible that instruments that qualify as equity for legal or regulatory purposes may be classied as liabilities for the purpose of nancial reporting. In our view, in assessing the substance of a contractual arrangement, factors not contained within the contractual arrangement should be excluded from theassessment. Economic compulsion should not be used as the basis for classication. Instruments that are often impacted and so may fail the denition of equity under IFRS include preference shares and classes of shares that have special terms and conditions. If it is determined at initial recognition that an instrument, or in certain circumstances a component, meets the denition of a nancial liability, then an investment fund applies the owchart below to determine whether the instrument, or a portion of it, should be presented as equity by exception. Presentation as equity by exception is required if: the instrument meets the denition of a puttable instrument (see Question 2); or the instrument, or a component, meets the denition of an instrument that imposes on the fund an obligation to deliver a prorata share of the net assets of the fund only on liquidation (see Question 2). Yes Is definition (ii) met part the instrument? for of The whole instrument is classified as equity by exception The whole instrument is classified as a liability That part is classified as equity by exception and the balance is classified as a liability No Yes No Yes Step 1 Is the financial instrument a in accordance with the general definitions in IAS 32? liability equity or Step 2 If the financial instrument is not equity in its entirety, then is it: (i) a puttable instrument; or (ii) an instrument or component that imposes an obligation to deliver a pro rata share of net only on liquidation? assets The instrument is equity in its entirety The instrument is a liability in its entirety The instrument is a compound instrument No further analysis under Step 2 is required Is the definition of (i) or (ii) met for the whole instrument? Is the definition of (i) (ii) met for the whole compound instrument? or Is definition (ii) met the entire liability component? for Is definition (ii) met for part of liability component? the The of the instrument definition of equity in accordance with the general requirements of IAS 32 is classified as equity. The remaining part is classified as a liability component meeting the The component of the instrument meeting the definition of equity in accordance with the general requirements of IAS 32 and the part of the liability component meeting the definition of (ii) are classified as equity. The remaining part is classified as a liability No No Yes No Yes The whole instrument is classified as equity by exception 4 | IFRS for Investment Funds 2012 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved. 2. When are puttable instruments and obligations arising on liquidation classied as equity? Puttable instruments and obligations arising on liquidation are dened as follows. Financial instruments that give the holder the right to put the instruments back to the issuer for cash or another nancial asset, or that are automatically put back to the issuer on the occurrence of an uncertain future event. Financial instruments that contain a contractual obligation for the entity to deliver to the holder a prorata share of its net assets only onliquidation. In this case, the obligation arises because liquidation either is certain to happen and is outside the control of the entity (e.g. a limited-life entity) or is uncertain but is at the option of the instrument holder (e.g. some partnership interests). Puttable instruments Obligations arising on liquidation Such instruments are classied as equity by exception under IAS 32 if they meet certain conditions that are summarised in the table below. The contractual terms and surrounding circumstances should be reviewed for each instrument to determine the appropriate classication. The criteria for meeting the exception are restrictive and a fund will have to meet all of them to classify the issued instruments as equity. Conditions required for equity classication Required for puttable instruments? Required for obligations arising on liquidation? Examples (on next few pages) 1 The nancial instrument entitles the holder to a pro rata share of the entitys net assets in the event of the entitys liquidation. Yes Yes 2 2 The nancial instrument belongs to the most subordinate class of instruments. Yes Yes 3 3a All nancial instruments in this most subordinate class have identical features. Yes See 3b 4 3b All nancial instruments in this most subordinate class have an identical contractual obligation to deliver a pro rata share of the entitys net assets on liquidation. See 3a Yes - 4 Apart from an obligation for the issuer to repurchase or redeem, the instrument: does not include any other contractual obligation to deliver cash or another nancial asset or to exchange nancial assets or nancial liabilities under potentially unfavourable conditions; and is not a contract under which an entity is or may be obliged to deliver a variable number of the entitys own equity instruments. Yes No 5 IFRS for Investment Funds | 5 2012 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved. Conditions required for equity classication Required for puttable instruments? Required for obligations arising on liquidation? Examples (on next few pages) 5 Total expected cash ows attributable to the instrument over its life are based substantially on: prot or loss; change in recognised net assets; or change in fair value of recognised and unrecognised net assets of the entity. Yes No 6 6 The issuer has no other nancial instrument or contract that has: total cash ows based substantially on prot or loss, change in recognised net assets, or change in fair value of recognised and unrecognised net assets of the issuer; and the effect of substantially restricting or xing the residual return to instrument holders. Yes Yes 7 The reason for the differences between the conditions for a puttable instrument and an instrument that imposes on the entity an obligation only on liquidation is the timing of settlement of the obligations. A puttable instrument can be exercised before liquidation; therefore, all contractual obligations that exist throughout its entire life are considered to ensure that it always represents the most residual interest. For an obligation that is settled only on liquidation, the focus is on obligations that exist atliquidation. Example 2 Pro rata share of net assets on liquidation Shares issued by limited-life Fund C and Fund D have the following features with respect to payments on liquidation. Fund C Fund D Fees payable on liquidation Fixed fee per unit Fixed fee per unit holder Calculation basis for a pro rata share of net assets Pro rata share of total net assets Pro rata share of specic portion or component of net assets How do the above features affect the classication of the units? IAS 32 states that a pro rata share of the funds net assets on liquidation is determined by: dividing the entitys net assets on liquidation into units of equal amount; and multiplying that amount by the number of units held by the nancial instrument holder. In our view, this means that each instrument holder has an entitlement to an identical monetary amount per unit on liquidation. Each feature of Ds units illustrated above results in unit holders not receiving an identical monetary amount per unit on liquidation and so precludes equity classication. C classies its units as equity providing that the remaining requirements are met. 6 | IFRS for Investment Funds 2012 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved. Example 3 Management shares:The most subordinate class The holders of the redeemable shares of Fund E are entitled to a pro rata share of Es net assets in the event of its liquidation. E has also issued a small amount of a different class of shares (management shares) to the fund manager; these shares are non-redeemable, have no entitlement to dividends and are the most subordinate class of instruments in liquidation. Can redeemable shares be regarded as the most subordinated class? IAS 32 does not preclude the existence of several types or classes of equity. A nancial instrument is rst classied as a liability or equity instrument in accordance with the general requirements of IAS32. That classication is not affected by the existence of puttable instruments or instruments that impose an obligation only on liquidation. As a second step, a fund considers whether a nancial liability also meets the exception for puttable instruments or instruments that impose an obligation only on liquidation and so should be classied as equity. In this example, the redeemable shares meet the denition of a liability in IAS 32. Also, in our view they fail the exception for puttable instruments because even a small amount of management shares that are subordinate to redeemable shares means that such redeemable shares are not subordinated to all other classes of instruments. The existence of a puttable feature in the redeemable shares does not in itself mean that the instrument is less subordinate than management shares. The level of an instruments subordination is determined by its priority in liquidation. In some instances, redeemable shares could be the most subordinated class e.g. when management shares have priority in liquidation and there are no other more subordinate instruments issued. In respect of puttable instruments, all nancial instruments in the class of instruments that is subordinate to all other classes of instruments need to have identical features to qualify for equity classication. In our view, this should be interpreted strictly to mean identical contractual terms and conditions, including non-nancial features such as governance rights, related to the holders of the instruments in their roles as owners of the entity. Differences in cash ows and contractual terms and conditions of an instrument attributable to an instrument holder in its role as non-owner are not considered to violate the identical features test, provided that the transaction is on similar terms to an equivalent transaction that might happen between a non-instrument holder and the issuing entity. Examples of contractual features that would violate the identical features test include: different rates of management fees; a choice for holders on issuance whether to receive income or additional units as distributions (such that the distributive or accumulative feature differs for each instrument after they are issued); different lock-up periods; and different currencies in which the payments are denominated. In our view, the following terms do not violate the identical features test because there are no inherent differences in the features of each instrument within the most subordinate class: administrative charges based on the volume of units redeemed before liquidation, as long as all unit holders in the most subordinate class are subject to the same fee structure; different subscription fees payable on initial subscription, as long as all other features become identical once the subscription fees are paid; a choice to receive income or additional units as distributions on each distribution date, as long as the same ability is afforded to all unit holders in the most subordinate class i.e. the choice is an identical feature; and a term contained in identical instruments that carry equal voting rights that caps the maximum amount of voting rights that any individual holder may exercise. IFRS for Investment Funds | 7 2012 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved. Example 4 Identical features test: Additional information rights Fund F issues redeemable shares that are the most subordinated class. Fund manager M holds 5% of the redeemable shares in F.M also has access to certain information rights in its role as a manager that are not granted to other holders of redeemable shares. Does such access to additional information mean that not all redeemable shares have identical features? If information rights are granted to M in its role as manager of the fund (and not in its role as owner), then they are not considered to violate the identical features test. Example 5 Contractual distribution of net accounting prot Unit Trust T issues redeemable units. In addition to the general redemption feature, T is contractually required to distribute to the holders the net accounting prot annually. How does an additional requirement to distribute the net accounting prot affect classication of redeemable shares? In our view, the requirement to distribute the net accounting prot annually is an additional obligation to deliver cash and, therefore, the redeemable units do not qualify for equity classication. Example 6 Total expected cash ows attributable to the instrument Fund G issues one class of redeemable shares that entitles each holder to a pro rata share of Gs net assets and that is the most subordinate class of instruments issued. Redemption amounts are based on net assets calculated in accordance with local GAAP (not IFRS). The redeemable shares do not contain any other contractual obligations to deliver cash. Are the total expected cash ows of the shares based substantially on prot or loss and change in net assets? Usually, to meet this requirement, the redemption amount is calculated with reference to net assets measured in accordance with IFRS. This is not the case in this example, because the redemption value of the shares is calculated based on local GAAP. Nevertheless, G may still satisfy this condition, depending on the circumstances. It may also be possible to argue that the effect of differences between local GAAP and IFRS is immaterial with regard to their application to G, or temporary and expected to converge over the life of the instrument, such that the total expected cash ows are based substantially on IFRS prot or loss or change in recognised net assets. In our view, the use of the terms expected and based substantially indicates that judgement should be exercised in determining whether the requirement is met in each specic situation, including consideration of how local GAAP and IFRS apply to the reporting entitys business and the terms of the instrument. 8 | IFRS for Investment Funds 2012 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved. 3. How do you classify a component of an instrument that imposes an obligation only on liquidation? The following guidance applies only to components of instruments that impose on the entity an obligation to deliver a pro rata share of its net assets only on liquidation. Puttable instruments are tested for equity classication as a whole (see owchart in Question 1). Instruments or components of instruments that meet the denition of a liability in accordance with the general requirements of IAS 32 and that impose on the entity an obligation to deliver to another party a pro rata share of the net assets only on liquidation are classied as equity if they meet the conditions set out in Question 2. If the instrument that imposes an obligation on the entity to deliver a pro rata share of the net assets only on liquidation also contains other contractual obligations, then these other obligations may need to be accounted for separately as liabilities in accordance with the requirements of IAS 32. For example, the following components could be present in an instrument: an obligation to pay non-discretionary dividends i.e. a nancial liability component; and an obligation to deliver a pro rata share of the net assets on liquidation. In such cases, a question arises about whether the second component can ever meet Condition 6 set out in the table in Question 2 that requires that the issuer has no other nancial instrument or contract that has total cash ows based substantially on the issuers prot or loss, change in recognised net assets, or change in fair value of recognised and unrecognised net assets. In our view, when evaluating such a component (an obligation arising on liquidation) for equity classication by exception, a fund should choose an accounting policy, to be applied consistently, on whether the term other nancial instrument includes: (i) other components of the evaluated instrument; or (ii) only nancial instruments other than the one that contains the evaluated component. If the funds policy is to view a mandatory dividend feature as another nancial instrument for this purpose, then equity classication of the obligation arising only on liquidation would be precluded for this component of the instrument because the mandatory non-discretionary dividends violate Condition 6 in Question 2 e.g. mandatory dividends based on prots. However, if the funds policy is to consider for this test only nancial instruments other than the one that contains the obligation arising on liquidation, then a mandatory dividend feature in itself would not preclude equity classication of the obligation arising on liquidation because this feature is part of the same instrument and it could not violate Condition 6 in Question 2. Example 7 Limited-life entity pays non-discretionary dividends Fund K is a limited-life entity. K issues units that are redeemable only on its liquidation. The unit holders are entitled to annual non-discretionary dividends equalling 90% of Ks prots and a pro rata share of the net assets on liquidation of K. How does K classify the components of the shares issued? The obligation to pay xed non-discretionary dividends represents a contractual obligation that is classied as a nancial liability (Component 1). The classication of the obligation to deliver a pro rata share of the net assets on liquidation (Component 2) depends on the accounting policy choice made by K. If K chooses accounting policy (i) above, then Component 2 is classied as a liability. If K chooses accounting policy (ii) above, and provided that all other criteria are met, then Component 2 is classied as equity. IFRS for Investment Funds | 9 2012 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved. 4. How do you classify redeemable shares issued by umbrella structures? The term umbrella fund structure is used in certain jurisdictions to describe a collective investment scheme that comprises an umbrella fund that operates one or more sub-funds. Investors buy instruments that entitle the holder to a share of the net assets of a particular sub-fund. The umbrella fund and sub-funds together form a legal entity, although the assets and the obligations of individual funds are fully or partially segregated. Each sub-fund usually has its own investment objectives, focusing on different markets. The analysis in this question applies only to instances in which the assets and obligations of each sub-fund are ring-fenced solely for investors of the respective sub-fund. The table below discusses the possible classication of puttable instruments and instruments that impose on the entity an obligation to deliver to another party a pro rata share of the net assets only on liquidation, issued by an umbrella fund structure. Type of nancial statements prepared Considerations Classication Individual nancial statements prepared by each sub-fund Each sub-fund assesses issued instruments for equity classication separately. Liability or equity Separate nancial statements of umbrella fund structure that include the assets and liabilities of the sub-funds that together form a single legal entity Instruments issued by the sub-funds are assessed for equity classication from the perspective of the umbrella fund structure as a whole. Instruments issued by each sub-fund cannot qualify for equity classication because they could not meet the prorata share of the entitys net assets on liquidation condition and, if they are puttable instruments, the identical features test. Liability Consolidated nancial statements with sub-funds as subsidiaries Instruments issued by sub-funds that qualify for equity presentation in the individual nancial statements of each fund and that represent non-controlling interests are classied as liabilities in the consolidated nancial statements. Liability Combined nancial statements prepared by an umbrella fund structure, expressed as prepared in accordance with IFRS In our view, puttable sub-fund instruments would not qualify for equity classication in the combined nancial statements for the reasons described above for both separate and consolidated nancial statements. Liability 10 | IFRS for Investment Funds 2012 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved. 5. When should a nancial instrument be reclassied between liability and equity? The classication of an instrument or its component parts as either a nancial liability or equity is made at initial recognition and, with the exception of puttable instruments and instruments that impose on the entity an obligation only on liquidation, is not generally revised as a result of subsequent changes in circumstances. However, a reclassication between liability and equity or vice versa may be required following changes to the contractual or effective terms of the instruments or changes in the composition of the reporting entity. Puttable instruments and instruments or components that impose on the entity an obligation only in liquidation are reclassied: to nancial liability from the date on which any of the equity classication criteria in Question 2 cease to be met; or to equity from the date on which all equity classication criteria in Question 2 are met. This indicates a continuous assessment model under which a fund re-assesses the classication whenever there are changes to the relevant circumstances e.g. changes to the capital structure, such as the issue of new classes of shares or redemptions of existing share classes. Puttable instruments or instruments that impose on the entity an obligation only on liquidation are measured on reclassication as follows. Reclassication Measurement Accounting for carrying amount adjustment From equity to nancial liability Liability is measured initially at the instruments fair value at the date of reclassication. Any difference between the carrying amount of the equity instrument and the fair value of the nancial liability at the date of reclassication continues to be recognised in equity. From nancial liability to equity Equity instrument is measured at the carrying amount of the nancial liability at the date of reclassication. No adjustment to the carrying amount. Accounting entries Reclassication from equity to nancial liability Assume that on the date of reclassication the carrying amount of an instrument previously classied as equity is 100 and its fair value is 90. The double entry on reclassication is as follows. Debit Credit Equity 1 90 Liability 90 Accounting entries Reclassication from nancial liability to equity Assume that on the date of reclassication the carrying amount of an instrument previously classied as equity is 100 and its fair value is 90. The double entry on reclassication is as follows. Debit Credit Liability 100 Equity 100 1 This example does not focus on different components of equity. IFRS for Investment Funds | 11 2012 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved. Other KPMG publications A more detailed discussion of the general accounting issues that arise from the application of IFRS can be found in our publication Insights into IFRS. In addition, we have a range of publications that can help you further, including: Illustrative nancial statements: Investment funds Illustrative nancial statements for interim and annual periods IFRS compared to US GAAP IFRS Handbooks, which include extensive interpretative guidance and illustrative examples to elaborate or clarify the practical application of a standard, including IFRS Handbook: First-time adoption of IFRSs New on the Horizon publications, which discuss consultation papers First Impressions publications, which discuss new pronouncements Newsletters, which highlight recent accounting developments IFRS Practice Issues publications, which discuss specic requirements of pronouncements Disclosure checklist. IFRS-related technical information is also available at kpmg.com/ifrs. For access to an extensive range of accounting, auditing and nancial reporting guidance and literature, visit KPMGs Accounting Research Online. This web-based subscription service can be a valuable tool for anyone who wants to stay informed in todays dynamic environment. For a free 15-day trial, go to aro.kpmg.com and register today. KPMGs Global Investment Management practice Our member rms combine their depth of local knowledge with our global networks cross-border experience to deliver practical, effective and insightful advice to our global investment management clients. Our professionals in Audit, Tax and Advisory are specialists in their elds and have deep experience in the issues and needs of investment management businesses. We offer professional services to a wide range of industry participants at a local, national and global level. Our clients include investment managers, wealth managers, fund administrators and service providers who focus on retail/mutual funds, hedge funds, private equity funds, real estate funds, infrastructure funds and other alternative investment funds (such as distressed debt and environmental assets), as well as sovereign wealth funds and pension funds. Acknowledgements We would like to acknowledge the principal contributors to this publication. They are Ewa Bialkowska and Arina Tomiste of the KPMG International Standards Group. 12 | IFRS for Investment Funds 2012 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved. Contacts Global investment management contacts Wm David Seymour Global Head Americas region KPMG in the US T: +1 212 872 5988 E: dseymour@kpmg.com Bonn Liu ASPAC region KPMG in Hong Kong T: +852 2826 7241 E: bonn.liu@kpmg.com.hk Tom Brown EMA region KPMG in the UK T: +44 20 7694 2011 E: tom.brown@kpmg.co.uk Neale Jehan Fund Centres Group KPMG in the Channel Islands T: +44 1481 741 808 E: njehan@kpmg.guernsey.gg Tony Rocker Infrastructure Funds KPMG in the UK T: +44 20 7311 6369 E: antony.rocker@kpmg.co.uk Jonathan Thompson Real Estate Funds KPMG in the UK T: +44 20 7311 4183 E: jonathan.thompson@kpmg.co.uk Mikael Johnson Hedge Funds KPMG in the US T: +1 212 954 3789 E: majohnson@kpmg.com Rustom Kharegat Private Equity Funds Sovereign Wealth Funds KPMG in the UK T: +44 20 7311 8847 E: rustom.kharegat@kpmg.co.uk John Hubbe Pensions KPMG in the US T: +1 212 872 5515 E: jhubbe@kpmg.com Gerold Hornschu Audit KPMG in Germany T: +49 69 9587 2504 E: ghornschu@kpmg.com Hans-Jrgen Feyerabend Tax KPMG in Germany T: +49 69 9587 2348 E: hfeyerabend@kpmg.com Alain Picquet Advisory KPMG in Luxembourg T: + +352 22 51 51 7910 E: alain.picquet@kpmg.lu James Suglia Advisory KPMG in the US T: +1 617 988 5607 E: jsuglia@kpmg.com Mireille Voysest Global Executive Investment Management KPMG in the UK T: +44 20 7311 1892 E: mireille.voysest@kpmg.co.uk IFRS for Investment Funds | 13 2012 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved. Fund Centres IFRS Working Group Andrew Stepaniuk Leader Fund Centres IFRS Working Group KPMG in the Cayman Islands T: +1 345 914 4315 E: astepaniuk@kpmg.ky Paul Reid KPMG in Australia T: +61 2 9335 7829 E: pmreid@kpmg.com.au Craig Bridgewater KPMG in Bermuda T: +1 441 295 5063 E: craigbridgewater@kpmg.bm Lino Junior KPMG in Brazil T: +55 213 515 9441 E: lmjunior@kpmg.com.br Peter Hayes KPMG in Canada T: +1 416 777 3939 E: phayes@kpmg.ca Vivian Chui KPMG in Hong Kong T: +85 22 978 8128 E: vivian.chui@kpmg.com.hk Manoj Kumar Vijai KPMG in India T: +91 22 3090 2493 E: mkumar@kpmg.com Frank Gannon KPMG in Ireland T: +353 1410 1552 E: fgannon@kpmg.ie Victor Chan Yin KPMG in Luxembourg T: +352 22 51 51 6514 E: victor.chanyin@kpmg.lu Winand Paulissen KPMG in the Netherlands T: +313 06 58 24 31 E: paulissen.winland@kpmg.nl Llewellyn Smith KPMG in South Africa T: +27 21 408 7346 E: llewellyn.smith@kpmg.co.za Patricia Bielmann KPMG in Switzerland T: +41 44 249 4884 E: pbielmann@kpmg.com Gareth Horner KPMG in the UK T: +44 131 527 6951 E: gareth.horner@kpmg.co.uk kpmg.com/ifrs 2012 KPMG IFRG Limited, a UK company, limited by guarantee. All rights reserved. The KPMG name, logo and cutting through complexity are registered trademarks or trademarks of KPMG International. Publication name: IFRS for Investment Funds Publication number: Issue 3 Publication date: February 2012 KPMG International Standards Group is part of KPMG IFRG Limited. KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International) is a Swiss entity that serves as a coordinating entity for a network of independent rms operating under the KPMG name. KPMG International provides no audit or other client services. Such services are provided solely by member rms of KPMG International (including sublicensees and subsidiaries) in their respective geographic areas. KPMG International and its member rms are legally distinct and separate entities. They are not and nothing contained herein shall be construed to place these entities in the relationship of parents, subsidiaries, agents, partners, or joint venturers. No member rm has any authority (actual, apparent, implied or otherwise) to obligate or bind KPMG International or any other member rm, nor does KPMG International have any such authority to obligate or bind KPMG International or any other member rm, in any manner whatsoever. The information contained herein is of a general nature and is not intended to address the circumstances of any particular individual or entity. Although we endeavour to provide accurate and timely information, there can be no guarantee that such information is accurate as of the date it is received or that it will continue to be accurate in the future. No one should act upon such information without appropriate professional advice after a thorough examination of the particular situation.