Surrounding ecopostureo in investment funds. Starting today, Thursday, the funds green that are launched on the market will have to apply the new requirements of Esma, the European Securities and Markets Authority, for these products. The supervisory body is going to short-tie funds that want to include words like Sustainable, Green… or acronyms such as ESG (which refers to environmental, social and good governance criteria). It will tell them what (and how much) they have to invest in, and it has banned certain companies, such as oil companies. As of November 21, the rule applies to funds that are launched on the market in EU countries; existing funds will have to adapt until May 2025. The objective is to prevent the portfolios of these products from being truly green, and that his name ends up being a mere claim marquetinian.
What do these new demands consist of? Funds whose names incorporate terms such as Sustainability, Impact, ESG, either Environmental –among others – they will have to leave out companies that obtain 10% or more of their income of the prospecting, refining or distribution of oil; They will not be able to invest in companies that extract coal. In addition, they will have to exclude companies in which 50% of their billing depends on gas, and those utilities that generate electricity above a certain emissions level.
These guidelines affect approximately 10% of EU funds, according to calculations by Sustainable Fitch (the sustainability division of the Fitch rating agency), which estimates that some 6,500 European funds include words like those mentioned in their names. In Spain, there are close to fifty, plus all their classes. The CNMV (National Securities Market Commission) has already confirmed that it will apply these indications, which will increase “harmonization at the European level and the protection of investors,” the regulator said in a statement.
According to Morningstar data, More than 40 funds for sale in Europe have already chosen this year to remove those keywords from their namesto comply with Esma. Barclays figure in more than 15,000 million euros the amount of money that European funds with names have invested sustainable in energy companies, mainly oil companieswhich could violate these thresholds. The bank adds another approximately 2,200 million, which are invested in utilitiesand almost 4,000 in basic consumer companies that may have to leave the funds, as elEconomista.es already published. But the fact that until now we have seen oil companies in green funds does not have to be greenwashingAs Claudia Antuña clarifies, AFI partner responsible for Sustainability. “The abbreviation ESG refers not only to environmental issues, but also to social and governance issues. Furthermore, these issues do not refer to the economic activity of companies. Therefore, it could be the case that, under an ESG approach, a fund Investment option does invest in an oil company, as long as it has a high ESG profile. In these cases, a case of greenwashingbecause the investment seeks to reward the best practices in relation to sustainability,” he explains.
“We consider that the greenwashing implies a desire to deceive and I have serious doubts that the managers have it”, defended last week Sonsoles Santamaría, general director of the Business of Tressisduring his speech at the IV ESG Forum elEconomista.es. In recent years, the asset management industry has had to face a real regulatory earthquake and adapt to a regulation that has been tremendously criticized for its demands and its calendar. For example, managers have been required to label their sustainable funds as such, but to do so they needed data – the sustainability data of the companies in which they invest – that the companies were not required to report.
LinkedinBeloud
#Siege #greenwashing #ESMA #shortties #green #sustainable #investment #funds
