Italian real estate asset management companies have been collecting and managing collective savings for more than 15 years and in 15 years of work this industry is now a fundamental segment for the development of the real economy of our country. Some regulatory interventions, in recent years, have been important for the world of finance and real estate services, which are at the service of the country's economy and citizens with transparent and qualified models adopted at a global international level. Other regulatory measures have had a negative impact, such as the unilateral reduction of passive rents by the Public Administration following the spending review.
In this sense, there could be different hypotheses of regulatory interventions to relaunch investments. First of all on the discipline of situations of conflict of interest and incompatibility, reversing the criterion of determination through the passage from a logic "by group of the manager and group of the expert" to a logic of incompatibility "by individual fund", in line with international standards. Furthermore, always in order to remedy the excessive requirements imposed by the DM n. 30/2015, a new criterion of incompatibility of independent experts could be introduced in the event of financial dependence. The benefits that can be obtained range from market transparency to investment incentives, in line with international standards (in particular for independent experts and real estate appraisers).
In particular, in order to remedy the excessive requirements imposed by the DM n. 30/2015, could be foreseen in the TUF new criteria for assigning assessment tasks to the independent expert which the managers (SGR and SICAF) of UCIs must comply with. In particular, the novella, in line with the RICS Valuation Standards which in Italy have long represented a consolidated reference in the valuation of real estate investment funds, establishes the obligation for independent experts, the companies controlled by them, associated or subject to common control, to the parent companies, directors and employees, to refrain from carrying out evaluation and non-estimative assignments towards the manager, the companies controlled by it or which control it, as well as the companies and managers subject to common control control if the fees for the assignment received exceed a certain threshold (presumably 25%) of the overall total revenues for the last financial year. This circumstance constitutes grounds for revocation of the assignment. Non-appraisal assignments mean the following activities: (i) verification and consultancy not directly connected to real estate valuations; (ii) property management; (iii) ordinary and extraordinary maintenance; (iv) real estate design, development and renovation; (v) real estate brokerage. Lastly, the provision for the renewal or assignment of a new assignment of independent expert without the necessary lapse of vacatio periods is reintroduced.
Another issue of particular relevance is the objective and transparent reading of the data on the activities of the real estate asset management companies which, with adequate commissions, have managed and are able to give an average profitability that is still consistent with the return on funds objectives and this despite a complex economic situation. For example, when analyzing the fund statements, reference should be made to the enduring ones absorption difficulties of the real estate market which did not prevent the retail funds, during 2015, from completing sales for approximately 400 million euros. According to some studies, management commissions also include all the costs that real estate funds incur as they are strictly functional to the ordinary activity of the fund, or provided for by legislative or regulatory provisions (annual fee due to the custodian bank and independent experts, the costs connected with the acquisition and disposal of the assets of the fund, the charges connected with the possible listing of the certificates representing the units, the financial charges for the debts assumed by the fund, the legal and judicial expenses incurred in the exclusive interest of the fund and the tax burden pertaining to the fund, etc.).
No evidence is given that real estate fund managers have average management fees below 1% of total asset value of the Fund (net of unrealized capital gains), even lower than those of asset management companies, which have on average management commissions of around 1,5%-1,7% of the assets (not managing, among other things, the problems of the real estate portfolios, linked to the search for a tenant for the leased properties, at redevelopment of the portfolio, property taxes, utilities, insolvency of tenants, illegal occupations, etc.).
A sense of belonging has been demonstrated on the part of Italian real estate developers, by continuing to believe in and support the country, in dialogue with national and local government/parliamentary/technical institutions, tax agencies, supervisory authorities, in order to find useful solutions for the reduction of the public debt and the enhancement and efficiency of the real estate assets, protecting the professionals who work every day with seriousness.
They are now important organic interventions of industrial policy in the finance and real estate services sectors supported by complete and qualified data and information, comparable with good practices, models and vehicles present worldwide, taking into account the excellence and peculiarities of Italian real estate operators.
