Canada
The Canadian government announced a strict framework to evaluate foreign investments in the critical minerals sector by state-owned enterprises and state-linked private investors, especially if from “non-likeminded” countries.
Now in its seventh year of annual publication, White & Case's Foreign Direct Investment Reviews provides a comprehensive look into rapidly evolving foreign direct investment (FDI) laws and regulations in approximately 40 national jurisdictions and two regions. This 2023 edition includes more than 15 new jurisdictions in addition to those covered in previous editions and summarizes high-level principles in the European Union and Middle East. Our expansion in coverage reflects the rapid global proliferation of FDI regimes and our market leading position in the field.
FDI regimes are wide-reaching in scope, from national security to public health and safety, law and order, technological superiority, and continuity and integrity of critical supply chains. They are divergent with respect to jurisdictional triggers across countries, and are almost always a black-box process.
The following are some general observations, in large part based on the 2022 CFIUS and EU annual reports:
Investors conducting cross-border business need to understand FDI restrictions as they are today—and how these laws are evolving over time—to avoid disruption to realizing synergies, achieving technological development and integration, and ultimately securing liquidity.
We would like to extend a special thank-you to all of our external authors, who have provided some insightful commentary on the FDI regimes in a number of important jurisdictions. The names of these individual contributors and their law firms are provided throughout this publication.
We would also like to extend a special thank-you to James Hsiao of our Hong Kong office and Tim Sensenig of our Washington, DC office for their tireless efforts and dedication to the publication of this edition.
The Canadian government announced a strict framework to evaluate foreign investments in the critical minerals sector by state-owned enterprises and state-linked private investors, especially if from “non-likeminded” countries.
Foreign direct investments, whether undertaken directly or indirectly, are generally allowed without restrictions or without the need to obtain prior authorization from an administrative agency.
Most deals are approved, but expanded jurisdiction, mandatory filings applying in certain cases, enhanced focus on national security considerations, and a substantially increased pursuit of non-notified transactions have changed the landscape.
Driven by the European Commission's guidance, Member States keep expanding their investment screening regimes. A similar trend is observed in Europe at large.
In Austria, the Austrian Federal Investment Control Act (Investitionskontrollgesetz or the ICA) introduced a new, fully fledged regime for the screening of Foreign Direct Investments (FDI) and came into effect on July 25, 2020. With its wide scope of application and extensive interpretation by the competent authority, the number of screened investments has soared.
Belgium implements an FDI screening regime by July 1, 2023.
The new Foreign Investments Screening Act took effect in May 2021, and completed its first full year in operation in 2022.
The scope of the Danish FDI regime is comprehensive and requires a careful assessment of investments and agreements involving Danish companies.
Estonia will have in place an FDI review regime by September 2023.
Deals are generally not blocked in Finland.
In France, FDI screening authorities have issued new guidelines to improve the transparency of the FDI process.
The Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy continues to tighten FDI control, but the investment climate remains liberal in principle.
The need for FDI screening remains in focus for deals with Hungarian dimensions.
Ireland anticipates adopting and implementing an FDI screening regime by Q1 2023.
Italian "Golden Power Law:" Ten years old and continuously expanding its reach.
The Russian Federation's invasion of Ukraine has precipitated the inclusion of provisions blocking Russian and Belarussian nationals from direct investment in a number of sectors.
All investments concerning national security are under the scope of review.
Luxembourg has introduced a bill of law to regulate foreign direct investments. The law is currently being discussed before the Luxembourg Parliament.
Malta's recently introduced FDI regime captures a substantial number of transactions that must be notified to the authorities and, in some cases, will be subject to screening.
The Middle East continues opening to foreign investment, subject to licensing approvals and ownership thresholds for certain business sectors or in certain geographical zones.
The Netherlands prepares for its first effective year of new FDI regulation.
Changes in the geopolitical situation have resulted in increased awareness of security threats caused by strategic acquisitions and access to sensitive technology. The ongoing review of the FDI regulations in Norway is expected to result in more effective mechanisms to identify and deal with security threats in transactions and investors should be prepared to take this into account when planning future investments in Norwegian companies that engage in sensitive activities.
The Polish FDI regime governing the acquisitions of covered entities by non-EEA and non-OECD buyers has been extended until July 2025.
Transactions involving foreign natural or legal persons that allow direct or indirect control over strategic assets may be subject to FDI screening.
The Romanian regime regarding foreign direct investment has undergone a major change in 2022, when new legislation was enacted, and is aimed at implementing relevant European Union legislation.
The Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS) tends to impose increased scrutiny in the sphere of foreign investments and has developed a number of amendments to the foreign investments laws that are aimed at eliminating legislative gaps in this sphere.
On November 29, 2022, Slovakia, for the first time, adopted full-fledged foreign direct investment legislation. This legislation is effective as of March 1, 2023.
Since May 31, 2020, certain foreign investments into Slovenian companies can be subject to review. Acquisition of real estate related to critical infrastructure may also be subject to review.
The restrictions imposed by the Spanish government on foreign direct investments during the COVID-19 outbreak have remained after the pandemic.
Other than security-related screening, Sweden is currently still without a general FDI screening mechanism.
Historically, Switzerland has been very liberal regarding foreign investments. However, there has recently been increased political pressure to create a more structured legal regime for foreign investment.
Making Türkiye an attractive investment destination continues to be a priority for the government.
Foreign direct investment is permissible in the UAE, subject to applicable licensing and ownership conditions.
The UK’s National Security & Investment Act has now been in place for a year and has already made its mark, prohibiting deals on national security grounds and also requiring remedies in cases that are not subject to the mandatory notification requirement. We expect a continued tough approach over the next year as global geo-political tensions bring national security concerns to the fore.
Australia requires a wide variety of investments by foreign investors to be reviewed and approved before completion of the investment.
China has further developed its national security regulatory regime by promulgating measures on cybersecurity review and security assessment of cross-border data transfer.
India continues to be an attractive destination for foreign investment, ranking as the world's seventh-largest recipient of FDI in 2021.
The Japanese government continues to review filings and refine its approach under the FDI regime following the 2019 amendments.
Korea is increasing the level of scrutiny of foreign investments due to growing concerns over the transfer of sensitive technologies.
Recent legislative reforms have increased the New Zealand government's ability to take national interest considerations into account, but have also looked to exclude lower-risk transactions from consent requirements.
All FDIs are subject to prior approval, but the investment climate is welcoming and liberal.
Australia requires a wide variety of investments by foreign investors to be reviewed and approved before completion of the investment.
Fiona Blanch (White & Case, Associate, Melbourne) contributed to the development of this publication
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 and national security.
When making its decision, the Treasurer is advised by the Foreign Investment Review Board (FIRB), which examines foreign investment proposals, consults with other relevant Australian government agencies as required, and advises on the national interest and national security implications. Australia's foreign investment policy framework comprises the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act 1975 (Cth) (the "Act") and its related regulations, the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Fees Imposition Act 2015 (Cth) and its related regulations ("Fees Regime"), Australia's Foreign Investment Policy (the "Policy") and a number of guidance notes.
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, before completion of the acquisition. In these circumstances, any agreement to make the acquisition must be conditional upon, and subject to, receipt of FIRB approval by the acquirer.
An application includes a filing fee that varies according to the type of deal and the deal value. As of January 1, 2021, amendments to the Fees Regime changed the way that fees are calculated for applications and, as of July 29, 2022, the fees applicable for an application to FIRB doubled, with the maximum fee payable now capped at AUD1,045,000.
An application to FIRB can be mandatory (as explained below), or voluntary, subject to the type of the transaction and the sectors involved (a voluntary filing may preclude post-acquisition orders being made by the Treasurer on the basis of "national security" concerns—as further explained below).
FIRB approval is required for a range of acquisitions by foreign persons, including:
Certain types of investors receive differing treatment for their deals:
The Treasurer may prohibit an investment if he or she believes it would be contrary to the national interest or national security.
In making this decision, while the concept of "national interest" is not defined in the legislation, the Treasurer will broadly consider:
The "national security test" requires the Treasurer to assess a given investment from a national security perspective, and whether such investment will affect Australia's ability to protect its strategic and security interests. In making this assessment, the Treasurer relies on advice from the relevant national security agencies for assessments as to whether an investment raises national security issues (e.g., through foreign intrusion or espionage). This test is generally applied in circumstances where an investment involves a "national security business, "national security land" or falls within one of the sectors of interest for the Treasurer, as set out in Guidance Note 8 on National Security.
Under the Act, the Treasurer has 30 days to consider an application and make a decision. However, in practice, the assessment process is in many cases extended and takes longer, typically eight to 12 weeks from the time of application to the receipt of a "no objections" notification. As mentioned above, the holiday period usually impacts these timeframes for decisions.
The timeframe 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 review period will be on hold until the request has been satisfied.
Typically, if FIRB requires further time, it will request that the applicant voluntarily extend the approval deadline. As the Treasurer is also entitled to unilaterally impose a 90-day extension under statute, applicants are generally incentivized to "voluntarily" request the proposed deadline extensions and, in reality, the review process will take approximately eight to 12 weeks.
Foreign persons should file an application in advance of any transaction, and any transaction requiring mandatory FIRB approval must be conditioned on receipt of FIRB approval. Such a transaction should not proceed to completion until the Treasurer advises on the outcome of his or her review. For applications involving a sensitive or national security business or sector (e.g., a transaction involving businesses engaged with the Australian defense force, public infrastructure, power, ports, water, telecommunications, banking or media sectors), foreign investors should consider the government's invitation in the Policy to engage with FIRB before filing an application for a significant investment. Leading into the holiday period in December and January, and the impact of an Australian federal election (the next federal election is not anticipated until 2025), it is expected that decision timeframes for FIRB applications will be protracted. Foreign investors should be particularly cognizant of the need to engage with FIRB and Australian legal advisers early in a deal timeline.
These discussions may help foreign investors understand the complexity of their application, any national interest concerns the government may hold about a particular proposal, and the conditions the Treasurer may impose on approvals.
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.
Investors should be aware of the sensitivity in relation to the investment structures used by foreign investors, profit shifting and payment of Australian tax. Early on, foreign investors should work with their tax advisors to ensure their investment structures do not fall outside the spectrum of what is acceptable to the Australian Tax Office (ATO), as the ATO is consulted in all approval processes. In particular, see below under the bullet point "Conditions" for commentary on tax conditions that may be attached to a FIRB approval. Investors should also work with their advisors to determine a level of transparency in upstream ownership, to avoid further enquiry from FIRB and possible future delays.
White & Case means the international legal practice comprising White & Case LLP, a New York State registered limited liability partnership, White & Case LLP, a limited liability partnership incorporated under English law and all other affiliated partnerships, companies and entities.
This article is prepared for the general information of interested persons. It is not, and does not attempt to be, comprehensive in nature. Due to the general nature of its content, it should not be regarded as legal advice.
© 2023 White & Case LLP