Skip to content
Chimera readability score 0.6275 out of 100, reading level.

On 3 March 2026, we said we’d bring forward our planned review of the UK Listing Rules for Investment entities, including how they apply to board independence and related party provisions.
Since then, there has been substantial debate over our role in relation to investment trusts, including calls for us to ‘get to grips’ with voting rules ‘that allow a minority shareholder to repeatedly attack an investment trust’.
Much of this debate suggests there are misunderstandings about how investment trusts are governed and where responsibilities sit. We’re concerned this may confuse investors in these trusts. Other calls to action have lacked clear proposals or been based on future hypothetical scenarios for which protections often exist. We want our review to ensure that these rules remain fit for novel circumstances.
This blog reminds participants of their powers and responsibilities, clarifies our role, and sets out what our review will cover.
About investment trusts
Investment trusts are one of the UK’s oldest collective investment vehicles. They are companies with shareholders, and they operate as investment products. Their closed-ended fund structure is particularly suited to holding illiquid assets, and they can borrow to enhance returns.
They are governed by independent boards appointed by shareholders, who can change managers or strategy if they believe performance is not where it should be.
As I highlighted at the Association of Investment Companies (AIC) conference on 4 March 2026, shareholders’ ability to hold boards and managers to account should be regarded as a feature of investment trusts, not a bug.
Our review and future work
We’re also looking at the interaction between shareholders and investment managers in the context of investment trusts.
Here our rules are relevant. Alongside company law, they are designed to ensure that conflicts of interests are managed appropriately.
Under the Companies Act, directors have a fiduciary duty to exercise independent judgement, avoid conflicts of interest, and not accept benefits from third parties.
The UK Corporate Governance Code, which applies to listed investment trusts on a ‘comply or explain’ basis, also includes provisions about director independence.
Our rules require boards to be able to act independently of their investment manager. This is essential for maintaining confidence that the governance of investment trusts supports all shareholders in all circumstances.
They also require listed trusts entering into transactions with related parties (such as directors, or controlling shareholders) to obtain board approval, and, importantly, secure written confirmation from independent sponsors that the terms are fair and reasonable to shareholders.
A material change to a trust’s published investment policy would need a further shareholder vote and approval from us.
Our review focuses specifically on whether we need to amend the rules to make it clear that our related party and board independence rules apply to prospective investment managers and directors.
We want to ensure that – whatever the route – minority shareholders have the right protections against conflicts of interest in the terms under which investment managers are appointed.
The broader review that this specific piece of work forms part of, examines how our listing rules apply to investment entities. We are considering whether amendments would be beneficial to allow a subset of undiversified investment entities a place to list.
Rebalancing risk
Over the past few years, we’ve been conducting a programme of ambitious reform to UK capital markets.
We’ve sought to rebalance risk and, where possible, replace pre-emptive checks with market disclosure. This work, which is well advanced, is partly about rules but also about predictability of the regime.
Shareholder rights, and the ability to hold company boards accountable and protect minority shareholders sit at the heart of this.
These principles have sustained investment trusts for more than 150 years and will continue to support the sector’s strength and success.

Facts Only

Actors: Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), Investment trusts, shareholders, investment managers, directors, controlling shareholders
Events: Review of UK Listing Rules for Investment entities, calls for the FCA to address voting rules, debate over investment trusts' governance and voting rules
Dates: March 3, 2026 (announcement), March 4, 2026 (AIC conference)
Locations: UK, Unspecified

Executive Summary

On March 3, 2026, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) announced plans to review the UK Listing Rules for Investment entities, focusing on board independence and related party provisions, due to ongoing debates about investment trusts' governance and voting rules. Investment trusts, one of the UK's oldest collective investment vehicles, are companies governed by independent boards appointed by shareholders, who can hold managers accountable through changing them or strategy if performance is unsatisfactory. The FCA's review will assess whether amendments to related party and board independence rules are necessary, ensuring minority shareholders have protections against conflicts of interest in investment manager appointment terms. This review forms part of a broader examination of how the listing rules apply to investment entities, considering the potential benefits of allowing a subset of undiversified investment entities to list.

Full Take

The FCA's announcement signals a continued focus on maintaining investor confidence in investment trusts, an important part of the UK's financial landscape. By examining conflicts of interest and related party provisions, the FCA seeks to ensure that minority shareholders have adequate protections against potential abuses. The review could lead to amendments to listing rules, potentially enabling a subset of undiversified investment entities to list. However, it is crucial for investors to remain vigilant and engaged in understanding the evolving governance landscape of investment trusts.
Patterns detected: ARC-0043 Motte-and-Bailey (the FCA's review focuses on specific aspects while leaving broader questions open)
Root cause: The need to maintain investor confidence and address potential vulnerabilities in the investment trust sector
Implications: The review may result in changes that strengthen the governance of investment trusts, benefiting minority shareholders. It could also allow for a greater diversity of investment entities to access public listings.
Bridge questions: How will the amendments to related party and board independence rules impact investment trusts' governance? What long-term implications will these changes have for the sector and its investors? How can minority shareholders effectively engage in holding boards and managers accountable?

Sentinel — Human

Confidence

This text shows signs of human authorship. The style is varied, the voice is personal, and there are no concerning fabrications or coordination indicators.

Signals Detected
low severity: Sentence length variance is not uniform, human writers tend to have varying sentence lengths.
high severity: The text presents a personal voice and idiosyncratic emphasis, which is characteristic of human writing.
low severity: No claims attributed to sources that seem unusually convenient or hard to verify are found.
Human Indicators
The text contains personal opinions and reflections, which is not typical of synthetic content.