Japan

Screen Shot 2019-04-12 at 3.57.24 PMBy Thomas Granger and James Gaden, Walkers

 

Statistics from Japan over the past couple of years regarding private equity (PE) and venture capital (VC) investment have been impressive. In 2017, there was a 15x year-on-year increase in dry powder raised, a 30 percent increase in the number of funds launched and the value of deals executed more than double.

The drivers behind this growth are varied. Increased interest from overseas; and a shift in mindset to greater acceptance of PE among domestic investors, coupled with negative interest rates and lacklustre performance of other investments are named as contributing factors. However, Japanese domestic banks and pension funds allocating billions to the space is the headline that grabs most attention.

Not surprisingly, the interest of such allocators has had the knock-on effect of determining how some funds are structured, resulting in departures from global trends and the emergence of what has been referred to as the “private equity-style unit trust” (PESUT). This should not come as a surprise, as demands of large investors typically impact investment structure. However, there are questions as to whether the PESUT is a one-size-fits-all or if it is hammering a square peg into a round hole.

The gold standard — limited partnerships

Globally, the vast majority of PE funds remain structured as Cayman Islands limited partnerships. In Japan, this trend is no different.

There are numerous reasons for this, including that:

  1. laws governing partnerships have been enacted intentionally to facilitate the commercial demands of investors and managers in PE. The Cayman Islands Exempted Limited Partnership Law even permits the fiduciary duty of the general partner to be disapplied, and for remedies otherwise unenforceable as penalties to be enforced in an exempted limited partnership;
  2. partnerships are, fundamentally creatures of contract, governed by negotiated terms in the partnership agreement, rather than prescriptive rules of statute, or rules of equity in the case of trusts. This allows parties the flexibility to participate on a preferred basis that has come to characterise PE including by providing rights of: (i) co-investment; (ii) excuse; (iii) information rights; (iv) committee participation; and (v) distribution in-kind rights;
  3. it is simple for an investor to enter into a side letter allowing it to invest on terms specific to its own investment criteria without changing the investment terms of other investors; and
  4. partnerships are, typically, tax transparent “flow throughs” providing the benefits of capital gains treatment to investors and carried interest recipients.

The alternative — private equity-style unit trusts

In contrast, the PESUT, being a trust, is subject to often antiquated rules of equity that impose strict fiduciary duties on the trustee and do not permit the same level of flexibility.

This means that although a “commitment-and-call” mechanism can be readily drafted into a subscription agreement — and default remedies can be included in the documents if investors fail to fund (although there is a real risk that these are unenforceable in a trust) — a trustee cannot readily avoid its fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of the beneficiaries and to treat them equally. This can prevent the practical implementation of the terms lawyers draft into the documentation and preclude side letters (which almost always lead to one investor being preferred over others).

In a multiple investor fund, the result is that either that:

  1. the commercial terms that investors desire will be unavailable;
  2. the operator of the fund will not be able to exercise its discretion in the manner to which industry is accustomed;
  3. the documentation becomes extremely complicated; or
  4. a mixture of the above.

That said, a PESUT has a couple of characteristics that are irresistibly attractive to certain investors. When it comes to tax reporting, a trust can effectively be treated as a “blocker”, allowing for reporting to take place at the trust level. Trusts are also more familiar to certain investors. Japanese tax and regulatory considerations may also weigh in to favour PESUTs in certain situations.

The trade off

To oversimplify the balancing act of many complex issues, the question is whether your investors want (i) a private equity fund, or (ii) a trust that invests in private equity.

If investors can all invest on substantially identical terms (as in a “fund-of-one”); will not require side letters, excuse rights or otherwise unequal treatment; but are familiar with trusts, a PESUT may be ideal. With thoughtful drafting, certain traditional PE features can even be incorporated.

However, if it is imperative to implement the full functionality that the broader PE industry treats as standard for its collective investment vehicles, a PESUT may be unwieldy, expensive and impractical. A combination of the rigid rules of equity, and the strict fiduciary requirements of professional trustees to treat all beneficiaries can result in the structure and documentation being unnecessarily complex or, worse, economically unviable. Where the flexibility to meet the preferences of varied investors is imperative, a partnership is often still the preferred route.

 

Screen Shot 2018-10-23 at 1.54.36 PM

 

 

W: www.walkersglobal.com

E: thomas.granger@walkersglobal.com
E: james.gaden@walkersglobal.com

T: (65) 6603 1694, (852) 2596 3433

Related Articles by Firm
Crypto and blockchain fundraising – 2019 market update
Ever since the introduction of bitcoin more than a decade ago, we have seen the expansion of the cryptocurrency ecosystem, with over 2,000 cryptocurrencies in existence today and growing daily ...
Venture capital flourishes in the MENA region on a strong offshore foundation
The recent announcement of Uber Technologies Inc’s acquisition of its Middle Eastern based competitor, Careem, in a cash and stock transaction worth US$3.1 billion, has renewed the spotlight on the burgeoning venture capital market in the Middle East and ...
Venture capital in Southeast Asia — 2018 review
As the preeminent venture capital and private equity practice in the offshore legal arena, Walkers continues to see record activity levels in venture capital fund raisings and fund establishments in Southeast Asia ...
A review of Hong Kong 2018 listing reforms
Hong Kong has emerged as the top IPO market globally ...
Redeeming failures — Lessons from the Ardon Maroon case
The recent case of Ardon Maroon Asia Master Fund (In Official Liquidation) serves as a stark reminder that it is critical that investment funds are built on properly considered, and expertly drafted constitutional documents, including the mechanics for redemptions ...
Smashing records — venture capital and PE in Asia
Private equity and venture capital financing grew by 37.6 percent in the region.
Cayman Islands schemes of arrangement — an alternative tool for cross-border restructuring
The Cayman Islands remains one of the premier jurisdictions to implement complex cross-border restructurings.
Related Articles
Ministerial Regulation removing back office services from the Foreign Business Operations Act announced
Certain back office service businesses will no longer require a foreign business licence.
Changes are coming!
Five factors to consider when reviewing your Canadian trademark strategy in 2019.
Forensic investigations, the role of corporate counsel and the rise of information governance
Head of Forensics – Erick Gunawan, discusses the Role of Corporate Counsel in the context of litigation or investigation and the increasing importance of information governance ...
Related Articles by Jurisdiction
Square pegs and round holes: Partnerships and trusts in Japanese PE fund structures
Statistics from Japan over the past couple of years regarding private equity (PE) and venture capital (VC) investment have been impressive ...
Chinese M&A goes under the radar
There is a greater focus on smaller, more strategic deals that attract less scrutiny from government officials ...
Latest Articles
Ministerial Regulation removing back office services from the Foreign Business Operations Act announced
Certain back office service businesses will no longer require a foreign business licence.
Changes are coming!
Five factors to consider when reviewing your Canadian trademark strategy in 2019.
Herbies goes to Shanghai FTZ
Herbert Smith Freehills is adding local law capabilities in China through a joint operation with Kewei Law Firm.