All for Joomla All for Webmasters

EIS Companies- Annual Report

Annual 350 Report on Individual 350 Enterprise Investment Scheme Companies For Renewable Money Blog

Posted By: Andrew Walker

Original Author: Nicholas Dimmock

Source: 350 PPM Ltd
Compliance Status: This article has been approved by Kession Capital as a Financial Promotion

  1. This article has been written and compiled by 350 PPM Ltd which is an Appointed Representative of Kession Capital Limited (FRN: 582160) which is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority in the UK.

 

Dear 350 Investor,

Please find below the annual report on the 350 EIS companies.

This is set out in chronology of when the businesses started trading, from Carbon 350 in 2009, Solar 350 in 2013 and 350 PPM in 2016.

Additionally, in the future this report will also cover EIS companies that are incubated by 350 PPM Ltd. Currently we are developing two such opportunities: DBI Biomass and Waste Conversion Services Ltd.

I have provided a brief of the two EIS companies below for your interest.

 

DBI Biomass Ltd

According to DBI, DBI will shortly be acquiring the Forestry Management Licence for over 263,000 hectares of prime forest, which we plan to develop as a Biomass Resource.

The licence is due to be novated from “Darnmore Bayupermai Industries PVT”, which is an Indonesian domiciled business. It is the principals of Darnmore Bayupermai Industries PVT, that have formed DBI Biomass Ltd in the UK, for the commercial exploitation of the Forestry Management Licences which are apparently owned by Darnmore Bayupermai Industries PVT and will apparently be novated to DBI Biomass Ltd in due course. I say apparently as we still have to complete full due diligence.

You may have noticed that Drax has just converted its third boiler to Biomass. It’s our opinion that this process / fuel switch represents a true solution to climate change for countries that are not blessed with high and consistent levels of solar irradiation.

There is nothing wrong with cutting older tress down if you replant, especially if your cutting 1 to replant 5. Plus, the Fuel Switch from Coal to Biomass utilising existing infrastructure is believed to be a cheap solution to climate change and the power produced could be the non-intermittent baseload craved by the national grid as opposed to intermittent wind and solar.

There is also a significant reduction in emissions and thus as the crediting systems come back on line via The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, I am sure this process and fuel stock will be a potential winner going forward.

The only other way to deal with the intermittency issue is with batteries, but I can’t see that we can achieve enough capacity. In Q1 2016, the UK generated 92.52 TWh’s of electricity.

(Source: Page 9:https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/532938/Press_Notice_June_16.pdf) A Terawatt Hour is 1,000,000 Megawatt Hours.

The rumour is that to hold just 1 MWh, you need batteries which will stretch from the moon and back, so I cannot imagine that energy storage is cheap.

The report as cited above, also details how much energy was utilised. In the case of Q1 2016, 82.99 TWh’s are consumed, meaning that 10.3% goes to waste ((92.52-82.99)/92.52)*100). I assume some of this wastage is due to various technologies providing power to the grid when it is not needed.

I also don’t believe that this industrial battery storage technology can develop at the rate of Moore’s law, which everyone seems to be saying, and thus, due to the costs of storage, I am a fan of Biomass over Batteries.

There will be a full analysis of this in a future article on the Renewable Money Blog in January titled:

Elon Musk Versus God’s Batteries, which basically compares the use of batteries to Biomass. God’s batteries being trees.

 

Waste Conversion Services Ltd

Waste Conversion Services has the propriety use of a new technology which can “implode” substances, breaking them down into their component parts. I am due to visit the technology provider in January for a demonstration but apparently, the party trick, is that municipal solid waste is poured into the machine and powder and water are the outputs. The demonstrator then drinks the water, so I hope he’s got his resonance calculations right.

The technology works though analysing the molecular vibration of the substance due to be imploded and then replicating sound waves I suspect at just a slightly higher frequency. This increases the vibration and oscillation of the atoms within the molecules, very quickly breaking down the molecule into its constituent parts, which is then separated though a vortex which acts like a centrifuge.

There are many uses for this technology, but this could sit well with DBI Biomass Ltd, as imploding wood down to powder, removing the water would make shipping considerably cheaper.

Apparently, this can implode steel, but I am sceptical until I see this with my own eyes and he drinks the water. The main concerns are does it work and is it reliable. I have briefly investigated some elaborate hoaxes before including a domestic renewable energy solution that doesn’t work unless its plugged in. This made it as far as a working model in a Renewable Energy Conference.

Now onto the company reports:

 

Part 2 – The EIS Companies

Carbon 350 Ltd

The Carbon company landscape is looking rather like a Vietnam platoon. Meaning that while there are some new recruits coming in – some new companies entering this specialist field in view of the developments of The Paris Agreement, the original field is decimated.

Of the original EIS Companies trailblazers, Ecosecurities (http://uk.reuters.com/article/us-jpmorgan-ecosecurities-idUSTRE58D37020090915), Tricorona (http://www.tricorona.se/), Trading Emissions (http://www.hl.co.uk/shares/shares-search-results/t/trading-emissions-plc-ordinary-1p/share-charts) , Climate Change Capital (http://carbon-pulse.com/2974/), Camco (http://www.camcocleanenergy.com/), Grue og Hornstrup A/s (http://www.g-h.dk/), it is only Tricorona and the two latter engineering consultancies that are still operational or independent.

The new interest in the market is due to Article 6 of The Paris Agreement, (in force since November 4th 2016). Article 6 is all about “Internationally Transferred Deterred Outcomes”, which is effectively emissions trading and the trading of carbon offsets.

Source: The Paris Agreement Text, Article 6: https://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/l09.pdf

Of course, Carbon 350 hasn’t succumbed, but the big news is that our main client, a large US Hedge Fund, has filed for Chapter 11. The administrator has taken over and they are liquidating and unwinding what they can. This of course is a doubled edged sword for us.

On the negative side:

      1. they owed us £37,500, which is annoying, and;
      2. we will most likely miss out on some future commissions on some of the projects they financed and we developed and accredited. Unless we can find another buyer, which is of course possible.

On the positive side:

      1. Because they were generally in such a rush to make money, with a lot of the transactions they completed with us, they left the assets in our name, via a connected company to Carbon 350 and then held a debenture over that company just in case we didn’t do what they said / as contracted. This means that hypothetically as long as they don’t liquidate the assets via the administrator, these assets will remain in our names and so rather than a 9% commission, we get a 100% commission (Held in assets). A number of other points should be considered:
        1. They haven’t and shouldn’t be able to liquidate their carbon assets as long as prices stays. They have been trying.
        2. Some of the projects are half financed and thus they would need to add further funding to liberate them.
        3. The crediting periods of many of the projects stretch 21 years forward and as such is this in their interest for the administrator.
        4. Their carbon portfolios are a tiny fraction of their overall portfolios, so can they be bothered.
        5. Are we really going to give the projects up without a fight? And if so, in their present predicament is the administrator willing to spend additional money to wrestle back control of the projects with the current state of the carbon markets.
        6. The whole stream of commissions to us (21 years) becomes due if they sell on the projects, so unless we can secure this in Escrow, I can’t see that we will give up control.
      2. This gives us an opportunity, potentially, in due course, to get stuck into the carcass.

The hedge fund operated in two markets through us: The Clean Development Mechanism producing United Nations Certified Emission Reductions and The Chinese Emission Trading Scheme producing Chinese Certified Emission Reduction for the domestic Chinese mandatory emissions trading market which is due to go live in January 2017.We control most of their large Clean Development Mechanism Projects. The Chinese Emission Trading Projects were done through our partners in China.

In the Chinese Emission Trading Scheme, the hedge funds are around half way through funding these but a typical transaction looks like this.

A typical transaction might look like this:

$40,000 Development and Accreditation Cycle Costs

50,000 Emission Reductions per Year per project

21 Year Crediting Period

75%/25% Split of Offset Value between Project Owner and Accreditation Financier, (although the later transactions moved further into the favour of the project owner with 85%/15% becoming the standard).

$2.36 Per Chinese Certified Emission Reduction (although this is variable).

In other words, the hedge fund invested $40,000 and is set to make:

50,000 Emission Reduction @ $2.36 (the price) * 25% (the hedge fund’s share = $29,500 per year for 21 years, if prices hold.

Our commission is circa 9% of what they make.

Chinese CCER Prices Haven’t Held

In my view, the problem of late is that CCER (Chinese Certified Emission Reduction) prices have been falling due to overallocation of emission trading allowances, oversupply of CCERs and reductions in the substitution limits (emission trading schemes are made up of Emission Allowances and Emission Credits. The substitution limits are the proportion of emission credits to emission allowances that can be used / retired to hit the polluters emission targets).

These factors were the same issues as were experienced by the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme, only with the Chinese market there is no facility to hedge prices forward.

We will have to see how things eventually play out in regard to the Chinese Emission Trading Scheme, as the regional pilot scheme are now being combined into a National Emissions Trading Scheme (http://carbon-pulse.com/17057/) and of course, The Paris Agreement is now in force.

There is now quite a lot of reform going on in the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) (Source: http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/ets/reform_en) and this should lead to higher prices of allowances and offsets. Specific to Certified Emission Reductions, the substitution limit on the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme supposed to be increased from circa 8% to 50% and then 100% based on the agreement of a new global treaty with all nations participating.

Well this has happened now, so why isn’t the substitution limit increasing?

In short, it is all about how the world seeks to solve the problem: are we going for international trade and co-operation or isolationism and protectionism.

Whichever way, it’s my belief that emissions trading the best mechanism to solve the problem.

Carbon Pricing and Mandatory Emission Trading Schemes

According to the World Bank, “Already, about 40 national jurisdictions and over 20 cities, states, and regions are putting a price on carbon”.

(Source: World Bank, State and Trends of Carbon Pricing 2016. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/598811476464765822/pdf/109157-REVISED-PUBLIC-wb-report-2016-complete-161214-cc2015-screen.pdf) .

Pricing in mandated schemes currently ranges from less than 1 USD to 131 USD in Sweden. Source as above.

In my mind, Carbon pricing and offsetting is the most effective subsidy mechanism to reduce emission and thus fight global warming. If you wish to lose weight, the best idea is to target the root cause of the problem; calorie intake. The principle is the same for emission.

If you want to reduce emissions, attack the root cause; put a price on carbon and incentivise emission reducing projects. If this is done via the United Nations, it should stop individual countries continuously changing the rules to suit themselves which has happened in environmental markets throughout the world.

By the way, many projects are still being registered under The Clean Development Mechanism

Here are the latest projects from June 2016 to be registered with the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change under the Kyoto Protocol. Surely, they are not just doing this for the experience.

7 Jun 16 Implementation of Co-generation plant for Production of Potable Water in Qeshm Island Iran (Islamic Republic of) AM0102  135445 10161
15 Jun 16 Replacement of Main Oil Line (MOL) Pumps at Neelam & Heera Asset of ONGC India AMS-II.D. ver. 13  10539 10302
15 Jun 16 Sogamoso Hydroelectric Project Colombia ACM0002 ver. 16  1386355 10236
14 Jun 16 Waste Heat Recovery based power generation by Shree Cement Limited at Ras, Rajasthan, India India ACM0012 ver. 6  97005 10189
13 Jun 16 Energy Efficiency measures in Buildings of the Mindspace Airoli Project, Navi Mumbai developed by Serene Properties Pvt. Ltd India AMS-II.E. ver. 10  15641 9457
09 Jun 16 4 MW Small Hydro Project by Shansha Hydro Power Project Co-Operative Society Ltd. India AMS-I.D. ver. 18  18725 10112

 

Accordingly, there still seems to be a belief that this market will continue post 2020 as The Paris Agreement’s reign starts and the Kyoto Protocol hands over to The Paris Agreement.

 

Carbon 350 Summary

Carbon 350 fortunately has very low overheads and thus we have been able to ride out these market fluctuations. Having acted as broker as opposed to principal has also helped.

Regarding the demise of the hedge fund, we are down £37,500 GBP, and probably quite a few commissions, but our share of the large CDM projects is up from 9% to 91% and it is my feeling that the high quality, fully fungible United Nations Credits could increase in value first as the market recovers. The quality assets always recover first and UN Certified Emission Reductions are just this.

Carbon 350 shares started at £13.50 and we raised £90,000 to get us going under the EIS (Enterprise Investment Scheme). In the boom years, Net Asset Value per share was easily over £1,000 and is now sitting at £200 per share although we haven’t run the calculation as yet to reflect the hedge fund’s demise.

Unfortunately, we have no immediate strategy for Carbon 350 although we are exploring a very interesting Oil and Gas project which involves recycling components from decommissioned oil rigs.

Hopefully, by next year we should have greater clarity in regards to how things will play out.

For now, we continue to sit on our hands.

Solar 350 Ltd

While there has been very little development of Solar Power in the UK and Europe of late, the rest of the world has been booming. According to REN 21 Global Status Report (Source: Page 19, http://www.ren21.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/REN21_GSR2016_FullReport_en_11.pdf) globally there has been an increase in installed capacity for Solar Photo Voltaic of 50 GW from 2014 to 2015.

Based on the rule of thumb of $1M per MW constructed, this is:

50 GW (new installed capacity in 2015) * 1000 (to get from GW to MW) * 1,000,000 United State Dollars (costs per MW for installing) =

$5,000,000,000 or 5 Billion USD worth of solar installed in 2015.

The main contributors to this have been:

        1. China: +15.2 GW (although they have been putting in 20 GW per year over the last 5 years), so this is dropping as subsidies decrease.
        2. Japan: +11 GW (this has been running at about 10 GW per year)
        3. United States: 7.3 GW (pretty standard per year for the US).

Source: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/598811476464765822/pdf/109157-REVISED-PUBLIC-wb-report-2016-complete-161214-cc2015-screen.pdf

The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates to achieve the objectives of the Paris agreement, global investment in renewables needs to increase by $36 trillion above the base case scenario between 2016 and 2050. Based on an immediate increase in investment, breakeven should be achieved by at 2025, and by 2050, $100 Trillion will have been saved in fossil fuel input costs”. Source: International Energy Agency: http://www.iea.org/Textbase/npsum/ETP2012SUM.pdf

Solar’s share of this renewable energy spend, if present ratios hold (but are more likely to increase as awe see the demise of wind), would be 28.5%.

It is against this backdrop that we are currently negotiating a Memorandum with an offshore Chinese investment company connected to one of the largest renewable energy companies in China (+10,000 employees, listed in multiple jurisdictions, multiple technologies, manufacturer & EPC, 10+ GW installed capacity worldwide).

The first test transaction is now complete and by early next year we intend to sign Memorandum of Understanding for them to invest a further £200,000 with a view to extending their investment by $10,000,000 per project subject to us making considerable progress with the £200,000.

Based on a finance plan to construct all the projects we are developing as follows: 10% Equity,65% Debt, 15% Mezzanine Debt (from Chinese sourced equipment), 10% Project Rights (the Ready to Build Asset with all planning and permits), their investment and assistance should allow us to not only develop the sites to ready to build, but as evident construct and operate the plants.

Basically, in simple terms, if this was housing, a brick manufacturer is investing in us, will provide the equity we need to build the houses and will provide preferential credit terms on the bricks we use.

What is their rationale for doing this? Well in China, from what we are hearing, the solar sun is setting, the government is not paying out on its PPA promises and the lack of aggregate demand in their domestic market means that they have excess inventory. Of course, they are going to want their pound of flesh, but as there are also private investors invested in the company which is offshore, this also allows Chinese investors to gain invest outside China.

Making the Most of Their Investment in Us

To make the most of the £200,000 we intend to secure, Solar 350 plans to Crowdfund, using the Chinese Investor as a cornerstone investor via Syndicate Room. Syndicate Room is the only platform that requires Crowdfunding companies to provide cornerstone investors for 25% of the targeted raise. We have looked at quite of few of the Crowdfunding Sites and Syndicate Room, is in my opinion, and although we still have to Crowdfund, is one of the best. (https://www.syndicateroom.com).

They have also avoided a lot of the criticism of other platforms as detailed on Rob Murray Brown’s Blog, The Truth About Equity Crowdfunding” (Source: http://fantasyequitycrowdfunding.blogspot.co.uk/).

Our Reorganisation

As you know, Solar 350 had a bit of a reorganisation in July to cut costs so we could devote more money to project development and less to operating overheads. The accounts for June 31st 2016 should shortly be available and I will provide them to you all on this blog. For the record, my takings in this year, June 2015-2016, were roughly zero, accordingly to our accountant.

The reorganisation also involved transferring basic funding requirements to a separate company, namely 350 PPM Ltd. For this reason, we could rid ourselves of the office and run a leaner and meaner operation, thus diverting more resources to project development.

350 PPM Ltd is headed by Tim Hyett and is now an Appointed Representative of Kession Capital, which is Authorised and Regulated by The Financial Conduct Authority.

Project Development and Strategy

From one project at Indicative Study and one Ready to Build Optioned, we intend to greenlight 1 utility scale development project every three months. As detailed above, it is our intention to go on and construct and operate these plants subject to funding.

Our main focus is planned to be Mexico as we see this as the gateway to the rest of South America. There are many compelling reasons why Mexico can be the centre of solar development over the next 5-10 years. The main ones being; rapidly developing economy, right wing government, rapidly expanding industrial and manufacturing sector, lax labour laws, recently deregulated power markets, existing reliance on Gas, and accordingly high power prices, low interest rates, high levels of solar irradiation, supportive subsidization, and a nascent carbon market.

The increasingly isolationism of The United States via President Trump, probably aids our cause and I have no issue with the US mining its own coal as opposed to importing from China. In fact, its emission reducing.

Solar 350 Summary

In summary, Solar 350 was always going to require more funding to get going than Carbon 350. It has not benefitted in the same way from the rapidly “rising economic tide” (which hopefully is just around the corner) and has required more co-ordination than when we were simply acting as a broker.

However, the Chinese input as well as additional financiers we are in touch with should make a real difference in the number of projects we could develop and accordingly, so long as the Memorandum is signed, which it should be by January, Solar 350 should take off nicely in 2017.

From one project at Indicative Study and one Ready to Build Optioned, we intend in greenlight 1 utility scale development project every three months. As detailed above, it is our intention to go on and construct and operate these plants subject to funding.

In terms of Share Price genesis, we raised very small amounts in the early years under SEIS at £2.50 and while there hasn’t been much activity of late, the Chinese investment company price on the trial transaction that has now banked was £17.36 on 21st December.

350 PPM Ltd

Tim Hyett, FSCI (Fellow of The Chartered Security Institute) and ex Equity Dealing Director of Foreign and Colonial Investment Management Ltd, and formed Member of The London Stock Exchange, joined 350 PPM Ltd as Managing Director in November 2015.

Although 350 PPM Ltd had been an Appointed Representative earlier, we finally got clearance from Kession Capital in August 2016 and the business is planned start trading in earnest early next year.

350 PPM Ltd is billed as:

.. an environmental incubator for early stage Environmental Developers, Projects and Technologies that 350 PPM believes will benefit substantially from the implementation of The Paris Agreement.

350 PPM identifies such companies and facilitates the acceleration of the business’s development across 5 distinct phases. The five phases are:

  1. Application, Market Analysis & Feasibility, Refining the Business Plan.
  2. Networking and Market Testing.
  3. Goal Identification, Niche Identification and Gap Resolution.
  4. Raising Capital and Execution of the Business Plan.
  5. Generating Revenue & Listing.

 All companies raising funding on this website undergo the same process. For more information on incubated companies please visit the Investor Centre.

Source: http://350ppm.co.uk/

The Incubation Model

The incubation model works very different to the majority of crowdfunding models in that we may have been working with a company for 2 years, providing “keep going” funding before the company actually crowdfunds.

If you look at some of the horror stories of Fantasy Equity Crowdfunding (Source: http://fantasyequitycrowdfunding.blogspot.co.uk/), some of these businesses are chasing existing trends playing catch up; the next “Uber”, or a new web based service for Mums, a new app, a web based estate agent for example.

They write a business plan, provide forecasts, raise cash and then try to operate at 100% from the start and typically run out of money before they have really developed the business or found out the gaps in their capabilities.

Or alternatively, the business was never commercially viable from the start and would need vast scale to actually work. Of course, the way to get scale cheaply, is to be the first mover, but as we have discussed many of the businesses crowdfunding are chasing an idea or theme and to enter the market at this point requires a lot of cash. Ironically, it is only because the sector is hot in investor’s minds that they fully fund. In reality everyone else has left the start line and is two laps ahead.

The same problem is inherent with many financial brokers. The financial opportunities that are believed to be easiest to place with clients probably exist in booming industries and while they still may appreciate in value,AlanAlan they are still chasing the market.

350 PPM Ltd Summary

Thus 350 PPM’s approach, by providing some early stage financing (very nominal amounts), in regard to opportunities with The Paris Agreement, is much more of a value investor play, as opposed to momentum investment.

Regardless, 350 PPM Ltd is designed to assist in the development of such business in just the same way that Solar 350 has developed or Carbon 350 before it. We intend to develop the technological aspects of the company in much the same way that crowdfunding companies do, with the exception being that we only wish for a limited number of client companies that we focus on until they are, metaphorically speaking “in the air and flying”.

At present, come January 2017, 350 PPM Ltd plans to begin actively market Solar 350 across digital channels. The objective being to build additional cornerstone investors in anticipation of Solar 350’s debut on Syndicate Room. Effectively, Syndicates Room’s policy is that cornerstone investors must invests 25% of the target amount after which Syndicate Room’s investors will take over and accordingly the bigger we can build Solar 350’s internal book, the more we can raise from Syndicate Room. Of course, with any luck we will start with the £200k from China.

350 PPM Ltd intends to of course promote additional opportunities in the coming months and years such as the opportunities detailed at the start of this report, but initially full focus will be on Solar 350.

Part 3 – The Enterprise Investment Scheme Update

Enterprise Investment Scheme

Everyone should now have received their SEIS 3’s or their EIS 3’s. As you know, these are the certificates that can allow you to reclaim your income tax rebates, avoid CGT, IHT etc.

Please note, do not send these into HMRC. They might lose them and may never return them. All you need is the code on the front to put on your tax return. We have already submitted your names and all the details of the transaction, which apparently go into the core database at The HMRC / Small Companies Enterprise Centre. Thus, they know you are eligible to claim already – all you need to do is provide them the number.

For those of you that did subscribe in November and December, all the applications will have been made by Friday 24th December. Cater Chartered Accountants (our EIS Administrator) will try to hurry these along, so we can provide you with your SEIS/EIS3 3’s before end of January, just in case you wish to submit these to count against tax liabilities of the previous tax year 14/15. EIS Investors info here

Part 4 – Overall Conclusions

We are going to be posting this annual report on our Renewable Money Blog. In the time between the Summer and Winter reports and in absence of any telephone contact, which I acknowledge has been a little lacking late, this is where you can find the latest 350 developments and news on the environmental sector: http://350ppm.co.uk/blog/.

If you would like us to email you directly with new articles and updates, all you have to do is subscribe for our Newsletter. All you need to do is enter your email address at the top right of the page in the box above the “SUBSCRIBE” and the website does the rest.

For the latest news on the environmental sector, the twitter feed which is just below the SUBSCRIBE button on the right-hand side, details all the latest news from the environmental sector. If you click on “VIEW ALL TWEETS”, just below actual twitter feed, this opens up a new page, showing the tweets and links in their entirety.

Or you can just click here for ease: http://350ppm.co.uk/tweets-by-nickd350/

So, in finishing, thank you for all your kind words of support. While I don’t always reply to these emails, I find them very encouraging.

Wishing you a wonderfully exceptional 2017,

Yours Sincerely, 

eis companies

 

 

 

Nick Dimmock

350 Founder

DISCLAIMER AND RISK WARNINGS

The information contained in this article is prepared for general circulation and is intended to provide information only. It is not intended to be constructed as a solicitation for the sale of any particular investment nor as investment advice and does not have regard to the specific investment objectives, financial situation, and particular needs of any person to whom it is presented. In particular, the information contained on this site is not intended for distribution to, or use by, any person or entity in the United Stated of America (being residents of the United States of America or partnerships or corporations organised under the laws of the United States of America or any state of territory thereof) or any other jurisdiction or country where such distribution or use would be contrary to law or regulation or which would subject 350 PPM Ltd or any affiliates to any requirement to be registered or authorised within such jurisdiction or country. The information contained herein is not intended to be passed to third parties without our prior content and may not be reproduced in whole or in part, without the permission of 350 PPM Ltd. The value of your investments and the income from them can fall as well as rise. An investor may not get back the amount of money invested. Past performance and forecasts are not reliable indicators of future results. Currency denominated investments are subject to fluctuations in exchange rates that could have a positive or adverse effect on the value of, and income from, the investment. Investors should consult their professional advisers on the possible tax and other consequences of holding such investments. Your capital is at risk. Tax treatment is dependent upon individua

 

 

 

Comments are closed.