German open-ended real estate funds and the ongoing reform debate | Practical Law

German open-ended real estate funds and the ongoing reform debate | Practical Law

German open-ended real estate funds have been successful for many years. However, the financial crises from 2004 to 2005 and from 2008 to 2009 created problems for these funds, which now require reform.

German open-ended real estate funds and the ongoing reform debate

Practical Law UK Articles 2-503-2448 (Approx. 9 pages)

German open-ended real estate funds and the ongoing reform debate

by Dirk-Reiner Voß, and Detlef Spranger, Salans LLP
Law stated as at 01 Sep 2010Germany
German open-ended real estate funds have been successful for many years. However, the financial crises from 2004 to 2005 and from 2008 to 2009 created problems for these funds, which now require reform.
This article is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to corporate real estate. For a full list of contents visit www.practicallaw.com/realestatehandbook.
Open-ended real estate funds formed in Germany have been successful for many years. They are regulated by the Investment Companies Act (Investmentgesetz) (InvG) and offer a high degree of protection for investment. In recent years, they attracted small private investors (for whom open-ended real estate funds were initially designed) and also German and international institutional investors. The aggregate volume of German open-ended real estate funds at their peak was in excess of EUR100 billion (as at 1 September 2010, US$1 was about EUR0.8).
In Germany, open-ended real estate funds hold about 13% of the assets managed by open-ended mutual funds (which totalled about EUR680 billion in March 2010). By contrast, the amount of assets invested in mutual funds managed by:
  • Equity funds is 30%.
  • Pension funds is 20%.
  • Mixed funds is more than 15%.
On an international scale, the success of German open-ended real estate funds has been an exception to the general rule. In other EU member states, open-ended real estate funds have failed to establish themselves as an important investment class (see box, Open-ended real estate funds in other EU member states). However, problems have been caused by financial crises in recent years, which have triggered the German government to propose reforms.
Against this background, this chapter considers:
  • The impact of the financial crises of 2004/5 and 2008/9.
  • The basic features of German open-ended funds.
  • The main elements of the proposed reforms.
  • The outlook for the legislative procedure.

The impact of the financial crises

German open-ended real estate funds were significantly affected by the financial crisis of 2004 and 2005. Under current law, open-ended real estate fund investors can request redemption of their shares at any time without giving notice (InvG), and in 2004 and 2005, institution investors used this option extensively. Consequently, several open-ended real estate funds faced liquidity problems and redemption was no longer available to investors. Others were forced to sell off properties.
This first crisis was followed by further closures triggered by the global credit crunch in 2008 and 2009. The closures again involved institutional investors withdrawing liquidity from the funds, which forced many funds to stop the redemption of shares and/or to sell off properties. Open-ended real estate funds that mainly issued their shares to small private investors such as the Deka funds or Commerz Real's Hausinvest were less affected.
As a consequence of these crises, there was a broad consensus that the legal framework for open-ended real estate funds required reform to stabilise the funds and improve protection, particularly of small investors. The right to redeem shares in open-ended real estate funds at any time and without notice was deemed not to fit with the long-term nature of property investments.
In May 2010, the Federal Ministry of Finance published (for discussion purposes), the Draft Act on the Improvement of the Investor Protection and the Functionality of the Capital Markets (Anlegerschutz- und Funktionsverbesserungsgesetz) (Discussion Draft). Private and institutional investors anticipated the suggested amendments by withdrawing about EUR1.4 billion from the funds. The famous funds Kanam Grundinvest and SEB Immoinvest, followed by CS Euroreal and other funds, were forced to close until further notice. Other funds stopped or reduced their investment programmes or sold properties.
Because of the market reaction and critics' arguments the government delayed its final decision on initiating the legislative process. Finally, in September 2010, the cabinet formally agreed on a considerably revised draft act (Government's Draft Act). This started the legislative procedure (see below, Outlook for the legislative procedure).
In the first half of June 2010, ten of the open-ended real estate funds were closed and had frozen the redemption of their shares. Those ten funds managed 30% of the EUR90 billion managed by the entire industry. Of those ten funds, three had been closed since October 2008. At the end of September 2010, the liquidation of the first fund, Kanam US-Grundinvest, was announced.

Basic features of German open-ended real estate funds

The institutional and regulatory framework of German open-ended real estate funds tries to ensure a high level of risk protection for investors. This is one of the main reasons for the success of these funds. The basic features of German open-ended real estate funds are examined below.

Separate asset pools without legal personality

The InvG regulates open-ended real estate funds. An open-ended real estate fund has no legal personality, but is a separate asset pool, which is funded by investors' contributions. The assets pooled in the open-ended fund are legally owned by the fund management company, which is the registered owner of the fund's properties and other assets. The fund management company holds the asset on trust for the investors.

Fund management companies

Only regulated investment fund management companies (Kapitalanlagegesellschaften) (KAGs) which are admitted and supervised by the German financial supervisory authority (Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht) (BaFin) can manage open-ended funds. These fund management companies must be organised as either a:
  • Stock corporation (Aktiengesellschaft) (AG).
  • Limited liability company (Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung) (GmbH).
Fund management companies must:
  • Have a minimum capital of at least EUR300,000, which is increased if the value of the managed assets exceeds EUR1.25 billion.
  • Meet special requirements concerning their internal organisation (for example, in relation to risk management and control) and their annual statements. In particular, they must have at least two managing directors with the necessary qualifications set out in the InvG.
In practice, fund management companies are mostly organised as German GmbHs. They are not usually owned by investors, but by commercial banks and insurance companies. Therefore, commercial banks play an important role in brokering fund sales, as these banks use their extensive network of branches throughout Germany as distribution channels.

Custodian bank

The management of an open-ended fund by the KAG is supervised and controlled by a custodian bank (Depotbank), which protects investors' rights and interests. All payments for the open-ended fund account must be made to and from a separate account that is held and controlled by the custodian bank. The KAG requires the consent of the custodian bank for a number of measures, including the:
  • Disposal of properties or shares in property-owning companies.
  • Encumbering of properties
  • Taking up of loans.
The custodian bank's control rights are secured by different methods, such as the requirement to register the approval right in relation to the disposal and/or encumbering of property in the land register.

Permitted assets

To reduce risks, open-ended funds can only invest in certain types of assets set out in the InvG.
Open-ended funds can only generally invest in rights in rem, that is the freehold ownership of properties and similar rights. This excludes, for example, an acquisition in leasehold. Under certain conditions, open-ended funds can also acquire shares in property-owning companies. One of these conditions is that the control rights of the custodian bank are secured by an agreement between the property-owning company and the fund.
Before acquiring a property, the open-ended fund must obtain an independent expert's property valuation. The acquisition can only proceed if the purchase price does not exceed the valuation price.
Open-ended funds must mainly invest in property that is (InvG):
  • Residential.
  • Commercial.
  • Mixed-use.
The fund contractually defines the geographical regions in which the fund can invest. The InvG generally allows international diversification and German open-ended real estate funds actively invest abroad. Currently, about 28% of assets managed by open-ended real estate funds are located in Germany. More than 50% of assets are located in other EU countries. To avoid conflicts of interest, an open-ended fund cannot buy properties from its KAG or a company that is affiliated to its KAG.
The InvG contains a number of provisions which are intended to achieve diversification of investment risks. For example:
  • No single property can have a value that is higher than 15% of the aggregate asset value of the whole fund.
  • The aggregate value of all single properties with a value higher than 10% of the aggregate asset value of the fund must not exceed 50% of the fund's net asset value.
German open-ended real estate funds traditionally favour assets in:
  • Office buildings, which comprise two-thirds of assets.
  • Commercial and gastronomy properties, which comprise 20% of assets.

Taking up of loans

Open-ended funds can only take up loans:
  • Under market conditions.
  • Of up to 50% of the aggregate value of the fund's properties.
Encumbrances on the fund's properties which secure loans cannot exceed 50% of the aggregate value of the fund's properties, and are only permitted with the custodian bank's consent (see above, Permitted assets).

Sale of assets

The sale of properties by an open-ended fund usually requires an independent expert's valuation (see above, Permitted assets).
This restriction does not apply if the fund is closed for redemption (see below, Emission and redemption of shares). In this case the assets can be sold under appropriate conditions to gain liquidity.

Emission of new shares and share redemption

Shares in the open-ended funds are backed by the properties and by the liquid assets held by the funds. Investors can buy shares at net asset value that are newly created, by contributing to the funds. Open-ended real estate funds are not companies, but are separate asset pools held and managed by the fund management company (see above, Separate asset pools without legal personality). A purchase of shares in the fund is therefore a contribution into the separate asset pool on an open-ended basis. Open-ended real estate funds have attracted many private investors. However, these funds can and have been set up of institutional investors. Private investors are commonly asked to pay an offering charge of about 5% on top of the purchase price.
Open-ended real estate funds must redeem the shares at the prevailing net asset value. Prices for the shares are quoted, and shares are regularly redeemed on a daily basis. Since 2007, the funds' contractual terms can stipulate that shares can only be redeemed once a month, if the total value of the shares submitted for redemption exceeds a contractually agreed threshold.
The shares are normally unlisted. The prices for redemption are based on regular valuations of the properties and liquid assets at that time. The value of any financial assets in the fund is determined according to its market price. However, a panel of experts establishes the value of each property. Currently, the whole portfolio must be evaluated on a rolling basis every 12 months. Newly acquired properties are valued at the purchase price for the first year following acquisition. This leads to staggered valuations of the entire portfolio.

Liquidity risk and instruments limiting this risk

Open-ended real estate funds can be exposed to liquidity risks, because a large part of their assets comprise illiquid real estate, whereas their shares are redeemable on a daily basis, which can trigger considerable need for liquidity.
The InvG takes this into account and provides various safety mechanisms to limit the risk of liquidity crisis, including that:
  • Funds must hold at least 5% of their assets in cash or other daily available financial instruments. InvG allows up to 50% of assets to be invested in this way.
  • Funds can maintain a leverage of 50% cent of the value of their real estate assets.
  • Funds can raise loans of up to 10% of their asset's value to finance share redemption.
In addition, the offering charge (see above, Emission of new shares and share redemption) and the staggered valuation of the properties (see above, Emission of new shares and share redemption) limit the attractiveness of frequent transactions.
If all these instruments fail, then as a final option (though frequently used in recent years) open-ended real estate funds can be closed. Open-ended real estate funds can delay the redemption of shares for up to one year if they lack sufficient liquidity. The period can be contractually prolonged for a further year. In this period, the funds must try to gain liquidity by selling off properties and other assets, or increasing the loans on their assets.

Main elements of the proposed reform

The frequent closures of open-ended real estate funds due to liquidity problems and a series of revaluations of the assets of open-ended real estate funds have considerably damaged the reputation of German open-ended real estate funds. This has given rise to reform plans, with the intention of:
  • Reducing the risk of closures of these funds.
  • Stabilising the asset value of the funds.
  • Improving the protection of fund investors.
The changes initially proposed in the Discussion Draft were significant and went far beyond any previous reform plans. Those suggestions by the Ministry of Finance have been harshly criticised by experts and market players. Many fund investors considered the proposals as a threat to their position, and therefore requested redemption of their shares, which has exacerbated the crisis. The Government's Draft Act takes into account several of those arguments. The main features of the proposed reforms are outlined below.

Discussed changes intended to reduce the risk of fund closures

The Government's Draft Act contains measures which are intended to reduce the risk of the closure of open-ended real estate funds. If adopted, the reforms would considerably change the character of these funds, particularly for non-retail investors.
Restrictions concerning the redemption of shares. Under the Government's Draft Act, the issue and redemption of shares in open-ended real estate funds would be subject to considerable restrictions. However, while the Discussion Draft provided that the issuance and the redemption of shares in open-ended real estate funds would only be possible twice a year, the Government's Draft Act takes a less restrictive approach as it allows, but does not make compulsory, the contractual fund rules to provide fixed-redemption dates.
However, the Government's Draft Act, like the Discussion Draft, proposes that the redemption of shares should generally be subject to a compulsory lock-in period of 24 months, that is, investors would have to invest their money in the portfolio for at least two years.
In addition, the Government's Draft Act proposes that, for another two years following the 24-month lock-in period, any redemptions should be subject to "redemption discounts" of 10% and 5% after the third and fourth year respectively. There is an exception, which has received much attention: these restrictions do not apply to withdrawings of up to EUR5,000 per month, and therefore funds can redeem shares without complying with lock-in periods and redemption discounts to the extent that the relevant investors did not ask for redemption payments above that figure. By establishing this exception, the government complied with critics questioning the future attractiveness of the investment product for typical retail investors.
Finally, the lock-in period will not apply to investors who made their investments before the fund rules are amended under the new law. Therefore, old investments can be redeemed in excess of EUR5,000 immediately, subject to the redemption discounts (see above).
No increase of the compulsory liquidity reserve. The Discussion Draft suggested an increase of the compulsory liquidity reserve of the funds from the current 5% to 15%. (At the same time, the Discussion Draft allowed for a reduction to zero, if certain requirements were met.) The government, however, decided in the Government's Draft Act not to follow this suggestion and proposes to explicitly order that the 5% liquidity reserve must be available for redemption of shares.
No compulsory listing of shares. Further, the Discussion Draft proposed that open-ended real estate funds would have to list their shares at a stock exchange in the EU. The intention was for investors to try to sell their shares at the stock exchange instead of submitting them for redemption. Again, the Government's Draft Act has not followed this proposal.

Changes in asset valuation

The reforms also propose changes in asset valuation. The Government's Draft Act provides for gradual changes including:
  • Reducing the period for revaluation from the current 12-month period to the period between redemptions under the fund rules if the fund rules provide for more frequent than annual redemptions.
  • Funds being obliged to ensure that no more than 30% of real estate assets remain unevaluated for more than one-third of the revaulation period.
The Discussion Draft had suggested that the open-ended funds' properties, and thereby indirectly the redemption price of the shares in these funds, should always be valued with a general discount of 10%. Critics deemed this proposal as an expropriation, which is commonly believed to be the main reason for the drain of liquidity in May 2010. Again, the Government's Draft Act did not adopt this proposal.

Compulsory dissolution of a fund

Finally, the reform proposes a staggered mechanism in the event that a fund is closed:
  • A fund must refuse an investor's request for redemption of shares, if the fund does not dispose of sufficient liquidity. If the liquidity issue cannot be solved within six months, the fund must start generating liquidity by selling real estate.
  • In the second year after the closure, the fund must increase its efforts to generate sufficient funds by selling assets and may sell its real estate with a 10% discount on the value established by the regular valuations of the properties.
  • After the second year the fund is granted another period of six months in which properties can be sold with a 20% discount.
  • If the fund has not generated sufficient funds after 36 months, the mandate of the fund managing company legally expires and the fund must be liquidated.
This also applies if the fund cannot redeem shares for more than three times within five years.

Outlook for the legislative procedure

It is expected that readings of the draft act will be held between November 2010 and January 2011, and that the act will be adopted in March 2011 at the earliest.
Although the Government's Draft Act takes into account many of the critics' arguments, industry, investors and the political opposition will probably propose further amendments. In particular, the minimum thresholds for the compulsory lock-in and the details of the compulsory dissolution are likely to be subject to further discussions.
Depending on the procedures and the transitional provisions, the new rules might not become relevant before the beginning of 2012.

Open-ended real estate funds in other EU member states

The most developed European open-ended real estate funds markets (other than the German market) are in the UK, Spain and Portugal. In most open-ended real estate funds (including in German funds), the majority of investors are retail investors. Member states with a specific regime for open-ended real estate funds class them as a regulated investment product. These regimes ensure a higher level of investor protection than for other real estate investment products. The legislative framework usually contains a set of important investor protection rules (similar to the German approach) including:
  • Risk spreading rules.
  • Borrowing restrictions.
  • A minimum redemption frequency, that is, the minimum period of time between redemptions.
  • Mechanisms to ensure sufficient liquidity.
  • Control by an independent depository, that is, an independent bank or company which holds funds or securities deposited by others.
  • Valuation by independent valuers.
To achieve the same goals, member states often use different mechanisms. The first steps have been taken to achieve harmonisation of the national legal regimes of open-ended real estate funds. The European Commission published the Expert group report – Open ended real estate funds, March 2008, which provided a complete analysis of the non-harmonised retail fund landscape and recommended EU-level actions which would facilitate cross-border business development and create benefits for the industry and investors. However, following this report, no further action has been taken at EU level.

Contributor details

Dirk-Reiner Voß

Salans LLP

T +49 30 2 64 73 506
F +49 30 2 64 73 133
E [email protected]
W www.salans.com
Qualified. Germany, 1996
Areas of practice. Real estate; corporate; M&A; banking and finance.
Recent transactions
  • Advising the Irish Ballymore Properties on the acquisition of the Kudamm Karree shopping mall in the centre of Berlin.
  • Advising the Danish Schaumann Properties A/S on the acquisition, development and financing of one of the biggest hotel projects in Berlin.
  • Advising a German bank on the financing structure for a large portfolio transaction.
  • Advising on the restructuring and sale of the real estate activities of Landesbank Berlin AG.
For more details of recent transactions, publications, and so on, see full PLC Which lawyer? profile here.

Detlef Spranger

Salans LLP

T +49 30 2 64 73 109
F +49 30 2 64 73 133
E [email protected]
W www.salans.com
Qualified. Germany, 1999
Areas of practice. Real estate; M&A; corporate and commercial law.
Recent transactions
  • Advising Capmark Finance on the sale of Sunrise nursing homes in Germany.
  • Advising Warner Chilcott on real estate matters in connection with the acquisition of Procter & Gamble's ethical pharmaceuticals unit.
  • Advising Polish listed chemical producer Ciech SA on the acquisition of soda producer Sodawerk Staßfurt.
  • Advising a French strategic investor on the proposed acquisition of a German company with operations in Germany and Central Europe.