United States
Deals are generally approved, but a new law increases the number and types of deals reviewed.
As governments in various countries tighten their grip on national security reviews of foreign direct investment, the need for better assessment and calibration of the associated regulatory risk in cross-border transactions is greater than ever before
Nowhere is this trend more evident than in the United States, with the August passage of the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act (FIRRMA), which expanded the range of transactions that are subject to review by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), and the more recent release of a pilot program under FIRRMA that instituted mandatory declarations for a broad range of transactions and put in place penalties—up to the full value of the transaction—for failure to comply. With CFIUS set to clamp down still further in coming months, CFIUS compliance is rapidly moving to the very top of the due diligence list for cross-border transactions involving US businesses.
The US is far from alone. As you will read in the pages that follow, the European Union, United Kingdom, Germany, France, China and other nations are also incrementally ratcheting up their reviews. In the UK, for instance, the government is proposing radical new legislation to allow it to intervene in cases that raise potential national security concerns. The UK government itself estimates that, under the new law, approximately 50 cases a year may end up with some form of remedy to address such concerns. In France, the new PACTE law is likely to strengthen the sanctions mechanism, extend the list of sectors subject to review and introduce some transparency into the process through annual reporting on a no-name basis of reviewed cases.
The pages that follow offer a common-sense guide to investing in major jurisdictions, a snapshot of recent regulatory changes in each, and guidance on making sound investment decisions in a time fraught with regulatory uncertainty.
Deals are generally approved, but a new law increases the number and types of deals reviewed.
While few deals are challenged in Canada, national security reviews are becoming more common and complex
Proposed European foreign direct investment regulation— a first step toward harmonized European investment controls
New legislation has been proposed to expand the scope of French national security reviews, especially in the technology sector, and to strengthen the powers of French authorities to impose sanctions
Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy is enforcing a stricter regime for foreign direct investment reviews
Deals are generally not blocked by the Italian government. However, in connection with the clearance process, conditions may be imposed that can have a significant impact on the investment
New amendments potentially require foreign investors to disclose information about beneficiaries, beneficial owners and controlling persons as part of pre-clearance
National security interventions have, with one exception, involved defense considerations
Australia requires a wide variety of investments by foreign businesses to be reviewed and approved before completion
China is attempting to implement a more structured and comprehensive system to keep a closer eye on economic deals that might have security implications
Japan’s implementation of the 2017 amendments to FEFTA must be watched closely to see whether Japan will adopt a more aggressive stance
Australia requires a wide variety of investments by foreign businesses to be reviewed and approved before completion
FIRB is more closely scrutinizing investments in sensitive sectors (especially power) and is more likely to impose conditions on such investments to increase government oversight.
The decision to approve or deny a foreign investment application is ultimately made by the Treasurer of Australia, based on an assessment of whether the investment would be contrary to the national interest. When making its decision, the Treasurer is advised by the Foreign Investment Review Board (FIRB), which examines foreign investment proposals and advises on the national interest implications. Australia's foreign investment policy framework comprises the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act 1975 ("the Act"), the Act's related regulations, Australia's Foreign Investment Policy ("the Policy") and a number of guidance notes.
WHO FILES
A foreign person or entity making an acquisition that requires approval under the Act must apply to FIRB for a notification that the Treasurer has no objection to the acquisition ("FIRB approval") before completion of the acquisition, and any agreement to make the acquisition must be subject to receiving FIRB approval.
An application includes a filing fee that varies according to the type of deal and the deal value.
TYPES OF DEALS REVIEWED
FIRB approval is required for a range of acquisitions by foreign persons, including:
Certain types of investors receive differing treatment for their deals:
SCOPE OF THE REVIEW
The Treasurer may prohibit an investment if he or she believes it would be contrary to the national interest. In making this decision, the Treasurer will broadly consider:
TRENDS IN THE REVIEW PROCESS
Historically, there have been few rejections by the Treasurer on the grounds of national interest. However, there have been some significant investment proposals that have been rejected on national security grounds, including the blocking of the New South Wales government's proposed sale of its electricity network Ausgrid to Chinese and Hong Kong investors in 2016. In 2016 – 2017, only two non-residential land applications were formally rejected (out of a total of 1,159 applications). These rejections both related to the Ausgrid acquisition.
HOW FOREIGN INVESTORS CAN PROTECT THEMSELVES
Foreign persons should file an application in advance of any transaction or make the transaction conditional on FIRB approval, and a transaction should not proceed to completion until the Treasurer advises on the outcome of its review. For a more sensitive application (e.g., a transaction involving the power, ports, water, telecommunications banking or media sectors), foreign investors should consider taking up the government's invitation in the Policy to engage with FIRB before filing an application for a significant investment.
These discussions may help foreign investors understand national interest concerns the government may hold about a particular proposal and the conditions the Treasurer may be considering imposing on the proposal should it be approved.
These discussions can also help with structuring a transaction in order to reduce the likelihood of rejection. Such discussions should be held at an early stage in order to provide enough time to satisfy all FIRB queries. Where there is a competitive bid process for the acquisition, a foreign investor that does not actively engage with FIRB early in the bidding process may be placed at a competitive disadvantage to other bidders who do. Foreign investors should be prepared to discuss in detail any conditions and undertakings that may be requested by FIRB, especially for acquisitions that are likely to attract greater political or media scrutiny.
REVIEW PROCESS TIMELINE
Under the Act, the Treasurer has 30 days to consider an application and make a decision. The time frame for making a decision will not start until the correct application fee has been paid in full. If the Treasurer requests further information from the investor, the 30-day time period will be on hold until the request has been satisfied. The Treasurer may also extend this period by up to 90 days by publishing an interim order. An interim order may be made to allow further time to consider the exercise of the Treasurer's powers. Investors can also voluntarily extend the period by providing written consent.
2018 UPDATE HIGHLIGHTS
- Generally, the Treasurer approves the vast majority of applications
- However, FIRB has been increasingly willing to use conditions and undertakings as a mechanism to increase the government's oversight of more complex or sensitive investments. Undertakings required from FIRB may include matters relating to governance, location of senior management, listing requirements, market competition and pricing of goods and services (e.g., that all off-take arrangements must be on arm's-length terms) and other industry-specific matters. FIRB has also issued a set of standard tax conditions that apply to those foreign investments that pose a risk to Australia's revenue and make clear the requirements and expectations for investors
- The Treasurer has wide divestiture powers and criminal and civil penalties can apply for serious breaches of Australia's foreign investment laws
Click here to go back to the full magazine:
National security reviews 2018: A global perspective
Kevin Chen (White & Case, Graduate, Sydney) contributed to the development of this publication.
This publication is provided for your convenience and does not constitute legal advice. This publication is protected by copyright.
© 2018 White & Case LLP