Canada
The Canadian government continues to scrutinize foreign investments by state-owned enterprises and state-linked private investors, especially if from "non-likeminded" countries.
Now a full decade in publication, White & Case's 2025 Foreign Direct Investment Reviews continues to provide a comprehensive look at foreign direct investment (FDI) laws and regulations across various countries and regions worldwide.
In this edition, we continue to offer key datapoints that can help inform parties and their advisors as they evaluate the new set of challenges presented by FDI screening requirements in cross-border transactions that span multiple countries.
FDI screening is continuously evolving, in fact, maturing. It is imperative to stay on top of the FDI requirements as transactions—be it mergers and acquisitions, investments, public equity offerings, or financial restructurings—are negotiated. Understanding the challenges, the potential remedies that could be required for approval and the proper allocation of FDI risk are key ingredients in avoiding unpleasant surprises related to timing, certainty and business plan execution.
With a new administration in the United States, a renewed US commitment to open foreign investment from allied countries, increased EU FDI cooperation, and the new geo-political lines and balances that are being drawn, the dynamics around FDI screening will be a driving consideration in the selection of investors in cross-border transactions. We continue to believe that most cross-border transactions will be successfully consummated in 2025, but understanding the evolving risks around FDI considerations will be critical.
The Canadian government continues to scrutinize foreign investments 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.
In the US, most FDI deals are approved without mitigation, but the landscape is evolving based on a combination of expanded jurisdiction and authorities, mandatory filings applying in certain cases, enhanced focus on a broad array of national security considerations, increased rates of mitigation, further attention to monitoring, compliance and enforcement, and a substantially increased pursuit of non-notified transactions.
The European Commission continues to be a driver of FDI screening across the EU, with Member States now moving toward coordinated enforcement.
The wide scope, low trigger thresholds and extensive interpretation of the Austrian FDI regime require a thorough assessment and proactive planning of the M&A process.
The Belgian FDI screening regime entered into force in July 2023. Investors and authorities alike are still coming to grips with the regime and the limited guidelines that help parties navigate it.
In 2024, Bulgaria established an FDI screening mechanism. Foreign investors' obligation to file for investment clearance did not become effective in 2024, but this should change soon.
The Czech Foreign Investments Screening Act took effect in May 2021, establishing the rights and duties of foreign investors and setting screening requirements for Czech targets.
The scope of the Danish FDI regime is comprehensive, and requires a careful assessment of investments and agreements involving Danish companies.
Estonia's FDI screening mechanism closed its first effective year in 2024.
FDI deals are generally not blocked in Finland, but the government is able to monitor and, if necessary, restrict foreign investment.
French FDI screening continues to focus on foreign investments involving medical and biotech activities, food security activities or the treatment, storage and transmission of sensitive data. The nuclear ecosystem is subject to very close scrutiny.
Following numerous amendments over the past years, Germany's FDI review continued in full swing in 2024, with further significant updates expected in the coming years.
Hungarian FDI regulation stands as a rock amid global economic storms, although there were few major changes in 2024.
Ireland's Screening of Third Country Transactions Act entered into force on January 6, 2025.
Italy's "Golden Power Law" review more tan ten years old and continuously expanding its reach.
The law in Latvia provides for sectoral FDI regimes for specific corporate M&A, real estate dealings and gambling companies.
All investments concerning national security are under the scope of review in Lithuania.
The Luxembourg FDI screening regime is now a year old, and the first notification filings have been made.
Malta's FDI regime regulates specific transactions that must be notified to the authorities and may potentially be subject to screening.
The Middle East continues to welcome foreign investment, subject to licensing approvals and ownership thresholds for certain business sectors or in certain geographical zones.
The Netherlands is set to expand its investment screening regime by extending the general mechanism to more sectors and by introducing additional sector-specific regulations.
Norway's foreign direct investment regime is in the process of being expanded, with more profound changes expected in the future.
After revision of the Polish FDI regime in 2024, the way the authorities are assessing transactions is evolving.
In Portugal, transactions involving acquisition of control over strategic assets by entities residing outside the EU or the EEA may be subject to FDI screening.
While far-reaching in its scope, compared to other EU countries, the Romanian FDI regime is generally perceived as investor-friendly.
The year 2024 was not marked by any major changes in the sphere of regulation of foreign investments in Russia, and the regulator continues to implement the course taken earlier in 2023.
After two years of foreign investment regulation in Slovakia, a supportive climate for foreign investments remains.
Slovenia's updated FDI regime now extends to branch offices and introduces new challenges for foreign investors navigating critical sectors.
Since 2020, certain foreign direct investments are subject to scrutiny in Spain and, since then, additional formalities have been introduced, specifically by a developing FDI regulation that entered into force on September 1, 2023. The FDI analysis is becoming increasingly crucial in the context of investments in Spain.
In its second year of operation, the Swedish FDI Act has become a standard component of a large portion of all transactions involving Swedish companies.
Apart from limited sector-specific regulations, there is currently no general FDI regime in Switzerland. An FDI Act is expected to come into force in 2026 at the earliest.
Strengthening Türkiye's position as a key investment hub remains a government priority.
Foreign direct investment is permissible in the UAE, subject to applicable licensing and ownership conditions.
FDI in the UK is covered by the National Security and Investment Act 2021, and in 2024 the government continued to update information and guidelines concerning the legislation.
Australia's FDI regimes underwent some modifications in 2024, designed to streamline the process of carrying out investments.
China continues to optimize its foreign investment environment by reducing investment restrictions, opening up market access and lowering investment thresholds into listed companies.
FDI continues to be an area of focus for the Indian government, which has announced plans to attract further foreign investment into the country.
The Japanese government expands business sectors subject to Japan's FDI regime to secure stable supply chains and mitigate the risk of technology leakage and diversion of commercial technologies into military use.
The Republic of Korea continues to welcome foreign investment, offering enhanced incentive packages and easing regulations while heightening scrutiny over transactions involving strategic industrial.
New Zealand has recently seen a period of stabilization of the overseas investment regime. However, following the formation of the coalition government at the end of 2023, this government has proposed significant changes to the overseas investment rules for 2025, making it easier for overseas investors to acquire New Zealand assets.
Taiwan continues to promote FDI under a two-track screening mechanism for foreign and PRC investors.
The Republic of Korea continues to welcome foreign investment, offering enhanced incentive packages and easing regulations while heightening scrutiny over transactions involving strategic industrial.
Explore Trendscape Our take on the interconnected global trends that are shaping the business climate for our clients.
In 2024, the Korean government announced increased incentive packages to attract foreign direct investment. At the same time, the government further tightened its grip on foreign direct investment involving strategic industrial technologies by introducing several major amendments to key statutes and regulations governing foreign direct investment.
Notification must be filed by foreign investors whose direct investment qualifies as a foreign investment or an overseas M&A transaction, or their proxies. In case of notification filed by a proxy, a power of attorney must be submitted in addition to the notification.
The FIPA defines "foreign investment" to include, among other things: acquiring 10 percent or more of the shares in a company incorporated in Korea; acquiring shares of less than 10 percent of a company incorporated in Korea and appointing officers in Korea; and investing in local non-profit organizations. In each case, the investment amount is no less than KRW 100 million (US$69,000).
An "overseas M&A transaction" under each of the ITPA and NHTSIA includes transactions where a foreign investor: intends to own 50 percent or more of the target company's equity securities; or intends to own less than 50 percent of the target's equity securities but, as the largest shareholder, will have a dominant influence over the appointment of officers or management; intends to take over or leases all or a major part of the business of the target company; or can exercise a dominant influence over the appointment of officers or management as a result of providing loans or contributing funds.
All FDI that qualifies as a foreign investment under the FIPA is subject to filing a report. All FDI requires filing of a foreign investment report (FIPA report) with a designated foreign exchange bank. Additionally, if the foreign direct investment involves a target company designated as a defense industry company by the minister of the MOTIE pursuant to the Defense Acquisition Program Act, then the investment will require foreign investment approval (FIPA approval) from the MOTIE.
Overseas M&A transactions involving target companies possessing NCTs developed without government subsidies are subject to filing an ITPA report with the MOTIE before such investments can proceed. Overseas M&A transactions involving target companies possessing NCTs developed with government subsidies for research and development are subject to approval from the MOTIE (ITPA approval).
Overseas M&A transactions involving target companies possessing NHTST are subject to the approval procedure similar to the procedure for IPTA approval, although unlike NCTs, there is no procedural distinction between government-subsidized and independently developed NHTSTs.
For a FIPA report, branches, offices and trade agencies entrusted by the head of the Korea Trade-Investment Promotion Agency or designated foreign exchange bank will accept the filing when all information and underlying documents are provided.
For FIPA approval, the key question considered is whether the transaction poses a risk to national security, specifically whether defense acquisition would be affected; and whether there is risk of technology being leaked, which could present a risk to the economy or national defense.
In case of FIPA approval, the MOTIE will consult with the Ministry of National Defense (in practice, the Defense Acquisition Program Administration) on whether to approve the application. The Ministry of National Defense will consent to granting approval if it deems that the relevant defense materials produced by the relevant defense industry company are replaceable by products of other domestic companies, or that granting approval will not pose a significant risk to national security.
In the event the foreign transaction at issue is determined to pose a serious risk to national security, the MOTIE may implement various measures to mitigate the risk, such as issuing an order to suspend, prohibit or even unwind the transaction.
For an ITPA report, the key question is similar—whether the transaction poses a risk to national security. For ITPA or NHTSIA approval, the factors considered by the MOTIE include impacts on national security as well as the national economy. In the event the foreign transaction at issue is determined to pose a serious risk to national security and/or have significant implications on the national economy, the MOTIE may order various measures to address the risk, such as issuing an order to suspend, prohibit or even unwind the transaction. A failure to comply with MOTIE orders may result in fines.
A FIPA report is routinely granted within one or two business days unless the industry sector in which the target company receiving the investment operates is subject to other restrictions.
In the case of an application for FIPA approval by the MOTIE, the MOTIE has 15 calendar days, with an option to extend the review by up to 15 calendar days, to notify the foreign investor whether it approves the transaction. The MOTIE generally observes the review periods as stipulated under the FIPA.
For an application for an ITPA report, the MOTIE has 15 calendar days to notify the target company and foreign investor whether the MOTIE approves the transaction. If the MOTIE does not approve the transaction, it has 30 calendar days from the date of notice to order to suspend, prohibit or even unwind the transaction. Before the submission of a formal application, the foreign investor may informally consult with the MOTIE in connection with its application.
In the case of an application for ITPA or NHTSIA approval, the MOTIE has 45 calendar days to notify the target company and foreign investor whether the MOTIE approves the transaction.
However, the above review periods do not include the period necessary for the authority to examine the relevant technology, which can take several weeks or months, and the period that the foreign investor takes to respond to potential requests for information issued by the MOTIE. Requests for information stop the review clock until a response is submitted that is deemed sufficient by the MOTIE.
For more accurate estimates of review periods, before the submission of a formal application, the foreign investor can informally consult with the MOTIE in connection with such application. It is common for the report or approval process to take much longer than 15 to 30 calendar days due to the technology examination process. For example, an ITPA report generally takes four months, while ITPA approval may take up to six months.
As of today, there is no publicly available list of "defense industry companies" currently designated by the minister of the MOTIE. The same applies to companies that hold NCTs and NHTSTs. Therefore, it is advisable to ask the target company whether it is designated as a defense industry company or whether it holds any NCTs or NHTSTs.
The MOTIE's Notice on Designation of NCT (no. 2024-114) and Notice on Designation of NHTST (no. 2023-108) do, however, provide a comprehensive list of technologies designated as NCTs and NHTSTs, respectively.
Entities in possession of industrial technologies may also apply to the MOTIE for determination of whether their technologies qualify as NCTs or NHTSTs. In particular, with the introduction of the ex officio decision notification system and the registration requirement under the amended ITPA, it would be crucial for entities that believe they hold NCTs to promptly undertake official determination and registration procedures to ensure compliance and avoid potential penalties.
Furthermore, either the target company or the foreign investor may contact the MOTIE before filing an ITPA report or approval application, an NHTSIA approval application or FIPA approval application to confirm the details required for such application.
The Korean government offers various channels of support to foreign investors. The foreign investment ombudsman handles all foreign investment-related complaints, while Invest Korea serves as an investment promotion agency and provides comprehensive services to foreign investors ranging from consultations, notification of investment opportunities and establishment of corporations in the country. Invest Korea maintains 36 overseas offices and 64 investment specialists to assist potential foreign investors. It is advisable for prospective investors to make use of these resources available to them when seeking investment opportunities in the Republic of Korea.
The Republic of Korea continues to maintain a relatively liberalized approach to regulating foreign direct investment that does not involve defense industries or technologies that are designated as NCTs or NHTSTs.
In the year 2024, the government has made efforts to further streamline the FDI process, and it seems likely that this trend will continue into the following years. That said, given the government's efforts to tighten its review on NCTs and NHTSTs, it is likely that foreign investors will continue to face stringent review with respect to transactions involving NCTs and NHTSTs. As such, it is advisable for prospective foreign investors to inquire whether the company is related to national defense or whether it holds designated NCTs or NHTSTs before making any investment in such company.
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.
© 2025 White & Case LLP