With an estimated two trillion dollars controlled by sovereign wealth funds, investments in the United States by entities associated with foreign governments have been an increasing part of the M&A landscape. Investments such as the proposed acquisition of Unocal by a Chinese government-owned company, the proposed acquisition of a British company, which held the rights to manage a number of U.S. ports, by a Dubai-owned company, and the proposed takeover of 3Com by a private equity firm with a Chinese-controlled entity as a minority partner have called into question considerations of U.S. national security. Consequently, the U.S. Congress has focused more sharply on how the U.S. government should review these transactions to ensure there is no threat to national security. In this regard, in 2007, Congress passed and President Bush signed into law the Foreign Investment and National Security Act of 2007 ("FINSA"),1 which amended the existing legislation dealing with review of foreign investment for national security concerns, section 721 ("section 721") of the Defense Production Act of 1950 ("DPA"), commonly known as the Exon-Florio provision. FINSA became effective on October 24, 2007. On April 21, 2008, the U.S. Department of Treasury issued proposed regulations2 to implement FINSA. The proposed regulations would take the place of the Treasury Department's existing Exon-Florio regulations set forth at 31 C.F.R. Part 800.3
Although the proposed regulations are generally consistent with FINSA, they do clarify the process and expand the scope of the investigatory period. Parties to investment in the United States should be aware of the more extensive examination of foreign investment transactions, particularly with respect to any foreign investment, direct or indirect, by which such foreign person can exercise any "control" to ". . . determine, direct, or decide important matters affecting an entity." Further, transactional documents should incorporate provisions providing for the consequences of such review by FINSA.
DPA authorizes the President of the United States to review mergers, acquisitions or takeovers of U.S. companies or assets by foreign-owned or foreign-controlled entities, which could result in foreign control of any person engaged in interstate commerce in the United States, to determine if such transactions threaten the national security of the United States. The President has delegated responsibility to the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States ("CFIUS"). CFIUS is an interagency committee chaired by the Secretary of the Treasury and is comprised of other representatives of the U.S. government. FINSA establishes CFIUS by statute, as it existed previously only by presidential mandate.
Under FINSA, CFIUS continues to have the power to review any transaction, even after it has closed, to identify and address U.S. national security concerns. However, parties to a transaction that would result in foreign control of a "person" engaged in interstate commerce in the United States (referred to in the proposed regulations as a "covered transaction") may voluntarily file a notification with the Department of Treasury to afford CFIUS an opportunity to review the transaction and address any potential national security concerns prior to closing. FINSA codifies aspects of the structure, role, process and responsibilities of the executive branch departments in review of such covered transactions for national security concerns.
FINSA provides for a 30-day CFIUS review of covered transactions to determine the effect of the transactions on national security and to address any threat posed by such transactions. The Department of Treasury will designate a "lead agency" to conduct the review. The lead agency, on behalf of CFIUS, may negotiate, enter into or impose, and enforce mitigation agreements with parties to the transaction to address any deemed threats to national security. An official at the Department of Treasury must provide written notice to the parties to a covered transaction of a determination by CFIUS whether or not to undertake an investigation and/or to conclude action under section 721.
FINSA requires an additional 45-day investigation in cases where the transaction:
- threatens to impair national security and that threat has
not been mitigated prior to the conclusion of the initial
- involves a foreign government-controlled
- would result in foreign control over critical
- results from the recommendation of the lead agency, with
the concurrence of the other CFIUS members.
To ensure appropriate accountability for CFIUS decisions, FINSA requires that, for any covered transaction on which CFIUS has undertaken an investigation and has determined to approve the subject transaction, a high-level official of the Department of the Treasury and of the lead agency must certify to Congress that there are no unresolved national security issues in order for the transaction to be cleared within the initial review. If a 45-day investigation is initiated and any national security concerns remain unresolved at the end of such investigation, the transaction must be referred to the President, who then must make a determination within 15 days on whether to approve or block the transaction.
Where a covered transaction does present national security concerns, FINSA provides statutory authority for CFIUS, or a lead agency acting on behalf of CFIUS, to enter into mitigation agreements with parties to the transaction or impose conditions on the transaction to address these concerns. This authority enables CFIUS to mitigate any national security risk posed by a transaction, instead of recommending to the President that the transaction be prohibited because it could impair U.S. national security.
FINSA provides that CFIUS may reopen its review of a transaction on which it previously concluded action under section 721 if a party to the transaction submitted false or misleading material information or omitted material information. CFIUS may also reopen a review where a party to a transaction intentionally and materially breaches a mitigation agreement or condition, and no other remedies are available to address the breach. FINSA also provides CFIUS with authority to impose civil penalties for violations of section 721, including violations of any mitigation agreement.
DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED REGULATIONS
The proposed CFIUS regulations retain many of the basic features of the existing Exon-Florio regulations. The system continues to be based on voluntary notices to CFIUS by parties to transactions, although CFIUS retains the authority to review a transaction of which it has not been voluntarily notified. The principal new development with regard to the procedures for filing notice to CFIUS is that the proposed regulations make explicit CFIUS' current practice of encouraging parties to contact and engage with CFIUS before formally filing. Such pre-notice consultations may help ensure that reviews of covered transactions are concluded as efficiently as possible.
Key Aspects of Proposed Regulations
- The proposed regulations would continue to consider
foreign acquisition of 10 percent or less of a U.S. business
to be other than a "covered transaction" if the
transaction is "solely for the purpose of
investment." However, it is important to note that those
"safe harbor" provisions do not automatically
exempt such a transaction from CFIUS review. For example, a
transaction involving a foreign person with an ownership
interest of 9 percent of a U.S. business that has the right
to determine, direct, or cause decisions regarding important
matters could be deemed a "covered
- The proposed regulations reaffirm the focus on foreign
control of an entity engaged in interstate commerce in the
United States. The proposed regulations adopt the
long-standing approach of defining "control" in
functional terms as the ability to exercise certain powers
over important matters affecting a business. Control is not
defined in terms of a specified percentage of shares or
numbers of board seats.
- The proposed regulations have expanded the procedures to
make explicit the opportunity for interaction between CFIUS
and the parties to a transaction before a notice is formally
filed. Information provided to CFIUS as part of a pre-notice
consultation becomes part of the formal notice and is
accorded the existing confidentiality protections of section
- The proposed regulations have expanded the scope of
information required to be submitted to CFIUS to include
additional data that CFIUS has routinely requested of parties
in connection with a voluntary notice. This includes, for
example, additional information regarding ultimate and
intermediate parents of the foreign person making the
acquisition; identification of any special government rights
over the foreign person making the acquisition; and personal
identification information for certain key personnel.
- There are also new requirements that the purchase
agreement or other similar documents establishing the terms
of the investment transaction must reflect all terms agreed
to by the parties with respect to matters relating to
post-closing control and governance.
- The proposed regulations provide that in cases where
CFIUS requests follow-up information, such information must
be provided within two business days after CFIUS'
request; otherwise, CFIUS may elect to reject the voluntary
notice. Also, there is reaffirmation of the requirement that
each notifying party certify in writing that the information
it provides to CFIUS is complete and accurate as it relates
to itself and the transaction, which requirement pertains to
both the original information in the voluntary notice, as
well as to follow-up information.
- The proposed regulations provide for civil penalties of
up to $250,000 for any material misstatement or omission in a
notice to CFIUS and each violation of a mitigation agreement
entered into with CFIUS or specific conditions imposed on the
parties. The civil penalties available under the DPA are
without prejudice to other penalties, civil or criminal,
available under law. These civil monetary penalties apply to
any transaction entered into after the effective date of
FINSA, October 24, 2007.
If you have any questions regarding the proposed regulations, including how they may affect your company, please contact one of the members of the Securities Law Practice Group or the lawyer in the firm with whom you are regularly in contact.
1 Foreign Investment and National Security Act of 2007, Pub. L. No. 110-49, 121 Stat. 246 amending Defense Production Act of 1950, 50 U.S.C. App. § 2170 et seq.
2 Regulations Pertaining to Mergers, Acquisitions, and Takeovers by Foreign Persons, U.S. Department of the Treasury, 73 Fed. Reg. 21,861 (Apr. 23, 2008).
3 Regulations Pertaining to Mergers, Acquisitions and Takeovers by Foreign Persons, 31 C.F.R. Part 800 et seq. (2007).
This article is for general information and does not include full legal analysis of the matters presented. It should not be construed or relied upon as legal advice or legal opinion on any specific facts or circumstances. The description of the results of any specific case or transaction contained herein does not mean or suggest that similar results can or could be obtained in any other matter. Each legal matter should be considered to be unique and subject to varying results. The invitation to contact the authors or attorneys in our firm is not a solicitation to provide professional services and should not be construed as a statement as to any availability to perform legal services in any jurisdiction in which such attorney is not permitted to practice.
Duane Morris LLP, one of the 100 largest law firms in the world, is a full-service firm of more than 650 lawyers. In addition to legal services, Duane Morris has independent affiliates employing approximately 100 professionals engaged in other disciplines. With offices in major markets in the United States and internationally, Duane Morris represents clients across the U.S. and around the world.