European venture capital and social entrepreneurship funds

07-12-2016

This initial appraisal concludes that the Commission's impact assessment is based on sound knowledge and on relevant data relating to the investment funds industry. However, the evidence regarding specifically the two fund frameworks under review - European venture capital funds and European social entrepreneurship funds - is, by the IA's own admission, limited. The IA and the review attached to it do not cover all the points listed in the review clauses of the two regulations, for instance the geographical and sectoral distribution of investments undertaken specifically by EuVECA and EuSEF funds. At first sight, it appears that different conclusions could be drawn using the same data provided in the IA, for instance regarding the low take-up and lower than expected performance of the funds. The range of options analysed in depth seems rather narrow. Finally, the purpose of the existing regulations is to enhance the growth of small and medium-size enterprises and of social businesses. The IA states that it is too early to judge whether these objectives have been achieved and excludes this issue from the scope of the analysis. Even so, an initial analysis of the public consultations undertaken shows that, despite the absence of more concrete evidence, a greater effort could have been made to integrate the voice of non-financial businesses, including SMEs and social enterprises, within the IA.  

This initial appraisal concludes that the Commission's impact assessment is based on sound knowledge and on relevant data relating to the investment funds industry. However, the evidence regarding specifically the two fund frameworks under review - European venture capital funds and European social entrepreneurship funds - is, by the IA's own admission, limited. The IA and the review attached to it do not cover all the points listed in the review clauses of the two regulations, for instance the geographical and sectoral distribution of investments undertaken specifically by EuVECA and EuSEF funds. At first sight, it appears that different conclusions could be drawn using the same data provided in the IA, for instance regarding the low take-up and lower than expected performance of the funds. The range of options analysed in depth seems rather narrow. Finally, the purpose of the existing regulations is to enhance the growth of small and medium-size enterprises and of social businesses. The IA states that it is too early to judge whether these objectives have been achieved and excludes this issue from the scope of the analysis. Even so, an initial analysis of the public consultations undertaken shows that, despite the absence of more concrete evidence, a greater effort could have been made to integrate the voice of non-financial businesses, including SMEs and social enterprises, within the IA.