Resolution of the Superintendent of Prudential Supervision No. 023-2026-SMV/10 — SMV — PE

PERÚ Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas

Pursuant to Article 1° of Law No. 29782, Law on the Strengthening of Supervision of the Securities Market, the name of the National Commission for the Supervision of Companies and Securities (CONASEV) is replaced by that of the Securities Market Superintendence (SMV), so that any reference to
CONASEV in legal norms shall be understood as referring to the SMV;
I. BACKGROUND
By Resolution of the Adjunct Superintendent of the SMV No. 017-2026-SMV/10 of March 20, 2026 (hereinafter, RESOLUTION SASP),
ANKA SAFI was sanctioned with eight (8) admonitions and a fine of three (3) UIT, equivalent to S/ 14,850.00 (Fourteen thousand eight hundred and 00/100 soles) for having committed nine (9) minor infractions typified in Annex I, numeral 3, item 3.1 of the Sanctions Regulation, approved by SMV Resolution No. 035-2018-SMV/01 (hereinafter, SANCTIONS REGULATION), for failing to submit periodic and eventual information within the deadline established by the applicable regulation;

PERÚ Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas

SMV
Superintendencia del Mercado de Valores
“Decenio de la Igualdad de Oportunidades para Mujeres y Hombres” “Año de la Esperanza y el Fortalecimiento de la Democracia” Documento electrónico firmado digitalmente en el marco de la Ley N° 27269, Ley de Firmas y Certificados Digitales, su Reglamento y modificatorias. La integridad del documento y la autoría de la(s) firma(s) pueden ser verificadas en https://apps.firmaperu.gob.pe/web/validador.xhtml
3. By letter presented on April 13, 2026,
ANKA SAFI filed a reconsideration appeal against the RESOLUTION SASP;
4. The reconsideration appeal has been the subject of
evaluation by the General Intendancy of Prudential Compliance in Report No. 652- 2026-SMV/10.3, which has been submitted to the knowledge of this Adjunct Superintendence;
5. In observance of the Principle of Due Process
contemplated in Article IV, item 1, numeral 1.2, of the Preliminary Title, as well as in Article 248°, item 2 of the Single Text of the General Administrative Procedure Law, Law No. 27444, approved by Supreme Decree No. 004-2019-JUS (hereinafter, TUO LPAG), the administrative file to which this resolution refers was made available to ANKA SAFI for its review;
II. ON THE ADMISSIBILITY OF THE RECONSIDERATION APPEAL
6. According to what is established in Article 32,
numeral 27 of the Regulation on the Organization of Functions of the SMV, approved by Supreme Decree No. 216-2011-EF, it is the function of the Adjunct Superintendence of Prudential Supervision to resolve reconsideration appeals against the resolutions it issues;
7. Likewise, Article 2181
, numeral 218.2 of the TUO
LPAG, establishes that the term for filing appeals is fifteen (15) peremptory days. According to what is stated in Article 144 of the TUO LPAG, the mentioned deadline will begin to run from the day following the legal notification of the challenged administrative act;
8. In this regard, it has been verified that the reconsideration appeal was filed within the fifteen (15) days established by the
Article 218 of the TUO LPAG;
9. Pursuant to Article 219 of the TUO LPAG, the reconsideration appeal is filed before the same body that issued the act subject to
challenge and must be supported by new evidence. However, in the case of administrative acts issued by bodies that constitute a single instance, new evidence is not required;
III. ON THE ARGUMENTS PRESENTED BY ANKA SAFI
10. ANKA SAFI requests as its main claim that the fine imposed by Article 11 of the RESOLUTION SASP referring to the
infraction contained in item i) of the consideration 8 of the referred resolution (hereinafter, INFRACTION), be revoked, and consequently, that the filing of said aspect be ordered as no “impact” on market transparency is configured under an analysis of real materiality and significant influence, in accordance with the Regulation on Material Facts and Reserved Information, approved by SMV Resolution No.

1
“Article 218. Administrative appeals
218.1 The administrative appeals are:
a) Reconsideration appeal b) Appeal
Only in the event that a law or legislative decree expressly establishes, the filing of the administrative appeal for review is admissible.
218.2 The term for filing appeals is fifteen (15) peremptory days, and they must be resolved within thirty (30) days.”

PERÚ Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas

SMV
Superintendencia del Mercado de Valores
“Decenio de la Igualdad de Oportunidades para Mujeres y Hombres” “Año de la Esperanza y el Fortalecimiento de la Democracia” Documento electrónico firmado digitalmente en el marco de la Ley N° 27269, Ley de Firmas y Certificados Digitales, su Reglamento y modificatorias. La integridad del documento y la autoría de la(s) firma(s) pueden ser verificadas en https://apps.firmaperu.gob.pe/web/validador.xhtml 005-2014-SMV/01 and its amendment, in force at the date the facts occurred (hereinafter, RHI);
11. As a subsidiary claim, ANKA SAFI states that if the existence of a formal infraction is considered, the sanctioning aspect of the INFRACTION should be reclassified as an admonition (without fine), applying principles of reasonableness and proportionality, as well as the graduation criteria provided in the SANCTIONS REGULATION;
12. ANKA SAFI mentions that the controversy of the
INFRACTION revolves around the communication of the appointment of director Javier Morán Ortiz, which occurred on May 31, 2023. However, it indicates that there was no concealment, nor material information asymmetry, nor real alteration of market conditions;
13. The administrator society refers that it communicated the fact to the SMV on June 07, 2023 through MVNet/General Petitions (Exp.
2023025571), and subsequently the corresponding formalization was carried out through the channel that the authority considered appropriate. For this reason, it indicates that the SMV had effective knowledge of the fact, there was traceability and conduct of compliance and there was no intention to withhold information from the regulator or the market;
14. For these reasons, ANKA SAFI mentions that to
sustain a fine (and not a less burdensome measure), the RESOLUTION SASP had to carry out a rigorous analysis of: the materiality of the fact in the concrete case, the real capacity to significantly influence investment decisions or values; and the existence of effective impact on market transparency;
15. The administrator society states that the
RESOLUTION SASP qualifies the impact as “not minimal” without accrediting in the file a concrete consequence, a verifiable detriment or an effective alteration in the behavior of investors or in the share value; ANKA SAFI considers that there was an erroneous qualification of the “impact” and omission of the materiality/significant influence standard
16. ANKA SAFI indicates that the qualification arises from a material criterion, that is, from the real capacity of the fact to significantly influence: i) the investment decision of a reasonable investor and/or ii) the value of the instruments issued or linked to the administered equity and/or iii) in the trading conditions;
17. The administrator society highlights that
materiality is linked to the aptitude to significantly influence the values of the autonomous estates;
18. ANKA SAFI points out that, in the present case, the
appointment of a director, without additional facts implying a change of control, management shift, strategy modification, alteration of investment policies or risk profile, is a fact of an organic nature whose impact is structural and mediate, not immediate;
19. Therefore, it indicates that to sustain that there was an impact “not minimal” on market transparency, the RESOLUTION
SASP had to demonstrate, for example: i) that the appointment implied a real change in the effective management of the funds, ii) that there were attributable variations in the share value, iii) that investment policies, committee, guidelines or risk appetite were modified,

PERÚ Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas

SMV
Superintendencia del Mercado de Valores
“Decenio de la Igualdad de Oportunidades para Mujeres y Hombres” “Año de la Esperanza y el Fortalecimiento de la Democracia” Documento electrónico firmado digitalmente en el marco de la Ley N° 27269, Ley de Firmas y Certificados Digitales, su Reglamento y modificatorias. La integridad del documento y la autoría de la(s) firma(s) pueden ser verificadas en https://apps.firmaperu.gob.pe/web/validador.xhtml iv) that material uncertainty was generated in participants and investors and v) that there was a situation of privileged information or effective information asymmetry;
20. ANKA SAFI points out that none of this is accredited in the file, consequently: i) the supposed impact on transparency remains at the hypothetical level, ii) no concrete detriment is observed, nor effective alteration of investor behavior and iii) the qualification of “not minimal” lacks empirical support and departs from the normative standard of materiality;
21. The administrator society indicates that if the core of the informational duty in material facts is significant influence, then a fact that does not possess real aptitude to influence investment decisions or share value cannot justify a monetary sanction as if it had generated effective market distortion;
22. Therefore, ANKA SAFI points out that it corresponds
to revoke the fine and archive the sanctioning aspect of the INFRACTION. And, at least, it corresponds to reclassify it as an admonition; ANKA SAFI considers that the RESOLUTION SASP presumes impact on the market without accrediting damage, detriment or benefit; defective application of graduation criteria
23. The administrator society mentions that the
monetary sanction must respond to a logic of graduation; that is, the SANCTIONS REGULATION obliges to weigh criteria such as: a) economic detriment and repercussion on the market; b) illicit benefit or advantage obtained; c) gravity of the damage to the public interest; d) intent, level of reproach and subsequent conduct and e) other criteria provided in the SANCTIONS REGULATION;
24. Under these criteria, ANKA SAFI indicates that there is no accredited economic detriment nor evidence of real repercussion on the market, there is no illicit benefit, there is no real damage to the public interest because the SMV had effective knowledge of the fact since June 07, 2023 (MvNet/General Petitions), which reduces to the minimum the argument of “impact on transparency” by concealment or regulatory surprise and there is also no intent to fail to comply;
25. Consequently, the administrator society
states that the fine is sustained on a presumption of gravity that when contrasted with the criteria of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, is not verified; ANKA SAFI considers that the monetary sanction is excessive compared to an organic fact without demonstrated material impact
26. ANKA SAFI indicates that the principle of
proportionality requires that the sanction be;

Suitable to protect the legal good (transparency),
Necessary (no other less burdensome measure being sufficient), and
Proportional in the strict sense (balance between the real gravity of the fact and the imposed burden).

In this case, the administrator society considers
that the fine of 3 UIT presents an evident imbalance because: a) the fact is of an organic/structural nature and of mediate effect, b) no material impact on shares or investment decisions is accredited, c) there is no detriment or illicit benefit and d) effective communication to the regulator existed;

PERÚ Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas

Gravity is affirmed, but not demonstrated;
Transparency is invoked, but not connected to a real effect;
A fine is imposed without explaining why an admonition is not enough;

ANKA SAFI indicates that this lack of motivation
affects the validity of the sanctioning reasoning in the imputed aspect;
IV. EVALUATION OF THE ARGUMENTS PRESENTED
By the RESOLUTION SASP, ANKA SAFI was sanctioned with eight (8) admonitions pursuant to what is provided in Articles
1°, 2°, 3°, 4°, 5°, 6°, 7° and 8° of said resolution and with a fine of three (3) UIT equivalent to S/ 14,850.00 (Fourteen thousand eight hundred and 00/100 soles) pursuant to Article 9°2 of the cited resolution;
It should be specified that the reconsideration appeal
filed by ANKA SAFI refers only to the challenge of the INFRACTION, which was sanctioned with a fine of (3) UIT; On the Sanction Criteria applied to the INFRACTION committed by ANKA SAFI
In principle, it must be specified that in the case of infractions related to late submission of eventual and periodic information,
the SMV has regulated through the “Criteria Applicable to the Administrative Sanctioning Procedure for Non-Compliance with the Norms regulating the Submission of Periodic or Eventual Information”, approved by SMV Resolution No. 006-2012-SMV/01 and its amendments (hereinafter, SANCTION CRITERIA), the way in which the sanction criteria must be applied in such types of infractions;
Likewise, the application of the sanction criteria
serves to grade the sanction objectively and fairly, based on the form of non-compliance, in this case its lateness, in which the submission of each type of information is incurred, within an evaluated period, likewise, it serves to standardize the sanctions to be imposed on participants for non-compliance of the same type;
Likewise, the SANCTION CRITERIA have as one
of their purposes that companies under the competence of the SMV can easily foresee

2
“Article 9.- Declare that ANKA Sociedad Administradora de Fondos de Inversión S.A. has committed one (1) minor infraction typified in Annex I, numeral 3, item 3.1 of the Sanctions Regulation, approved by the SMV Resolution No. 035-2018-SMV/01, for not having timely presented the material fact referred to the appointment of Mr. Javier Moran Ortiz as director of ANKA SAFI, which occurred on May 31, 2023.”

PERÚ Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas

SMV
Superintendencia del Mercado de Valores
“Decenio de la Igualdad de Oportunidades para Mujeres y Hombres” “Año de la Esperanza y el Fortalecimiento de la Democracia” Documento electrónico firmado digitalmente en el marco de la Ley N° 27269, Ley de Firmas y Certificados Digitales, su Reglamento y modificatorias. La integridad del documento y la autoría de la(s) firma(s) pueden ser verificadas en https://apps.firmaperu.gob.pe/web/validador.xhtml the punitive consequence of possible infractions to their normative obligations;
36. For the elaboration of the SANCTION CRITERIA,
the legal framework of the securities market, the SANCTIONS REGULATION, as well as supplementary norms such as Law No. 27444, General Administrative Procedure Law (LPAG); have been taken into account;
37. Considering that the norms establish defined deadlines for the submission of information, non-compliance with them can be qualified as such objectively. That is, once the submission deadline has expired, without the information having been provided, the participant incurs an infraction of the norms; that is, these are infractions that have their origin in an objective cause, concretely identifiable;
38. Nevertheless, the objective nature of said
non-compliances, at the time of grading the sanction, the criteria contained in the SANCTION CRITERIA, the SANCTIONS REGULATION and those pointed out by the LPAG will be taken into account;
39. In that sense, it is important to mention and highlight that the SANCTION CRITERIA regulate the basis for the determination of the sanction to be imposed; that is, these criteria constitute the minimum basis for the determination of the sanction to be imposed, which assumes that the existence of certain aggravating factors has not been accredited such as: grave impact on the legal goods protected; concrete detriment to investors; obtaining an illegal benefit; intent in the commission of the infraction, being that, if any of the mentioned aggravating factors occur, the fine for each infraction could be increased up to the maximum allowed by law, taking into account the principles of reasonableness and proportionality;
40. Regarding the fine for non-compliances in the
communication of eventual information, the SANCTION CRITERIA first determine the fine based on the calendar days of delay up to a maximum of three (3) UIT, on said result, the fine may be increased if the existence of sanction antecedents or if it has antecedents of the same conduct that is intended to be sanctioned is verified;
41. It should be specified that in accordance with what is established in Article 35° of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, minor infractions can be sanctionable with a fine of up to 25 UIT as the legal maximum; however, in the present case, considering what was stated above and what was developed in the
RESOLUTION SASP, the fine imposed for the INFRACTION was 3 UIT;
42. Therefore, it is worth specifying that the principles of
reasonableness and proportionality have been positivized by the legislator ex ante through predetermined normative parameters, which implies a reduction of discretion and standardization of sanctions;
43. It is worth referring that Article 31° of the SANCTIONS
REGULATION states that the infractor who has been imposed a fine sanction for the commission of minor infractions may request a reduction of twenty percent (20%), of the amount to be paid, provided that it accredits the prior and joint compliance with some requirements, among others, the presentation of a sworn statement in which

PERÚ Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas

3
“140. On this particular point, regarding the infraction of item i) of the third consideration of this resolution, it has been accredited that it has not caused a concrete economic detriment to investors; the administrator society does not have sanction antecedents, nor recidivism; ANKA SAF has not obtained a benefit from its illegal conduct; and, nor has it been accredited that the administrator society has acted with intent”

PERÚ Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas

SMV
Superintendencia del Mercado de Valores
“Decenio de la Igualdad de Oportunidades para Mujeres y Hombres” “Año de la Esperanza y el Fortalecimiento de la Democracia” Documento electrónico firmado digitalmente en el marco de la Ley N° 27269, Ley de Firmas y Certificados Digitales, su Reglamento y modificatorias. La integridad del documento y la autoría de la(s) firma(s) pueden ser verificadas en https://apps.firmaperu.gob.pe/web/validador.xhtml market participants, but also includes the information available to them, which allows them to make informed decisions;
49. In this sense, the fact of appointing a director, even if it does not imply an immediate change in the management of the funds, generates uncertainty in the market regarding the future direction of the administrator, which can affect the confidence of investors and the value of the shares;
50. Furthermore, the late communication of this fact, even if it was eventually formalized, constitutes a breach of the duty of timely information, which is essential for the proper functioning of the market;
51. Therefore, the RESOLUTION SASP correctly qualified the impact as “not minimal”, since the late communication of the appointment of a director, without additional facts that imply a change of control or management shift, generates uncertainty in the market and affects the transparency of the information available to investors;
52. Consequently, the reconsideration appeal filed by ANKA SAFI is declared unfounded, and the RESOLUTION SASP is upheld;
V. RESOLUTION
53. In virtue of the foregoing, and in use of the faculties conferred by the legal norms in force;
RESOLVES:
Article 1.- Declare the reconsideration appeal filed by ANKA Sociedad Administradora de Fondos de Inversión S.A. against the Resolution of the Adjunct Superintendent of the SMV No. 017-2026-SMV/10, unfounded.
Article 2.- Uphold the Resolution of the Adjunct Superintendent of the SMV No. 017-2026-SMV/10, which sanctioned ANKA Sociedad Administradora de Fondos de Inversión S.A. with eight (8) admonitions and a fine of three (3) UIT, equivalent to S/ 14,850.00 (Fourteen thousand eight hundred and 00/100 soles), for having committed nine (9) minor infractions typified in Annex I, numeral 3, item 3.1 of the Sanctions Regulation, approved by SMV Resolution No. 035-2018-SMV/01, for failing to submit periodic and eventual information within the deadline established by the applicable regulation.
Article 3.- Notify the present resolution to the interested party, ANKA Sociedad Administradora de Fondos de Inversión S.A., and publish it on the website of the Securities Market Superintendence (SMV).
Lima, May 04, 2026

Adjunct Superintendent of Prudential Supervision SMV

PERÚ Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas

[RegAlert note: the English text above is a translation of the first 24,000 characters of a 42,246-character original (57% of the document). The remainder was not translated. The complete original-language text is stored with this document.]