Growth vs. regulation: can alternative investments win in this race?
But with rapid shifts comes growing pains. Regulatory hurdles and consequent operational inefficiencies threaten to slow the industry's speed. But what exactly is standing in the way, and more importantly, how can we clear the path for expansion?
Despite the continued growth of alternative fund management, structural challenges are pressuring innovation. The industry's struggles range from regulatory overload to outdated approaches to alternative investments. For example, frameworks like AIFMD II and SFDR updates are evolving, and AML/KYC regulations are becoming even tighter. Together, they are piling on compliance burdens across Europe.
The challenge is not just the fact that the number of rules is increasing; the main headache is their fragmented implementation across jurisdictions. Since the UK left the EU's single market, financial institutions now have to follow two different sets of rules. This makes compliance more expensive and operations more complicated.
AIFs that handle crypto funds face even more difficulties. One particular issue is the limited number of suitably licensed providers. Under MiCA, only CASP-licensed firms can offer services, yet many lack full capabilities or restrict the number of tokens they support.
The set of rules for traditional banking infrastructure is another major roadblock. Opening fund bank accounts, a process that from first glance should be easy and smooth, now frequently takes over a month due to heightened due diligence and risk aversion. Exceptions made of a few actors, European banks remain very cautious and conservative, as with such an approach, they often restrict fund managers' access to essential financial services.
Given these complexities, how can AIFs navigate them successfully? The key is to be proactive and build trust with clients through best practices. One powerful approach is to collaborate with compliant service providers and embrace regtech solutions. As regulatory burdens rise, regtech has become an essential tool, growing at almost 25% and helping more and more businesses worldwide adapt with ease.
Speaking more about transparency, AIFs must demonstrate strong governance and adherence to clear reporting. Embracing technology, for example, real-time reporting and blockchain-based record-keeping, can take their efficiency to the next level. They can also find smart contracts and tokenized fund shares as a way to make fund administration easier and increase liquidity. A report by BCG forecasts that the asset tokenization market could expand into more than a $16trn business opportunity by 2030, potentially representing 10% of global GDP.
Nevertheless, investor security does not rely solely on AIFs — it is a collaborative effort involving at least three parties: depositaries, custodians, and auditors. Each of them contributes to keeping investor assets safe. Depositaries and custodians protect fund assets by ensuring proper oversight, and auditors provide independent verification of financial statements, checking for accountability. This interconnected system acts as a safety net, and no single player bears the full burden — each layer should work properly and keep investors' assets secure.
A way out for a simpler, more organized industry is obvious — regulations should become more transparent. A big change for the industry would be eliminating redundant reporting requirements that add little value. For companies operating both in the UK and in the EU, the harmonization of regulations can also be highly beneficial. The alignment of laws will help the UK attract even more capital, increase market access, and remove barriers for European fund managers and investors.
Although, for now, regulation and other issues remain a headache for AIFMs, I believe that we are on a path to a better future. Lawmakers around Europe recognize this problem and agree that there is a need for more effective and easier regulation. That's why the EU initiative on law simplification is aimed to reduce 25% of the administrative burden for all companies, resulting in €37.5bn in administrative cost reduction at the end of this mandate.
Importantly, the framework is already changing through updates, such as the recent UK's Digital Securities Sandbox or the EU's MiCA framework. Both were introduced late last year to help institutions adopt these technologies more easily, paving the way for wider acceptance of tokenized securities and blockchain-based investments.
Julie Bourgeois is the Head of Legal and Compliance at 6 Monks, an alternative investment fund manager (AIFM).
"Growth vs. regulation: can alternative investments win in this race?" was originally created and published by Private Banker International, a GlobalData owned brand.
The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


New York Post
34 minutes ago
- New York Post
Boston Consulting Group fires rogue employees who worked on Gaza ‘relocation' plan
One of the world's largest consulting firms has fired two rogue employees who defied a company prohibition and led a 'small, off-the-books team' involved in crunching the numbers on the costs of relocating Palestinians from the Gaza Strip. Two partners involved in the project were fired in early June, according to the Financial Times. Their team reportedly worked on a proposal to transform postwar Gaza into a regional trading hub and were involved in modeling the cost of relocating a quarter of the Palestinian population. 'This work was explicitly prohibited, and BCG disavows it,' Christoph Schweizer, the CEO of Boston Consulting Group, wrote in a letter. He added that the partner responsible 'ignored a direct instruction and proceeded anyway, coordinating a small, off-the-books team and executing the work outside BCG systems and approvals.' 4 Boston Consulting Group, one of the world's largest consulting firms, has fired two rogue employees linked to a scheme to help 'relocate' Palestinians from Gaza. Sipa via AP Images 'Even if this was not in any way, shape, or form a formal BCG project, our association with it is real, deeply troubling, and reputationally very damaging,' Schweizer said. More than a dozen BCG staff worked on the effort, codenamed 'Aurora,' between October 2024 and late May of this year, including senior figures such as the firm's chief risk officer and the head of its social impact practice, according to FT. The work stretched over seven months and exceeded $4 million in contracted value. BCG's model included cost estimates for relocating more than 500,000 Gazans, with 'relocation packages' worth $9,000 per person, totaling around $5 billion, according to the FT. One scenario under 'voluntary relocation' proposed giving Gazans $5,000, subsidized rent for four years, and subsidized food for a year. The model assumed a quarter of Gazans would leave, and that 'three-quarters of those relocated would never return.' One person involved told the FT that 'there is no coercive element here and the plan is not incentivizing people to leave. The 25% is a 'plug number'. The people of Gaza will decide. It is not a plan to empty Gaza.' 4 More than a dozen BCG staff worked on the effort, codenamed 'Aurora,' between October 2024 and late May 2025, according to a report. AP BCG, which employs between 32,000 and 36,000 people globally in over 100 offices scattered across more than 50 countries, said the work was unauthorized. 'The lead partner was categorically told no, and he violated this directive. We disavow this work,' the company told FT last week. The firm added: 'We stopped the work, exited the two partners who led it, took no fees and launched an independent investigation.' Keep up with today's most important news Stay up on the very latest with Evening Update. Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters In his letter, Schweizer added: 'For many around the world, and in particular for those of you with Palestinian roots, this has been deeply painful and profoundly disappointing. We feel this too. And we deeply regret that we fell short — not only of our standards, but of the trust that you, our people, our clients, and our broader communities place in BCG.' The Gaza Strip is home to 2.1 million Palestinians — an estimated 80% of whom were registered as refugees who fled what is present-day Israel in 1947-48. The project was tied to the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), a group BCG had not previously disclosed its full involvement with. 4 BCG said the rogue plan to help Palestinians leave Gaza was 'reputationally very damaging.' AP Senior BCG executives reportedly held multiple discussions about the project, though the firm says its leadership was misled. GHF is a US-based group operating with the backing of both the US and Israeli governments to distribute humanitarian aid in the Gaza Strip. It was created to bypass traditional distribution systems including the United Nations and other aid organizations. But the group has attracted scrutiny in light of the fact that it operates under heavy Israeli military oversight. It also employs private security contractors in charge of managing crowd control. Since GHF started distributing aid, hundreds of Palestinians have reportedly been killed and thousands injured while seeking aid at its distribution sites, often as a result of Israeli forces firing into crowds, according to UN officials and Israeli media reports. Israel has claimed that armed Palestinians are firing at Gazans near the aid distribution sites. GHF has slammed the reports as 'inaccurate,' telling The Post: 'False allegations of attacks near aid distribution sites have unfortunately become a consistent pattern. Inaccurate reporting of events in the region hampers distribution of life-saving aid to those who need it most.' 'To date, there have been no incidents or fatalities at or in the immediate vicinity of any of our distribution sites,' GHF said in a statement. 'However, IDF is tasked with providing safe passage for aid-seekers to all humanitarian organizations operating in Gaza, including GHF. GHF is not aware of any of these incidents but these allegations are too grave to ignore and we therefore call on Israel to investigate them and transparently publish the results in a timely manner.' When news initially surfaced of BCG's involvement with GHF, long-time partner Save the Children, the UK-based charity, cut ties with the firm. 4 Palestinians line up to receive bags of flour distributed by the World Food Programme in Gaza City on June 26. AP The nonprofit's chief executive, Inger Ashing, reportedly told staff on Monday that the organization was 'appalled and deeply disturbed' to learn that BCG had modeled relocation plans for Palestinians. 'Following that, we suspended all ongoing work with BCG pending the outcome of their external investigation,' Ashing said, noting that the suspension began on June 13, shortly after BCG first acknowledged its work with the GHF. 'Save the Children suspended its pro bono partnership with the Boston Consulting Group (BCG) on June 13 pending a review by the firm into its processes that led to BCG staff carrying out unauthorized work with the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF),' the charity told The Post in a statement. 'Save the Children has repeatedly warned publicly that any militarized aid distribution system, such as that set up by the GHF, would carry catastrophic consequences, and put civilians attempting to access food at risk.' The charity told The Post that 'we continue to advocate for aid delivery in Gaza that is guided by humanitarian principles and by international humanitarian law, ensuring that assistance reaches those in need safely, with dignity, and free from political interference.' BCG isn't the only private firm distancing itself from GHF. Last week, banking giants UBS and Goldman Sachs both declined to set up Swiss accounts for GHF, Reuters reported last week. The Post has sought comment from BCG, UBS and Goldman Sachs.
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Europe's Clash With Musk's xAI Escalates on Grok's Rants
(Bloomberg) — The clash between Elon Musk's xAI ( empire and European officials is intensifying with leaders in Poland and Germany calling for more aggressive action against the company. Singer Akon's Failed Futuristic City in Senegal Ends Up a $1 Billion Resort Are Tourists Ruining Europe? How Locals Are Pushing Back Can Americans Just Stop Building New Highways? Denver City Hall Takes a Page From NASA Philadelphia Trash Piles Up as Garbage Workers' Strike Drags On German lawmaker Ralf Stegner, responding to antisemitic comments that xAI's chatbot Grok made Tuesday on X, said the posts 'must not be tolerated under any circumstances' and called for sanctions in an interview with the German newspaper Handelsblatt. Poland's government separately urged the European Union to investigate and possibly fine xAI following lewd comments made by Grok about the country's politicians. The EU is already investigating Musk's social media platform under a relatively new content-moderation policy known as the Digital Services Act and had been weighing a fine ahead of its summer recess in August. Bloomberg has reported that the regulator is considering calculating the fine by including revenue from Elon Musk's other businesses, including Space Exploration Technologies Corp. and Neuralink Corp., an approach that would significantly increase the potential penalties. A review specifically targeting Grok would expand the EU's actions against X and threaten to ratchet up tension between Europe and US President Donald Trump, who has repeatedly blasted the region for going after US tech companies. xAI didn't respond to requests for comment. The company said Tuesday that it was working to remove inappropriate posts on X after the antisemitic Grok comments drew widespread condemnation. 'Since being made aware of the content, xAI has taken action to ban hate speech before Grok posts on X,' the chatbot's account posted. Thomas Regnier, the EU spokesperson for digital affairs, said X is obliged to 'assess and mitigate any potential risks' stemming from Grok, which is integrated into its online platform. 'We follow developments closely, like with any other platform, and cannot speculate on potential next steps,' he said Wednesday in an interview with Bloomberg News. Musk announced in March that his xAI startup had taken over his social-media platform X, formerly known as Twitter. On Wednesday, X Chief Executive Officer Linda Yaccarino announced she was stepping down after two years on the job. Yaccarino was responsible for reversing an advertiser exodus from the platform, triggered in part by Musk's own erratic content moderation decisions and posts. She repeatedly had to defend her boss and the platform from critics who've pointed to a rise in violent content, antisemitism and misinformation on X. Johannes Schätzl, a lawmaker from Germany's junior coalition partner, called on the EU to finish its review of X's alleged violations under the Digital Services Act as quickly as possible, and in an interview with Handelsblatt accused Musk of using Grok 'to spread politically extreme content.' Poland's deputy prime minister Krzysztof Gawkowski said that, if X fails to stop the chatbot-fueled 'hate speech,' the bloc should have the option of disabling it for residents. 'We are entering a higher level of hate speech which is controlled by algorithms,' Gawkowski told the Polish radio station RMF FM. 'Turning a blind eye to this matter today, or not noticing it, or laughing about it — and I saw politicians laughing at it — is a mistake that may cost mankind,' he said. Grok drew specific criticism in Poland this week after it responded to user questions about the country's politicians with profanity-laced remarks about their personal life and appearances. Screenshots of the comments quickly spread on social media, fanning a public debate about the dangers of such content. Grok also stoked controversy in Turkey after targeting the nation's president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, in posts. Turkey's transport and infrastructure minister, Abdulkadir Uraloglu, told Bloomberg Wednesday that the comments by Grok were unacceptable. Turkey will ban X 'if necessary,' he said, unless steps are taken to prevent such content. Turkey wouldn't be the first. Brazil briefly took down X last year over hate speech and fake news. Bloomberg reported in February that European governments, reeling from Musk's political attacks, were comparing notes with Brazil President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. —With assistance from Konrad Krasuski, Patrick Donahue, Maxim Edwards and Gian Volpicelli. (Updates with comments from European Commission spokesperson in the sixth paragraph.) Will Trade War Make South India the Next Manufacturing Hub? 'Our Goal Is to Get Their Money': Inside a Firm Charged With Scamming Writers for Millions Pistachios Are Everywhere Right Now, Not Just in Dubai Chocolate 'Telecom Is the New Tequila': Behind the Celebrity Wireless Boom SNAP Cuts in Big Tax Bill Will Hit a Lot of Trump Voters Too ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Trump promised 200 deals by now. He's gotten 3, and 1 more is getting very close
At the conclusion of his first 100 days in office in late April, President Donald Trump made a stunning statement about his progress on tariff negotiations: He had completed trade deals with 200 countries. More than two months later, Trump has announced just three of those agreements – with China, the United Kingdom and Vietnam. So what happened? Wednesday marks the day that Trump had set three months ago as a deadline for all countries to reach a deal or face higher 'reciprocal' tariffs. Trump has since publicly acknowledged that pausing those 'Liberation Day' tariffs until July 9 left insufficient time to negotiate with practically every country around the world. Trump had initially expected to complete more trade deals by Wednesday's deadline, but in recent weeks he's been convinced that landing those deals can't happen more swiftly, sources familiar with the matter tell CNN. That's why his public rhetoric has shifted in recent weeks to saying he would send out letters that set higher tariffs on America's trading partners, effectively getting results on the board while talks continue. So Trump agreed to push the deadline back to August 1 to give countries that are close to a deal a little more time for talks – particularly the European Union, which is on the verge of announcing a trade deal with the United States. EU and US trade negotiators are nearing a framework agreement that would set in place 10% tariffs and lay out the parameters for extensive trade discussions going forward, according to three officials familiar with the matter. The progress in negotiations with the EU, in particular, was a key consideration in extending the deadline beyond July 9. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent pointed to the EU talks, as well as the view that several other key negotiations were in their final stages, as he advocated for more time, according to two people familiar with the matter. Trump still needs to sign off on any final agreement and talks between the two sides are ongoing, but the officials said the agreement would be announced before the end of the week. Olof Gill, trade spokesperson for the European Commission, confirmed in a press briefing Wednesday that EU trade negotiators are in active discussions with US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer and that a deal is expected to be announced in the coming days. The progress marks a dramatic turn in Trump's long-standing, long-public disdain for the EU, a view that served as the backdrop to months of frustrating and intractable trade discussions this year. But Trump's tone – and behind the scenes, the tenor and tempo of the negotiations – shifted dramatically in the weeks since he threatened 50% tariffs on the EU in a morning social media post in late May. That unexpected and dramatic threat sparked an immediate response from the EU and set the stage for an urgent effort to reach some form of an agreement before Trump's 'reciprocal' tariffs snapped into place. EU officials have been in the midst of briefing member countries about the framework and proposed negotiating process, one of the EU officials said, adding that despite the often-divergent equities of the bloc's nations, the deal has been presented as the best and likely only way to avoid a dramatic escalation in tariffs on August 1. Trump's negotiators have maintained a hardline on the EU's push for exemptions to sectoral tariffs already in place or forthcoming, the officials said. For instance, a push to reduce Trump's 25% tariff on autos is a central late-stage focus of the discussions, as has an effort to cut the 50% levies on steel. US negotiators have indicated some willingness to consider key EU industries and products for possible rate reductions, including airplanes, alcoholic beverages and some agricultural products. But it would require Trump's final sign-off, the officials said. EU officials have also pledged to significantly increase purchases of US energy and defense sector goods. If a deal can't be reached, the EU has vowed to introduce countermeasures targeting billions of dollars' worth of US exports to the bloc. Those retaliatory steps have been due to come into force on July 14. It is not yet clear if the EU will push back that date to account for Trump's extension of his 'reciprocal' tariffs deadline to August 1. 'If no agreement is reached by the stated deadline, the EU is prepared to activate targeted and proportionate countermeasures in defense of its legitimate interest,' Marie Bjerre, Denmark's minister of European affairs, reminded the European Parliament Wednesday, noting that there are limits to the bloc's patience. Trump has been frustrated by a lack of progress on trade. During a cabinet meeting Tuesday, he said his tariff threats have successfully brought trading partners to the table – but the deals other countries have offered the United States are unacceptable. 'They say … 'We will give you total access, and you don't have to pay any tariffs, but please don't charge us tariffs,' and we don't like that deal,' Trump said. 'We're not hard-line, but it's about time the United States of America started collecting money from countries that were ripping us off – ripping us off – and laughing behind our back at how stupid we were.' Trump this week has sent out several letters setting new tariffs, including 25% tariffs on Japan and South Korea. Other letters are expected to be publicized Wednesday. Other deals have been harder to come by. India has long been viewed as the most likely major partner to sign onto a framework with the US. But Indian trade negotiators have hardened their positions in recent days, according to US officials. India is also a member of the BRICS group, so it's unclear what Trump's 10% tariff threat on BRICS countries Sunday means for trade negotiations. South Korea had also been viewed for weeks as likely to reach an agreement, though Trump's auto tariffs remain a key sticking point in those talks, and Trump's letter on Monday may have thrown a wrench in those gears. Japan steadily moved further away from an outcome in recent weeks, and Trump cast significant doubt on talks that once seemed on a path to a certain agreement. Japanese trade negotiators, who just weeks ago were scrambling to lay the groundwork for an announcement by last month's Group of Seven summit, have delivered far more pessimistic messages in their public statements in recent days. Japan's Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba said Tuesday that despite 'earnest and sincere discussions,' Japan has been unable to reach a deal, according to remarks translated by CNN. 'We deeply regret that the US government has imposed additional tariffs and announced plans to raise tariff rates,' Ishiba said. Indonesia, Cambodia and Thailand have all delivered substantial offers to their US counterparts in the last two weeks in an effort to move to the front of the line for an agreement and are likely candidates for any near-term deal in the next few days, US officials said. Brazil has ramped up its efforts to secure an agreement, including bilateral talks at the end of last week designed to expand on an earlier offer to sharply reduce tariffs on certain US products, American administration officials said. The most prevalent point of contention among foreign trade teams has been a lack of clarity on what their US counterparts envision for any final agreement. But the biggest roadblock in the more expansive negotiations has been the existence – or promised imposition – of Trump's sectoral tariffs on autos, steel and pharmaceuticals, US officials said. CNN's Alayna Treene, James Frater and Anna Cooban contributed to this report. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data