Invesco Canada Ltd.
National Policy 11-203 Process for Exemptive Relief Applications in Multiple Jurisdictions -- relief granted from subsection 5.1(4) of NI 81-101 to permit simplified prospectus of alternative mutual funds to be consolidated with simplified prospectus of mutual funds that are not alternative mutual funds.
Applicable Legislative Provisions
National Instrument 81-101 Mutual Funds Prospectus Requirements, ss. 5.1(4) and 6.1(1).
August 30, 2022
IN THE MATTER OF THE SECURITIES LEGISLATION OF ONTARIO (the Jurisdiction) AND IN THE MATTER OF THE PROCESS FOR EXEMPTIVE RELIEF APPLICATIONS IN MULTIPLE JURISDICTIONS AND IN THE MATTER OF INVESCO CANADA LTD. (the Filer)
The principal regulator in the Jurisdiction has received an application from the Filer, on behalf of any alternative mutual fund established or restructured in the future and managed by the Filer (collectively, the Alternative Funds) for a decision under the securities legislation of the Jurisdiction of the principal regulator (the Legislation) that grants relief to the Alternative Funds from the requirement in subsection 5.1(4) of National Instrument 81-101 Mutual Fund Prospectus Disclosure (NI 81-101) which states that a simplified prospectus for an alternative mutual fund must not be consolidated with a simplified prospectus of another mutual fund if the other mutual fund is not an alternative mutual fund (the Exemption Sought).
Under the Process for Exemptive Relief Applications in Multiple Jurisdictions (for a passport application):
(a) the Ontario Securities Commission is the principal regulator for this application; and
(b) the Filer has provided notice that subsection 4.7(1) of Multilateral Instrument 11-102 Passport System (MI 11-102) is intended to be relied upon in all of the provinces and territories of Canada (the Jurisdictions).
Terms defined in National Instrument 14-101 Definitions, MI 11-102 and National Instrument 81-102 Investment Funds (NI 81-102) have the same meaning if used in this decision, unless otherwise defined.
This decision is based on the following facts represented by the Filer:
1. The Filer is a corporation amalgamated under the laws of Ontario with its head office located in Toronto, Ontario.
2. The Filer is an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of Invesco, Ltd., a global investment manager.
3. The Filer is registered as an investment fund manager, portfolio manager, mutual fund dealer, exempt market dealer and commodity trading manager in Ontario and as an investment fund manager, portfolio manager, mutual fund dealer and exempt market dealer in Quebec. The Filer is registered as portfolio manager and exempt market dealer in the rest of the Jurisdictions and additionally as a mutual fund dealer in Alberta, British Columbia, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island and as an investment fund manager in Newfoundland and Labrador.
4. The Filer will be the investment fund manager of each Alternative Fund.
5. The Filer is not in default of applicable securities legislation in any of the Jurisdictions.
6. Each Alternative Fund will be established under the laws of Ontario or Canada as a mutual fund that is a trust or a class of shares of a mutual fund corporation and will be a reporting issuer in one or more of the Canadian Jurisdictions.
7. The securities of each Alternative Fund will be qualified for distribution in one or more of the Jurisdictions using a simplified prospectus and fund facts document prepared and filed in accordance with the securities legislation of such Jurisdictions. Each Alternative Fund will be subject to the requirements of NI 81-101 and NI 81-102.
8. The Filer desires to be able to combine the simplified prospectus of any Alternative Fund with the simplified prospectus of the mutual funds existing today or created in the future (i) that are reporting issuers to which NI 81-101 and NI 81-102 apply, (ii) that are not alternative mutual funds, and (iii) for which the Filer acts as the investment fund manager (the Conventional Funds), in order to reduce renewal, printing and related costs. Offering the Alternative Funds using the same simplified prospectus as the Conventional Funds would facilitate the distribution of the Alternative Funds in the Jurisdictions under the same prospectus disclosure and enable the Filer to streamline disclosure across the Filer's fund platform.
9. Even though the Alternative Funds will be alternative mutual funds, they will share many common operational and administrative features with the Conventional Funds and combining them in the same simplified prospectus will allow investors to more easily compare the features of the Alternative Funds and the Conventional Funds.
10. The ability to file the same simplified prospectus for the Alternative Funds and the Conventional Funds will ensure that the Filer can make corresponding changes to the operational and administrative features of the Alternative Funds and the Conventional Funds in a consistent manner, if required.
11. Investors will continue to receive the fund facts document(s) when purchasing securities of the Alternative Funds or Conventional Funds as required by applicable securities legislation. The form and content of the fund facts document(s) of the Alternative Funds and the Conventional Funds will not change as a result of the Exemption Sought.
12. The simplified prospectus of the Alternative Funds and the Conventional Funds will continue to be provided to investors, upon request, as required by applicable securities legislation.
13. National Instrument 41-101 General Prospectus Requirements (NI 41-101) does not contain a provision equivalent to subsection 5.1(4) of NI 81-101. Accordingly, an investment fund manager that manages exchange-traded funds (ETFs) is permitted to consolidate a prospectus under NI 41-101 for its ETFs that are alternative mutual funds with a prospectus for its ETFs that are conventional mutual funds. There is no reason why mutual funds filing a simplified prospectus under NI 81-101 should be treated differently from ETFs filing a prospectus under NI 41-101.
The principal regulator is satisfied that the decision meets the test set out in the Legislation for the principal regulator to make the decision.
The decision of the principal regulator under the Legislation is that the Exemption Sought is granted.