尊敬的用户您好，这是来自FT中文网的温馨提示：如您对更多FT中文网的内容感兴趣，请在苹果应用商店或谷歌应用市场搜索“FT中文网”，下载FT中文网的官方应用。
New Orleans is (in)famous for being a party town that seems to inhabit a parallel universe — what happens on Bourbon Street usually stays there, however wild. Not so, however, in America’s fast-expanding private capital world.
新奥尔良因其派对之城而闻名于世，它似乎是一个平行宇宙--无论多么狂野，波旁街(Bourbon Street)上发生的一切通常都会留在那里。然而，在美国快速扩张的私人资本世界里，情况并非如此。
On Wednesday, the New Orleans-based Fifth Circuit US Court of Appeals ruled in favour of six private equity and hedge fund groups to toss out a transparency rule introduced last year by Securities and Exchange Commission. This had required private equity, hedge fund and real estate groups to start issuing quarterly performance and fee reports, perform annual audits, and to stop giving some investors preferential treatment over redemptions and special access to portfolio holdings.
周三，总部位于新奥尔良的美国第五巡回上诉法院裁定支持六家私募股权和对冲基金集团，废除了美国证券交易委员会去年引入的透明度规定。该规定要求私募股权、对冲基金和房地产集团开始发布季度绩效和费用报告，进行年度审计，并停止对某些投资者提供赎回和特殊访问投资组合持有的优惠待遇。
Such concepts have long been standard in public markets. But they are anathema to many powerful private capital players. Wednesday’s ruling has thus sparked jubilation among many financiers — and dismay from progressives and consumer protection groups.
这些概念在公共市场中早已成为标准。但对许多强大的私人资本参与者来说，它们是令人憎恶的。因此，周三的裁决在许多金融家中引发了欢呼，但也令进步派和消费者保护组织感到失望。
So what should sober-minded investors conclude? There are three key points to note.
那么，理智的投资者应该得出什么结论呢？有三个关键点需要注意。
First, this saga will underscore the impression that the US judiciary is becoming ever more partisan. After all, the reason the case was brought in New Orleans is that Louisiana is a red state whose Republican leaders are predisposed to dislike what the Democrat-controlled Washington administration does. Two of the three judges in the case were appointed by Donald Trump and the other by George W Bush.
首先，这个事件将凸显美国司法系统越来越党派化的印象。毕竟，该案件在新奥尔良提起的原因是路易斯安那州是一个红色州，其共和党领导人倾向于不喜欢民主党(Democrat)控制的华盛顿政府所做的事情。该案件中的三位法官中有两位是由唐纳德•特朗普(Donald Trump)任命的，另一位是由乔治•W•布什(George W Bush)任命的。
Such legal forum shopping is not new, of course. But the stink of political partisanship in the US is rising today. And insofar as the New Orleans ruling reinforces the sense of a partisan judiciary, it is deeply unfortunate.
当然，这种法律论坛购物并不新鲜。但是，美国政治党派之间的争斗正在加剧。就像新奥尔良的裁决加强了党派司法的感觉一样，这是非常不幸的。
The second point is that because Republicans are forum shopping, more SEC initiatives may now be overturned. Recent proposed reforms to Treasury market trading and climate-linked reporting, say, look particularly vulnerable.
第二点是由于共和党在寻找论坛，更多的美国证交会(SEC)的举措可能会被推翻。最近提出的对国债市场交易和与气候相关的报告的改革，看起来特别脆弱。
This is also unfortunate. Chopping and changing these rules will undermine confidence in the predictability of American policymaking. Moreover, the proposed reforms to the bond market and climate-change reporting are sensible: the former aims to reduce the (very real) risk that the Treasuries market will malfunction; the latter would just echo where most other major countries are heading.
这也是不幸的。频繁修改这些规则将削弱对美国政策制定的可预测性的信心。此外，对债券市场和气候变化报告的拟议改革是明智的：前者旨在减少国债市场可能发生故障的风险；后者只是回应了大多数其他主要国家的方向。
The third big lesson from New Orleans is perhaps the most important: investors of all stripes need to get much savvier about the risks lurking in the private capital world. “Business” and “finance” news tends to focus on public companies which are, by definition, easier to track. But one oft-ignored reality of American capitalism is that private companies have always played a huge role in the economy. Another is that the footprint of private capital has exploded in the past two decades.
新奥尔良的第三个重要教训可能是最重要的：各种类型的投资者需要更加精明地了解私人资本世界中潜藏的风险。"商业"和"金融"新闻往往关注的是公共公司，这些公司从定义上来说更容易追踪。但美国资本主义经常被忽视的一个现实是私人公司在经济中一直扮演着重要角色。另一个现实是私人资本在过去二十年间的影响力急剧扩大。
The American Investment Council says that the US now has 32,000 private equity-backed companies, employing 12mn, while 34mn Americans have pensions invested in this sector. Meanwhile, FTI Consulting estimates that average returns have been 15 per cent in the past 20 years — 50 per cent more than the S&P 500.
美国投资委员会(American Investment Council)表示，美国现在有32,000家私募股权支持的公司，雇佣了12百万人，而有34百万美国人的养老金投资于这个行业。与此同时，富事高咨询(FTI Consulting)估计过去20年的平均回报率为15%，比标准普尔500指数高出50%。
Private capital players argue that tighter regulations would crush those amazing returns and insist they are unnecessary since their investors are highly sophisticated. There is some truth to both points: the high-net-worth individuals who used to dominate the sector could and should understand the principle of caveat emptor; and public company reporting burdens are costly and clumsy.
私人资本参与者认为，更严格的监管将会压制那些惊人的回报，并坚称这是不必要的，因为他们的投资者非常精明。这两点都有一定道理：曾经主导该行业的高净值个人本应理解买方自负的原则；而上市公司的报告负担则是昂贵且笨拙的。
Indeed, FTI calculates that the SEC’s disclosure proposals run to 650 pages, and points out that “unlike their large publicly traded counterparts . . . most private equity firms and real estate funds typically do not have large in-house compliance departments” to handle this.
事实上，FTI计算出美国证交会的信息披露提案达到了650页，并指出“与其大型上市公司的对应物不同……大多数私募股权公司和房地产基金通常没有大型内部合规部门”来处理这个问题。
But the sector is no longer just about sophisticated rich individuals; the reason those 34mn Americans have their pensions exposed to private equity is that numerous mainstream funds and endowments have recently rushed in. Given that, the SEC’s desire to inject more transparency and protection seems entirely understandable and laudable, particularly since higher interest rates will reduce returns in the coming years.
但这个行业不再仅仅涉及富有的个人；之所以有3400万美国人的养老金暴露在私募股权市场上，是因为许多主流基金和捐赠基金最近纷纷涌入。鉴于此，美国证交会希望增加更多的透明度和保护似乎完全可以理解和值得赞赏，特别是由于未来几年的利率上升将会降低回报率。
Of course, there is another way to resolve this problem: the asset owners themselves could now demand better disclosure — or vote with their feet, by leaving. I very much hope that more asset owners now do precisely this; it is the only rational response to Wednesday’s ruling.
当然，解决这个问题还有另一种方式：资产所有者们可以要求更好的披露，或者通过离开来表达自己的立场。我非常希望更多的资产所有者能够采取这样的行动；这是对周三裁决的唯一合理回应。
But one problem with this scenario — that is, trusting in the power of market forces — is that private capital funds typically have long lock-up periods. Another is that financial history shows asset owners usually only demand basic levels of transparency after, and not before, a disaster hits.
然而，这种情况存在一个问题——即对市场力量的信任——私人资本基金通常具有较长的锁定期。另一个问题是，金融历史表明，资产所有者通常只在灾难发生后，而不是之前，才要求基本的透明度水平。
Maybe private capital investors will be wiser this time? After all, the impact of rising interest rates on the business model of private capital is already becoming clear. But unless those asset owners do wake up and demand the type of transparency and fair treatment that the SEC can no longer enforce, some will face nasty shocks in the future. And such post-party hangovers are never pleasant, least of all when they’re unexpected. Just ask any hardened visitor to Bourbon Street.
也许这一次私人资本投资者会更明智？毕竟，升息对私人资本的商业模式的影响已经变得明显。但是，除非那些资产所有者醒悟过来并要求美国证交会无法再执行的透明度和公平待遇，否则他们中的一些人将在未来面临严重的冲击。而这种派对后的宿醉从来都不愉快，尤其是当它们出乎意料时。只需问问任何曾经流连波旁街的人。