tp钱包正版最新下载|cfius全称 _比特派(Bitpie)官网-比特派钱包app官方下载-bitpie官网下载app

赴美投资并购必知：美国外资投资委员会（CFIUS） - 知乎

赴美投资并购必知：美国外资投资委员会（CFIUS） - 知乎首发于美国成美律师事务所切换模式写文章登录/注册赴美投资并购必知：美国外资投资委员会（CFIUS）成美律所提供海外投资并购，商业诉讼纠纷和知识产权法律服务的美国律所。美国成美律师事务所创始合伙人柳治平（大隐）律师撰写本文介绍美国外资投资委员会（CFIUS）的历史与现状，管辖范围和内容，以及中国资本赴美投资并购与CFIUS互动的案例。欢迎大家转发、指正。作者简介：柳律师，纽约大学法律博士（2007年），在美国著名大型律所执业逾七年, 为客户完成了超过百宗，总额累计超过70亿美元的并购，股份融资以及贷款交易，成美律师事务所（http://www.ambizlaw.com）创始合伙人。（A）CFIUS历史与现状美国外资投资委员会（The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States，简称“CFIUS”）是一个美国联邦政府委员会，由财政部牵头的9个联邦政府部与办公室为固定成员：以下为CFIUS 的观察员，在合适的时候，参与CFIUS活动:CFIUS的使命是根据美国1950年《国防生产法案》（The Defense Production Act of 1950（DPA））以及2007年《外商投资与国家安全法案》（The Foreign Investment and National SecurityAct of 2007 （FINSA）），对可能影响美国国家安全的外商投资交易进行审查。CFIUS始建于1980年代，其目的被一些人认为是阻扰当时野心勃勃的想着收购整个世界的日本。1987年，日本的富士通公司（Fujitsu）试图收购仙童半导体公司（Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation）。美国国会对此的反应是通过了1988年的埃克森-弗洛里奥修正案（Exon-Florio Amendment），该修正案赋予了总统阻止或解除一项外国公司收购美国生意的权力，前提是有“可信的证据（credible evidence）”表明，“取得控制权的外国利益所采取的行动可能会威胁到国家安全（foreign interest exercising control might take action that threatens to impair thenational security）”。CFIUS就是负责执行这项法律的政府委员会。接下来，CFIUS又在1990年大展拳脚。当时，随着总统乔治·H·W·布什一声令下，中国航空技术进出口总公司被迫放弃了对美国西雅图航空零部件制造企业曼口公司（MAMCO）的收购。之后的十几年，CFIUS趋于沉寂。2005年，中海油对优尼科公司（Unocal Corporation）的收购计划因为CFIUS审查原因被迫搁浅。而其再一次粉墨登场回到聚光灯下，是在2006年的迪拜港口（Dubai Ports）提议收购半岛东方轮船公司（Peninsular and Oriental）事件。作为一家来自于阿联酋，美国在中东地区最坚定的盟友国家之一的公司，迪拜港口并没有在这次收购中享受到任何福利与便利。相反的，对波斯湾国家运营美国港口威胁的担忧，倒是促使国会通过了《国家安全外国投资改革和加强透明度法案》（National Security Foreign Investment Reform and Strengthened Transparency Act）。该法案加强并扩大了CFIUS审查程序，把关键基础设施和外国政府涉入的收购添加为审查因素。在该修正案颁布之前，CFIUS的审查其实是可以自主进行的。即交易所涉当事方并不强制需要提交审查通知，接受国家安全审查，但如果其提交审查通知并通过审查，总统便无法再解除交易。而2007年出台的修正案改变了这一机制，其规定凡是涉及外国政府控制或重要基础设施的交易必须接受审查。从那之后，CFIUS的戏码越来越重。仅2011年，就有111条审查记录在案，其中有40件发展进入到深入调查阶段，更有6桩交易在这之中遭遇撤销。（B）CFIUS 与中国公司随着中国经济实力的上升，中国企业对美国标的的投资并购也迅速增长，这些交易也一步步地成为CFIUS的重点关注对象。2008年，华为和贝恩资本（Bain Capital）收购3com公司遭遇阻挠。2010年，华为再次沦为针对目标，其对摩托罗拉（Motorola）公司的投资也告搁浅。2011年，华为再次因为未能通过CFIUS的审查，不得不被迫放弃对三叶系统公司（3Leaf）的区区２００万美元资产收购交易。当时，中国商务部曾在网站发表公告，对该案结果表示遗憾，并称“希望美国有关方面摒弃成见，避免采取保护主义措施，以公平、公正、开放的态度正确对待来自中国和世界其他各国的投资。” 但显然，CFIUS并不打算对中国企业心慈手软。2012年，奥巴马总统命令由中国公司三一集团的美国关联公司罗尔斯公司（RallsCorporation）拆除其在俄勒冈购得的风电发电场项目所有硬件,出售其他权益（包括股权）。该风场毗邻一座海军飞行演练基地。罗尔斯公司和项目的前任主人希腊公司一样，在开发与收购该项目时候并没有向CFIUS报备寻求审批。总统令含糊其辞地声称罗尔斯公司“mighttake action that threatensto impair the national security of the United States” ，大致翻译：“可能会采取威胁（到去）破坏美国国家安全的（程度的）行动”。也就是说，总统令没有罗尔斯公司的任何已经采取的实际行动为依据，也没有认定任何可能上升到破坏美国国家安全的（罗尔斯公司还没有采取的）行动。这是近20年来美国总统首次发布以国家安全为由干预外来投资的总统令。中方随后一纸诉状直接将CFIUS和奥巴马告上了联邦地区（初审）法院，在中美两国引起轩然大波。一番周折后，哥伦比亚特区联邦巡回（上诉）法院作出裁决。判决整体是：（1）奥巴马总统在发布总统令之前，没有给罗尔斯公司提供总统令依赖的证据，没有给罗尔斯公司辩驳的机会，所以在剥夺罗尔斯公司财产权益时候违反程序正义（Due Process）。上诉法院把案子打回初审法院重审，要求后者提供这样的程序正义。但是关键在细节里：这个程序正义只要求CFIUS和总统提供不必加密的证据（unclassified evidence），而CFIUS和总统整个剥夺财产的决定可能是基于加密不能分享的证据，让罗尔斯公司无从反驳。（2）总统令的实质内容按照“政治问题”法律原则（political question doctrine）不受法院审查。美国宪法传统下，总统和其领导的行政部门在关系到国家安全（比如军事和外交）领域的决策，法院一般不做实质审查。这个判决明确把这一传统延伸到CFIUS的决策，标志着CFIUS和美国总统在决定交易是否影响美国国家安全时的自主裁量权不容法院实质审查。之后罗尔斯与美国政府达成和解，美国政府许可罗尔斯将该风电场项目出售给选定的第三方买家。这个和解实质甚微，因为总统令本身明确责令（当然也就允许了）罗尔斯出售（divest）该风场。俄勒冈案件诉讼进行期间，笔者为三一集团的美国关联公司设计其他交易方式，代理其走完CFIUS对这些项目的审查程序，获得了CFIUS批准，帮助三一集团完成在美国其他地区（比如科罗拉多州）的风能项目的投资或并购。备注：笔者本人参与了俄勒冈案件诉讼的后台工作，以及与CFIUS的交易审报，基于为客户保密责任，以上仅为公开信息之重述。（C）CFIUS的审查范围和内容根据FINSA的定义，CFIUS的审查对象即为所有的受辖交易（CoveredTransaction）。受辖交易是指任何会导致外国人控制美国企业的交易（any merger, acquisition, or takeover by or with any foreign person which could result in foreign control of any person engaged in interstate commerce in the United States）。其中，“外国人（Foreign Person）”指任何外国国民、外国政府或任何外国实体；或者任何受控于或可受控于外国国民、外国政府或外国实体的实体，而对于“控制”（Control）的标准界定其实相对宽泛，具有表决权的股份所有权比例、董事会席位、公司核心资源和技术的占有等都可作为衡量的因素。当一桩交易被认定为受辖交易后，CFIUS就会对其是否可能对美国国家安全造成威胁进行分析审查。此时，所有对美国极为重要、实质或虚拟的系统或资产，都将成为CFIUS考虑保护的对象。以往中国企业赴美投资，和CFIUS打交道比较多的可能就是在能源、电子通信和材料领域。直到2013年双汇集团收购全球规模最大的生猪生产商及猪肉供应商史密斯菲尔德（Smithfield）时，很多人才意识到，CFIUS的触角并不只是拘泥于其通常的审查对象——制造业、金融和信息服务业、矿业，以及建筑和运输业，而是可能涉及包括食品生产业、农业等在内的行业。简单来讲，无论军事、科技、民用生活还是农业、能源、交通运输，各个领域能产生的影响都可能被视作是美国国家安全的威胁。这并非没有道理，毕竟现代科技和生活方式把国家安全从军事领域扩展到其他诸多领域。现代通讯和交通手段，以及城市生活，使得外国公司更容易通过实际控制的位于美国境内的资产通过蝴蝶效应，危害到美国的食品与水，网络，基础设施，甚至政治过程比如选举，等等。尽管最终双汇和史密斯菲尔德的交易通过审查，获得了CFIUS的批准，其成功也不能轻易模仿复制。因为CFIUS 采用的是“一案一议”的审查方式，没有相对明朗确定的审查标准，一笔并购被如何界定将在多大程度上影响CFIUS对后续类似交易的裁定，是不确定的。（D）CFIUS的审查程序根据FINSA，审查程序可以由总统或 CFIUS 成员启动，也可由参与交易的任意一方自愿向 CFIUS 提交书面通知（VoluntaryNotice）在交易进行前主动申请开始。整个程序可以分为例常审查（Routine Review）、调查（Investigation）和总统裁决（Action bythe President）三个阶段。其中，例常审查期限为30天。若CFIUS认定该被审查交易不属于受辖交易，即不会对美国国家安全构成威胁，则其将签发“不予行动”决定（“No Action” Decision），通知相关方不予调查，程序结束，交易得到所谓安全港条款（Safe Harbor Provision）庇护。通常，该例常审查期间还包括一个7至14天的在材料提交前受审对象与CFIUS的讨论过程。如果在例常审查中发现，交易属于受辖交易范畴，且出现下列三种情形，那么在例常审查结束后，该交易须进入为期45天的调查期：一、交易确实会对美国国家安全造成威胁；二、交易本身由外国政府控制；三、交易会导致美国关键基础设施转由外国人控制并且此控制会对美国国家安全造成威胁。在调查期间，CFIUS会与交易方协商采取有效的缓解措施，通常做法是签署缓和协议（Mitigation Agreement），即交易方在CFIUS的监督下采取措施，缓和交易中已显现或潜在的威胁美国国家安全的情况，以作为获得CFIUS批准审查的条件。极端情况下，如各成员机构对该交易的看法无法达成一致，穷尽上述45天调查期后，CFIUS可提请总统阻止交易——CFIUS主席将会在向总统的报告中详细阐述各种不同的意见，请总统裁决，总统须在 15 天内作出最终决定。结语总而言之，CFIUS的管辖范围很广，美国宪法传统赋予其对于关系到国家安全相关事务极大的自由裁量权，CFIUS成为中国投资人赴美投资并购一个难以捉摸的潜在问题。中国企业在投资伊始就尽早与律师一道设计合理的投资结构，恰当稳妥处理与CFIUS互动，管理投资过程中可能产生的法律风险。******************************************定稿作者：柳治平（大隐）律师微信号： whazupdoc电子邮件： zliu@ambizlaw.com本文初稿由成美律师事务所曹其华，臧凯，朱一葭起草。本文版权属于美国成美律师事务所。欢迎其他公众号转发，但敬请事先告知定稿作者。发布于 2020-12-06 02:23外资投行CFIUS海外并购赞同 6添加评论分享喜欢收藏申请转载文章被以下专栏收录美国成美律师事务所提供海外投资并购，商业纠纷诉讼和知识产权法律

CFIUS审查的基本判断逻辑 - 知乎

CFIUS审查的基本判断逻辑 - 知乎首发于投资的一些法律问题切换模式写文章登录/注册CFIUS审查的基本判断逻辑开府仪同3S1、基本概念(1) CFIUS是什么。CFIUS全称Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States，字面意思是指美国外国投资委员会这个跨部门委员会。CFIUS历史悠久，最初的职权和范围与目前所称已经有显著的差别。随着FIRRMA法案的实施，普遍认为FIRRMA法案重塑了原先管辖范围优先的CFIUS审查，从而给外国投资人对美投资产生重大影响。(2) CFIUS审查是什么意思。目前常谈到的CFIUS审查，多指根据FIRRMA(《2019年外国投资风险审查现代化法案》（the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act of 2019)以及2020年2月正式生效的《关于外国人士在美国进行特定投资的规定》（Provisions Pertaining to Certain Investments in the United States by Foreign Persons，即“CFIUS最终规则”）而进行的对美投资审查。2、判断逻辑(1) 触发审查与否的基本逻辑。如以下(a)、(b)、(c)事项全部满足，则大概率触发CFIUS审查。(a) US Business. 所谓的US Business, 包括任何在美从事商业活动的行为，无论是否通过在美国的分支机构进行。(b) foreign person. 所谓foreign person，包括任何外国政府、个人、实体或任何受其控制的US Entity.(c) types of investment. 包括：(i) 将会导致foreign person 控制 U.S. business (最终规则中的列举为：7%的表决权加上终止重大合同的权利；或9%的表决权加上否决权（包括对高级管理人员解聘)；(ii) 无论控制与否，将会导致foreign person获得“triggering rights”的“TID”投资。“Trriggering Rights”包括：董事或观察员席位或提名权; 或接触重大非公开信息; 或参与实质性决策。“TID”是指：critical technology关键技术，critical infrastructure关键基础设施，sensitive personal data敏感个人信息。(2) 个案分析。最终规则对以下的判断因素的分析和列举相当详细，并且有实质重于形式的兜底；同时，另外safe harbor，excepted investors, investment fund carve-out等特定规则，因此，个案中的判断，需要结合个案的实际情况。3、申报要求CFIUS的基本申报要求是自愿申报，但是，在以下情形下，需要进行强制申报：(1)、对TID的控制或非控制投资，导致foreign person对US Business拥有实质权益，且政府实体在该foreign person中拥有实质性权益。“实质权益”是指foreign person获得US Business25%投票权。如果政府实体在该foreign person中持有49%或以上权益，则该政府实体也将被视为持有“实质权益”。(2) 、生产、设计、测试、制造、组装或研发critical technology的“TID”行业的US Business进行的控制或非控制投资，且该等关键技术的出口、再出口、转让（在国内）或再转让给外国投资者需要美国监管机构授权。编辑于 2021-05-26 15:56CFIUS风险投资（VC）跨境投资赞同 1添加评论分享喜欢收藏申请转载文章被以下专栏收录投资的一些法

CFIUS Overview | U.S. Department of the Treasury

An official website of the United States Government

Skip Navigation

Accessibility

Languages

Contact

U.S. Department of the Treasury

About Treasury

General Information

Role of the Treasury

Officials

Organizational Chart

Orders and Directives

Offices

Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility

Domestic Finance

Economic Policy

General Counsel

International Affairs

Management

Public Affairs

Tax Policy

Terrorism and Financial Intelligence

Inspectors General

Bureaus

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB)

Bureau of Engraving & Printing (BEP)

Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN)

Bureau of the Fiscal Service (BFS)

Internal Revenue Service (IRS)

Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC)

U.S. Mint

Office of Inspector General (OIG)

Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA)

Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (SIGTARP)

Special Inspector General for Pandemic Recovery (SIGPR)

Budget, Financial Reporting, Planning and Performance

Strategic Plan

Budget Request/Annual Performance Plan and Reports

Agency Financial Report

Inspector General Audits and Investigative Reports

Climate Action Plan

IRS Strategic Operating Plan

History

Curator

History Overview

Prior Secretaries

Prior Treasurers

The Treasury Building

Collections

Freedman's Bank Building

CareersAt HeadquartersAt Our Bureaus Top 10 Reasons to Work HereBenefits and GrowthDiversity Veterans EmploymentPathwaysHow to ApplySearch JobsThe Fair Chance to Compete Act

Policy Issues

Inflation Reduction Act

COVID19 Economic Relief

American Families and Workers

Small Businesses

State, Local, and Tribal Governments

American Industry

Tax Policy

Revenue Proposals

Tax Expenditures

International Tax

Treaties and Related Documents

Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA)

Reports

Tax Analysis

Tax Regulatory Process

Climate Change

Economic Policy

Treasury Coupon Issues

Corporate Bond Yield Curve

Economic Policy Reports

Social Security and Medicare

Total Taxable Resources

Terrorism and Illicit Finance

Sanctions

Asset Forfeiture

Domestic Violent Extremism

311 Actions

Terrorist Finance Tracking Program

Money Laundering

Financial Action Task Force

Protecting Charitable Organizations

Financing the Government

Treasury Quarterly Refunding

Interest Rate Statistics

Treasury Securities

Treasury Investor Data

Debt Management Research

Financial Markets, Financial Institutions, and Fiscal Service

Cash and Debt Forecasting

Debt Limit

Financial Stability Oversight Council

Federal Insurance Office

RESTORE Act

1603 Program

The Community Development Financial Institution (CDFI) Fund

Making Home Affordable

Financial Sanctions

Specially Designated Nationals List (SDN List)

Consolidated Sanctions List

Search OFAC's Sanctions Lists

Additional Sanctions Lists

OFAC Recent Actions

Sanctions Programs and Country Information

Frequently Asked Questions

OFAC Civil Penalties and Enforcement

Contact OFAC

Consumer Policy

Financial Literacy and Education Commission

Mymoney.gov

Innovations in Financial Services

Featured Research

InternationalThe Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS)Outbound Investment Security Program Exchange Stabilization FundG-7 and G-20International Monetary FundMultilateral Development BanksMacroeconomic and Foreign Exchange Policies of Major Trading PartnersExchange Rate AnalysisU.S.-China Comprehensive Strategic Economic Dialogue (CED)

Small Business Programs

Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization

Small Business Lending Fund

State Small Business Credit Initiative

Tribal Affairs

Data

Interest RatesDaily Treasury Par Yield Curve RatesDaily Treasury Par Real Yield Curve RatesDaily Treasury Bill RatesDaily Treasury Long-Term RatesDaily Treasury Real Long-Term Rates

Treasury Coupon-Issue and Corporate Bond Yield Curve

Treasury Coupon Issues

Corporate Bond Yield Curve

Federal Financial Data

Your Guide to America’s Finances

Monthly Treasury Statement

Daily Treasury Statement

How Your Money Is Spent

USAspending.gov

National Debt

National Debt to the Penny

Historical Debt Outstanding

Monthly Statement of the Public Debt

Quarterly Refunding

Debt Management Overview and Quarterly Refunding Process

Most Recent Documents

CFIUS Frequently Asked Questions | U.S. Department of the Treasury

An official website of the United States Government

Skip Navigation

Accessibility

Languages

Contact

U.S. Department of the Treasury

About Treasury

General Information

Role of the Treasury

Officials

Organizational Chart

Orders and Directives

Offices

Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility

Domestic Finance

Economic Policy

General Counsel

International Affairs

Management

Public Affairs

Tax Policy

Terrorism and Financial Intelligence

Inspectors General

Bureaus

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB)

Bureau of Engraving & Printing (BEP)

Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN)

Bureau of the Fiscal Service (BFS)

Internal Revenue Service (IRS)

Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC)

U.S. Mint

Office of Inspector General (OIG)

Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA)

Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (SIGTARP)

Special Inspector General for Pandemic Recovery (SIGPR)

Budget, Financial Reporting, Planning and Performance

Strategic Plan

Budget Request/Annual Performance Plan and Reports

Agency Financial Report

Inspector General Audits and Investigative Reports

Climate Action Plan

IRS Strategic Operating Plan

History

Curator

History Overview

Prior Secretaries

Prior Treasurers

The Treasury Building

Collections

Freedman's Bank Building

CareersAt HeadquartersAt Our Bureaus Top 10 Reasons to Work HereBenefits and GrowthDiversity Veterans EmploymentPathwaysHow to ApplySearch JobsThe Fair Chance to Compete Act

Policy Issues

Inflation Reduction Act

COVID19 Economic Relief

American Families and Workers

Small Businesses

State, Local, and Tribal Governments

American Industry

Tax Policy

Revenue Proposals

Tax Expenditures

International Tax

Treaties and Related Documents

Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA)

Reports

Tax Analysis

Tax Regulatory Process

Climate Change

Economic Policy

Treasury Coupon Issues

Corporate Bond Yield Curve

Economic Policy Reports

Social Security and Medicare

Total Taxable Resources

Terrorism and Illicit Finance

Sanctions

Asset Forfeiture

Domestic Violent Extremism

311 Actions

Terrorist Finance Tracking Program

Money Laundering

Financial Action Task Force

Protecting Charitable Organizations

Financing the Government

Treasury Quarterly Refunding

Interest Rate Statistics

Treasury Securities

Treasury Investor Data

Debt Management Research

Financial Markets, Financial Institutions, and Fiscal Service

Cash and Debt Forecasting

Debt Limit

Financial Stability Oversight Council

Federal Insurance Office

RESTORE Act

1603 Program

The Community Development Financial Institution (CDFI) Fund

Making Home Affordable

Financial Sanctions

Specially Designated Nationals List (SDN List)

Consolidated Sanctions List

Search OFAC's Sanctions Lists

Additional Sanctions Lists

OFAC Recent Actions

Sanctions Programs and Country Information

Frequently Asked Questions

OFAC Civil Penalties and Enforcement

Contact OFAC

Consumer Policy

Financial Literacy and Education Commission

Mymoney.gov

Innovations in Financial Services

Featured Research

Small Business Programs

Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization

Small Business Lending Fund

State Small Business Credit Initiative

Tribal Affairs

Data

Interest RatesDaily Treasury Par Yield Curve RatesDaily Treasury Par Real Yield Curve RatesDaily Treasury Bill RatesDaily Treasury Long-Term RatesDaily Treasury Real Long-Term Rates

Treasury Coupon-Issue and Corporate Bond Yield Curve

Treasury Coupon Issues

Corporate Bond Yield Curve

Federal Financial Data

Your Guide to America’s Finances

Monthly Treasury Statement

Daily Treasury Statement

How Your Money Is Spent

USAspending.gov

National Debt

National Debt to the Penny

Historical Debt Outstanding

Monthly Statement of the Public Debt

Quarterly Refunding

Debt Management Overview and Quarterly Refunding Process

Most Recent Documents

Category

- Any -General Information on CFIUS Reviews-GeneralBackground Information on FIRRMA-GeneralPost-FIRRMA Regulations-General-Control Transactions-Country Specification-Sensitive Personal Data-Declarations-Real EstateCase Management System-General-Using the CMS-Uploading Information Through the CMS-Party Administration-Pre-FIRRMA Transactions

General Information on CFIUS Reviews

General

What are the most common reasons for notices being determined to be incomplete?

Notices are determined to be incomplete for multiple reasons, commonly including:

Unclear description of business lines – the notice must provide a clear and detailed account of each company’s products and services;

Unclear description of the transaction – the notice must clearly describe all entities involved in the transaction and the nature and structure of the transaction;

Absence of geographic location(s) of the U.S. business – the notice must clearly describe the U.S. business with addresses and/or geographic coordinates for all U.S. properties and facilities; and

Absence of a certification – all notices must be certified correctly (in accordance with the certification template at the Committee’s section of the Department of the Treasury website and 31 C.F.R. §§ 800.204 or 802.202) to be deemed complete.

What steps can be taken with respect to information required by 31 C.F.R. § 800.502 to further facilitate CFIUS review?

Suggestions include:

Sections 800.502(c)(1)(iii) and (v) require submission of information related to the foreign person and its parents. CFIUS’s review would be aided if the notice identifies whether the actual party in interest is the party to the transaction or one of the parents of the party to the transaction. CFIUS does not consider special purpose vehicles, wholly-owned subsidiaries established for the sole purpose of the transaction, or other shell companies to be the actual parties in interest in a transaction.

Sections 800.502(c)(3)(iii) and (iv) require information regarding certain U.S. Government contracts. Parties are advised to update and verify U.S. Government contact information for the contracting officials of such contracts. Private sector entities not party to the notice are not acceptable points-of-contact for contracts in question.

Even if not required under 31 C.F.R. § 800.404, is there additional information about items subject to the EAR that parties should consider providing?

Pursuant to the regulations at 31 C.F.R. part 800, a declaration must include a statement as to whether the U.S. business produces, designs, tests, manufactures, fabricates, or develops one or more “critical technologies,” a term defined at 31 C.F.R. § 800.215 to include, inter alia, certain items controlled under the EAR. If applicable, the declaration must also include a description of each such critical technology and the Export Control Classification Numbers (ECCN).

Note that some items may be listed on the Commerce Control List (CCL), but are not critical technologies under the CFIUS definition. While not required, parties may include information about such items as part of the declaration submission. Parties may also state whether the items that the U.S. business produces, designs, tests, manufactures, fabricates, or develops are designated as EAR99. Inclusion of this information may avoid the need for the Committee to pose follow-up questions on these items during the assessment period and may facilitate a more efficient process.

What steps, though not required for a notice to be determined complete, may facilitate CFIUS’s review?

CFIUS has found it very helpful in the past for transaction parties to provide the following additional information, even if the activity is not the primary focus of their commercial operations. CFIUS often requests this information after a voluntary notice has been accepted if it was not included in the initial filing.

Cyber systems, products, services: Identify whether the U.S. business that is the subject of the transaction develops or provides cyber systems, products, or services, including

Business systems used to manage or support common business processes and operations (for example, enterprise resource planning, e-commerce, email, and database systems); control systems used to monitor, assess, and control sensitive processes and physical functions (for example, supervisory control, data acquisition, and process and distributed control systems); safety, security, support, and other specialty systems (for example, fire, intrusion detection, access control, people mover, and heating, ventilating, and air conditioning systems); or

Telecommunications and/or Internet or similar systems, products or services.

Natural resources: Identify whether the U.S. business that is the subject of the transaction processes natural resources and material or produces and transports energy, and the amount processed, produced, or transported annually.

It may also be useful to discuss the business rationale for the transaction in the notice.

Lastly, CFIUS’s regulations require parties to provide information regarding any other applicable national security-related regulatory authorities, such as the ITAR, EAR, and NISPOM. Some of the regulatory review processes under these authorities may have longer deadlines than the CFIUS process, and parties to transactions affected by these other reviews may wish to start or complete these processes prior to submitting a voluntary notice to CFIUS under Section 721.

Does CFIUS require information on all foreign persons, such as limited partners in an investment fund, that would hold an interest in a U.S. business, whether directly or indirectly, as part of a transaction?

In addition to the information required for submission of a complete filing with CFIUS, to facilitate its review, CFIUS through the Staff Chairperson may request follow-up information with respect to all foreign investors that are involved, directly or indirectly, in a transaction, including limited partners in an investment fund. Like other aspects of the CFIUS process, the scope of such a request depends on the facts and circumstances of each transaction. For example, CFIUS often requests identifying information for indirect foreign person investors, including limited partners, their jurisdiction(s) of organization, and ultimate ownership, among other information, regardless of any arrangements that may otherwise limit the disclosure of such foreign person’s identity. CFIUS may also request information with respect to any governance rights and other contractual rights that investors collectively or individually may have in an indirect or direct acquirer or the U.S. business to facilitate the Committee’s review regarding jurisdictional or national security risk-related considerations. Such information, as with all information filed with CFIUS pursuant to 50 USC 4565, is subject to the confidentiality protections afforded by 50 USC 4565(c).

How can parties accurately and completely report all classified contracts as required by 31 C.F.R. § 800.502(c)(3)(iii)?

The notice should identify all classified contracts, subcontracts, purchase orders, lease agreements, service agreements, etc. (“classified contracts”), that contain a “Security Requirements Clause” (FAR 52.204-2 or similar clause) or include a Contract Security Classification Specification (DD Form 254). The clause identifies the contract as involving classified information, and the DD Form 254 provides classification guidance. Therefore, parties should report each contract that contains a Security Requirements Clause, has a DD Form 254, requires or will require access to classified information by a contractor or its personnel in the performance of the contract, or requires the contractor or its personnel to have security clearances. Note that a contract may be a classified contract (in that the nature of the subject goods or services to be performed under the contract are classified) even though the contract document itself is not classified.

Will Day 1 of the 45-day review period be the day after I submit the notice?

Pursuant to 31 C.F.R. §§ 800.503 and 802.503, “Day 1” is the date on which the Staff Chairperson accepts a voluntary notice, which occurs the next business day after the Staff Chairperson has: (1) determined that the notice complies with § 800.502 (or § 802.502, as applicable); confirmed that the applicable filing fee has been received, or waived; and (3) disseminated the notice to all members of the Committee. The time that it takes for the Staff Chairperson to accept a voluntary notice after it has been submitted by the parties depends upon a variety of factors, including the notice itself and whether parties have submitted a draft notice before submitting the formal notice.

How does CFIUS determine the “completion date,” in assessing when a mandatory filing should be submitted, where the foreign person first acquires equity interest but will not receive control or covered investment rights until after CFIUS’s review?

The “completion date” is the earliest date upon which any ownership interest is conveyed, assigned, delivered, or otherwise transferred to a person [31 C.F.R. § 800.206]. In a transaction where the ownership interest is conveyed before the foreign person receives the corresponding rights, the “completion date” is the earliest date upon which the foreign person acquired any of the equity interest. For example, if Company A acquired a 25 percent ownership interest in Company B on July 1, but its right to control Company B was deferred until after CFIUS reviews the transaction, the “completion date” for the transaction is July 1. If the transaction is subject to the mandatory declaration requirement pursuant to 31 C.F.R. § 800.401, the latest date that the parties can file the transaction with CFIUS is June 1. Note that contingent equity interests are assessed separately under 31 C.F.R. § 800.207.

Are parties required to pay a filing fee?

Voluntary notices filed with the Committee generally require payment of a filing fee. Declarations do not require payment of a filing fee. See the CFIUS Filing Fees page for more information.

Background Information on FIRRMA

General

What is FIRRMA?

On August 13, 2018, the President signed into law the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act of 2018, or FIRRMA. FIRRMA strengthens and modernizes CFIUS, a multi-agency government body chaired by the Secretary of the Treasury that reviews foreign investment for national security considerations.

Why was FIRRMA necessary?

By modernizing CFIUS, FIRRMA strengthens the government’s ability to protect national security while preserving the longstanding open investment policy of the United States. At its core, FIRRMA expands the scope of transactions reviewable by CFIUS to address more effectively current national security concerns. CFIUS was last updated more than a decade prior to FIRRMA’s enactment and its jurisdiction had remained unchanged in the 30 years since Congress passed the Exon-Florio Amendment, which created Section 721 of the Defense Production Act of 1950, the statutory cornerstone of CFIUS. Both the nature of foreign investments in the United States and the national security landscape have shifted significantly since then.

Does CFIUS focus solely on national security? Does FIRRMA expand CFIUS’s ability to address risks beyond national security to include economic issues?

CFIUS remains focused exclusively on national security. CFIUS examines the effects of a transaction and assesses the impact of those effects on the national security of the United States. Section 721, as amended by FIRRMA, helps CFIUS protect our national security from emerging risks.

To whom does the new legislation apply? Is it country-specific?

Like prior CFIUS legislation, FIRRMA does not single out investors from any specific country. CFIUS’s authorities may be applied to address the national security risks posed by foreign investment in the United States, regardless of where the investment originates. Investors from certain countries may qualify as “excepted investors” based on whether they meet specified criteria in the CFIUS regulations. Meeting these criteria may exempt certain investors from CFIUS jurisdiction over certain transactions, or from mandatory filing

requirements. For further information, refer to the Excepted Foreign States page.

How does FIRRMA affect investment from countries that are allies and partners of the United States?

The United States has a longstanding open investment policy, and we maintain strong relationships with our allies and partners on investment. FIRRMA strengthens these relationships by enabling the United States to work more closely with allies and partners on national security issues related to foreign investment. This enhances confidence in investments made by those allies and partners in the United States now and in the future.

Is the United States still open to foreign investment?

The United States welcomes foreign investment and is the best place to invest worldwide due to its strong economic growth policies, innovation ecosystem, and highly developed market. The CFIUS process, as modernized and strengthened by FIRRMA, enhances confidence in the nation’s longstanding open investment policy by continuing to restrict only those foreign investments that pose national security concerns.

Can foreign investors still invest in the United States’ technology industry?

The United States welcomes foreign investment in the technology industry and maintains a strong commitment to the rule of law and the protection of intellectual property. The United States provides unique opportunities to tap into advanced research and innovation and a skilled workforce. Pursuant to Section 721, as amended by FIRRMA, CFIUS will continue to assess on a case-by-case basis whether a particular transaction (regardless of industry) poses a risk to U.S. national security.

Did FIRRMA change CFIUS’s timeline for reviews?

Yes. The timeline for CFIUS reviews changed upon enactment of FIRRMA. The review period for any notice accepted after FIRRMA became effective is a maximum of 45 days, rather than 30 days. If an investigation is required, it will commence no later than the end of the 45-day review period prescribed by FIRRMA.

Did FIRRMA change CFIUS’s timeline for investigations?

Yes. The timeline for investigations has been updated to allow the Secretary of the Treasury to grant one 15-day extension (i.e., extending investigations from 45 to 60 days) in “extraordinary circumstances.”

Are stipulations accepted? What is the effect of a stipulation?

Yes. In general, a stipulation could expedite review and action by CFIUS because it may streamline certain aspects of CFIUS’s review. It may also result in fewer follow-up questions from the Committee. Parties submitting a stipulation should be aware that the Committee and the President are entitled to rely on such stipulation in determining whether the transaction is covered under the relevant regulations and/or a foreign government-controlled transaction; parties making a stipulation waive the right to challenge any such determination. Additionally, neither the Committee nor the President is bound by any such stipulation, nor does any such stipulation limit the ability of the Committee or the President to act on any authority provided under Section 721 with respect to any covered transaction.

Post-FIRRMA Regulations

General

Why did the Department of the Treasury issue the FIRRMA regulations?

The rules published in the Federal Register in 2020 finalize the regulations relating to FIRRMA. The Department of the Treasury previously published proposed versions of the regulations, on which it received comments from the public. The regulations implement changes that FIRRMA made to CFIUS’s jurisdiction and review process. For more information on the implementing regulations, refer to the CFIUS Laws and Guidance page.

When did the FIRRMA regulations become effective?

Final regulations implementing FIRRMA took effect on February 13, 2020. Regulations implementing a CFIUS filing fee took effect on May 1, 2020. A revision to the regulations concerning mandatory declarations was made effective October 15, 2020. Additional information on CFIUS’s legal authorities and regulations can be found on the CFIUS Laws and Guidance page.

How do the regulations support the United States’ policy of being open to foreign investment?

The specificity provided in the regulations gives clarity to the business and investment communities with respect to the types of transactions that are covered by the Committee’s new authority under FIRRMA. The CFIUS process, as modernized and strengthened by FIRRMA and these regulations, should enhance confidence in the nation’s longstanding open investment policy.

How do the final FIRRMA regulations differ from the proposed regulations issued in September 2019?

The Department of the Treasury published proposed versions of the regulations in September 2019 and received comments from the public. Treasury made a number of revisions in response to the comments submitted during the comment period. The preambles to the final rules summarize these changes.

In response to written comments, the final rules update a number of provisions including by:

adding a definition for “principal place of business;”

modifying certain criteria to qualify as an “excepted investor;”

clarifying the application of the “incremental acquisition rule;”

adjusting the treatment of genetic data within the definition of “sensitive personal data;”

refining the application to investment funds, including by amending the definition of “substantial interest;”

modifying the exceptions for certain real estate transactions in airports and maritime ports; and

refining the geographic coverage relating to certain military installations on appendix A to the real estate regulations.

The rules also include a number of additional illustrative examples and provide clarifying edits in the text of the provisions. Finally, the rule amending the part 800 regulations incorporates many of the provisions of the pilot program regarding critical technologies (published in October 2018), including the mandatory declaration requirement for certain covered transactions involving certain U.S. businesses that produce, design, test, manufacture, fabricate, or develop one or more critical technologies. The mandatory declaration requirement for certain critical technology related transactions was further revised by regulations effective October 15, 2020.

Does Treasury anticipate that it will make additional revisions to the regulations in the future or issue other rules?

Given the specificity of certain provisions of the rule, Treasury anticipates that it will periodically review, and when necessary amend, the regulations to address changes in technology and data use, as well as the evolving national security landscape more generally.

Control Transactions

Do the FIRRMA regulations change CFIUS’s jurisdiction over transactions that could result in control of a U.S. business by a foreign person?

No. CFIUS maintains its authority to review the potential national security effects of any transaction that could result in foreign control of any U.S. business. The regulations expand CFIUS’s jurisdiction over certain “non-controlling” transactions and certain real estate transactions.

Country Specification

Do the regulations treat investors from certain countries differently?

FIRRMA does not prohibit investments from any country, and investments from all foreign persons remain subject to CFIUS jurisdiction over transactions that could result in foreign control of a U.S. business. As required by FIRRMA, however, the regulations limit the application of CFIUS’s jurisdiction over non-controlling “covered investments” and certain real estate transactions by certain foreign persons, defined as “excepted investors,” from certain “excepted foreign states.” Any such eligible investor and foreign state must meet specific criteria to qualify for this status.

How did Treasury determine the eligible foreign states under the regulations? Will the list be revised in the future?

CFIUS has identified Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom as the initial excepted foreign states and excepted real estate foreign states. CFIUS identified these countries due to certain aspects of their robust intelligence-sharing and defense industrial base integration mechanisms with the United States.

In January 2022, CFIUS identified New Zealand as an eligible foreign state for the purposes of the excepted foreign state and excepted real estate foreign state definitions for reasons including New Zealand's intelligence-sharing relationship with the United States and its collective defense arrangement and cooperation with the United States.

As the excepted foreign state concept has significant implications for the national security of the United States, the Committee continues to identify a limited number of eligible foreign states and may expand the list in the future.

How long does an “excepted foreign state” and “excepted real estate foreign state” have to meet the factors that the Committee will consider when making a determination regarding an eligible foreign state’s national security-based foreign investment revie

As detailed in the regulations, from February 13, 2020 to February 13, 2023, the countries identified as eligible foreign states are considered “excepted foreign states” and “excepted real estate foreign states” unless the Committee changes a foreign state's eligibility. For each of these countries to remain excepted after the end of the three-year delayed effectiveness period (i.e., February 13, 2023), a Committee determination under 31 C.F.R. §§ 800.1001(a) or 802.1001(a), as applicable, is necessary. This three-year period is intended to provide these initial eligible foreign states time to ensure that their national security-based foreign investment review processes and coordination with the United States on national security-based investment review meet the requirements under 31 C.F.R. §§ 800.1001(a) and 802.1001(a).

In January 2022, the Committee determined that Australia and Canada have met these requirements. Australia and Canada will remain excepted foreign states and excepted real estate foreign states unless the Committee rescinds a determination.

What factors will CFIUS consider in making a determination regarding an eligible foreign state’s national security-based foreign investment review processes and bilateral cooperation with the United States on national security-based investment review?

A list of factors posted here outlines what the Committee will consider when making a determination regarding an eligible foreign state’s national security-based foreign investment review processes and bilateral cooperation with the United States on national security-based investment reviews.

Does every foreign person based in an “excepted foreign state” or “excepted real estate foreign state” qualify as an “excepted investor” or “excepted real estate investor” as applicable?

Not necessarily. The regulations identify criteria that a foreign person must meet in order to qualify as an “excepted investor” or “excepted real estate investor” regarding, for example, its principal place of business, place of incorporation, and ownership. The regulations also identify criteria that would preclude a foreign person from qualifying as an excepted investor, such as non-compliance with the law.

Are “excepted investors” subject to CFIUS jurisdiction for control transactions?

Yes. CFIUS retains the authority to review a transaction that could result in foreign control of any U.S. business, regardless of whether the foreign person is an “excepted investor.” However, transactions involving excepted investors may be exempt from mandatory filing requirements under 31 C.F.R. § 800.401.

Sensitive Personal Data

Is personally identifiable information (PII) the same as sensitive personal data under the regulations?

“Sensitive personal data” is defined to include ten specified categories of data that may be maintained or collected by U.S. businesses. The categories of data include types of financial, geolocation, and health data, among others. Moreover, a U.S. business that maintains or collects these categories of data on U.S. citizens will only be considered to have sensitive personal data to the extent it (i) targets or tailors products or services to certain populations, including U.S. military members and employees of federal agencies with national security responsibilities, (ii) collects or maintains such data on at least one million individuals, or (iii) has a demonstrated business objective to maintain or collect such data on greater than one million individuals and such data is an integrated part of the U.S. business’s primary products or services. Genetic test information is also included in the definition regardless of whether it meets (i), (ii), or (iii).

Declarations

For what type of transactions can parties submit a declaration?

The regulations provide a short-form declaration as an alternative to CFIUS’s traditional voluntary notice. Declarations allow parties to submit basic information regarding a transaction that should generally not exceed five pages in length. Parties use the CMS to file declarations with the Department of the Treasury. In certain circumstances filing a declaration for a transaction is mandatory.

In particular, the regulations implement FIRRMA’s requirement that certain covered transactions where a foreign government is acquiring a “substantial interest” in specified types of U.S. businesses are subject to a mandatory declaration. Additionally, the regulations require the filing of a declaration for covered transactions involving certain U.S. businesses that produce, design, test, manufacture, fabricate, or develop one or more critical technologies. Parties may choose to file a notice instead of a declaration.

How do the regulations address the pilot program on critical technologies that became effective in November 2018?

The pilot program on critical technologies was in effect through February 12, 2020. It will continue to apply only to transactions for which specified actions were taken on or after the effective date of the pilot program and prior to February 13, 2020. Generally speaking, transactions involving critical technologies that occurred on or after February 13, 2020 should be analyzed under the regulations for part 800.

The rule published for part 800 incorporates many of the provisions of the pilot program on critical technologies, including the mandatory filing requirement for certain covered transactions involving critical technologies. The regulations concerning mandatory declarations for certain critical technology transactions were revised effective October 15, 2020. Transaction parties should review the CFIUS regulations (including the applicability rule at 31 C.F.R. § 800.104) carefully to determine whether a transaction is subject to the mandatory declaration provisions.

Real Estate

In what locations are real estate transactions covered by the regulations on real estate?

The regulations on real estate are generally structured around specific sites—certain airports, maritime ports, and military installations—and specific geographic areas in and around those sites. Other facilities or properties of the U.S. Government may in the future be included in the list of sites identified in the rule.

Will the Department of the Treasury publish a tool to help the public interpret the scope of the new real estate regulations?

The CFIUS Part 802 Geographic Reference Tool was developed as a resource to help the public locate specific real estate in relation to the military installations associated with the regulations at 31 C.F.R. part 802 and listed in appendix A (parts 1 to 3) of the rule. This mapping tool allows users to input an address and determine the distance to certain military installations. This tool was developed to assist the public and is provided for reference only; it should not be interpreted as guidance or an advisory opinion by CFIUS with respect to any particular transaction.

Note that the mapping tool does not display the offshore areas identified in part 4 of appendix A to 31 C.F.R. part 802. Further, the tool does not display the covered ports (air and maritime ports) relevant to 31 C.F.R. part 802. Relevant information on the offshore areas and covered ports are available through other U.S. Government websites. Additional resources are available on the CFIUS Real Estate webpage.

Are all real estate transactions covered if they fall within the specific geographic areas described in the regulations?

No. The regulations on real estate transactions exclude from CFIUS’s jurisdiction under 31 C.F.R. part 802 certain transactions based on characteristics of the foreign person, the transaction, and the real estate. The regulations include a section on “excepted real estate transactions” and exclude the following, subject to certain conditions:

real estate transactions involving an excepted real estate investor;

real estate transactions that are part of a “covered transaction” under the part 800 regulations (though such transaction may separately be subject to CFIUS’ jurisdiction under 31 C.F.R. part 800);

real estate transactions in an “urbanized area” or “urban cluster,” as defined by the Census Bureau, except those relating to “covered ports” and those in “close proximity” to certain military installations;

the purchase, lease, or concession of a single “housing unit,” as defined by the Census Bureau;

the lease or concession of real estate in airports and maritime ports for the purpose of retail sales;

the lease or concession of real estate in airports and maritime ports involving a foreign air carrier with a security program accepted by the Transportation Security Administration;

the purchase, lease, or concession of certain commercial space in a multi-unit commercial building; and

transactions involving real estate owned by Alaska Natives or held in trust by the United States for certain native populations.

Do the regulations cover the sale or lease of residential property?

FIRRMA excludes from CFIUS’s jurisdiction the purchase or lease by, or concession to, a foreign person of a single “housing unit,” as defined by the Census Bureau. Given that many single housing units are conveyed with adjoining land, the regulations on real estate also exclude any fixtures and adjacent land but only to the extent they are incidental to the intended use of the real estate as a housing unit. Fixtures and land may be considered incidental if their size and nature is common for similar single housing units in the locality in which the unit is located. If the incidental fixtures or land is not common for other similar housing units in the locality, the exception would apply only to the housing unit itself.

Are all real estate transactions in urbanized areas excluded from the regulations?

No, in certain locations, real estate transactions in urbanized areas are within the scope of the regulations. Specifically, transactions involving real estate that is in “close proximity” (one mile) to a military installation listed in part 1 or part 2 of appendix A to part 802 is covered, as is real estate that is, is located within, or will function as part of a “covered port.”

Where can I find more information on urbanized areas and urban clusters?

In addition to the CFIUS Part 802 Geographic Reference Tool referenced above, information on urbanized areas and urban clusters can be found on the Census Bureau Website, including though a Web-based system, TIGERweb, which allows users to select features such as urbanized areas and urban clusters, and view such attributes on a map.

Is there a mandatory notification requirement for real estate transactions?

No. The transactions described in the regulations on real estate are not subject to a mandatory declaration requirement. As a general matter, parties to a covered real estate transaction will decide whether to file a notice or submit a declaration to CFIUS.

Case Management System

General

Why did CFIUS implement the CMS?

CFIUS implemented the CMS to allow parties to submit all transaction-related information through a single portal in a standard and secure manner. As of June 1, 2020, the CMS must be used to file any written notice or any declaration pursuant to 31 C.F.R. part 800 or 31 C.F.R. part 802.

Using the CMS

How will I know that my submission of information to CFIUS through the CMS was successful?

After submitting information through the CMS, you will receive a confirmation email. Active cases will also display on the dashboard module for easier management and additional submission confirmation.

What should I do if I have a question regarding the CMS?

Please first read the User Guide located here. If the User Guide does not address your issue, or if you are encountering technical issues, contact CFIUS.itsupport@treasury.gov. For technical issues related to ID.me, click here. For questions about the CFIUS process as it relates to the CMS or to provide feedback regarding the CMS, contact CFIUS.cms@treasury.gov.

Do I submit responses to CFIUS information requests through the CMS?

Parties will receive an information request from CFIUS via an email from Treasury staff, sent via the CMS. To make requested edits to a filing please return to the CMS portal and edit your submission there. To submit responses to other requests for information, simply reply to the email from the CMS. If you wish to reply confidentially, remove the individuals from the cc line that you do not wish to share your response with.

Do I need to submit draft notices through the CMS?

Yes. Parties should submit draft notices through the CMS portal. Submission of a draft notice aids the Committee’s understanding of the transaction and provides an opportunity for the Committee to request additional information to be included in the notice, if necessary.

How is a filing fee submitted with a notice through the CMS?

Beginning on August 9, 2020, filing fees must be submitted through Pay.gov via the CMS portal. The CFIUS Filing Fees page contains information on filing fees and submission instructions. In addition, the CMS User Guide on the CMS page and the Payment Instructions document contain detailed information on how to submit a filing fee through the CMS portal. Because filing fees are submitted directly through the CMS portal, users do not need to include a receipt with their formal filing; however, CFIUS recommends that users retain a copy of the receipt for recordkeeping purposes. CFIUS cannot accept a formal written notice until it has received the filing fee payment.

Is an ID.me account needed to submit a filing fee?

Yes. An ID.me account is necessary to access the CMS portal and pay the filing fee. Instructions to create an ID.me account are found on the CMS page on the CFIUS website.

How will I know if my submission of a filing fee is successful?

Once a user submits a filing fee through the CMS portal, they will be taken to a “CFIUS – Payment Success” page. If a payment is successfully submitted to Pay.gov, the payment status will say “Payment Submitted – Pending Receipt.” Once the payment has cleared, the payment status will say “Payment Received,” indicating that the Pay.gov system has received the filing fee payment. If a payment is not successful, the payment status will say “Payment Failed.”

What should I do if the payment status says “Payment Failed”?

Users should contact Pay.gov at https://www.pay.gov/public/home/contact.

Uploading Information Through the CMS

How do restricted uploads work?

Documents, such as personal identifier information, that are not to be accessed by other individuals on a filing must be uploaded as a “Restricted Document.” If you upload a Restricted Document, then the uploader and CFIUS will be the only ones with access to the Restricted Document; no other individuals will be able to see the title of the Restricted Document.

Are there limits on file sizes?

Yes. The CMS accepts individual files up to 20 megabytes in size.

Can I upload a document instead of filling out a portion of the web form?

While certain fields of the web form require data for saving, processing, and submission, in order to streamline the efficiency of the CMS, parties are encouraged to upload Excel files for large spreadsheets. In addition, parties may upload confidential responses as a separate document and enter “see Exhibit #” in the web form. However, parties may not simply defer all responses to attachments when submitting a declaration or filing a notice. Treasury may reject declarations and request the refiling of notices that only reference attachments.

What file formats can the CMS accept?

The CMS accepts Excel, Word, and PDF files.

Will CFIUS begin to review the information saved in the form before it is submitted?

Information saved prior to submission is stored in the CMS web platform hosted by the Department of the Treasury. However, a CFIUS case officer will not begin review of the information until the draft or formal written notice has been submitted through the CMS.

Party Administration

What is a Filing Admin?

A filing admin is a user on a filing with permission to add or remove other users on the filing. A filing admin may add new users either as additional filing admins or as a non-admin user.

Non-admin users can view all non-restricted uploads and submit the filing but cannot add or remove other users. The initial creator of a submission will always be a filing admin.

What is a Payor?

“Payor” is the designation given to a CMS user that only has permission to pay a filing fee. CMS users that are listed as contacts in a filing may designate a payor in instances when a person does not have a need to access the rest of the information contained in the CMS portal in connection with the filing of a notice. Contacts listed in a notice filing who are not designated as “Payors” may also submit the filing fee.

How do I remove someone from a filing in the CMS?

Individuals added to a filing through the CMS are given broad permissions, including the ability to view or edit most documents and submit the filing to CFIUS. If they are added as filing admins, they can also remove other users from a filing or add new users as filing admins. For this reason, please use discretion when determining which individuals to add and at what level of permission. You can remove yourself by going to the Participant Administration tab, finding your email address, clicking on the dropdown arrow, and selecting ‘Delete.’ A filing admin may also remove other users on the Participant Admin tab. If neither of these methods are available to you, email the designated case officer and CFIUS@treasury.gov to request assistance.

Pre-FIRRMA Transactions

Certain aspects of my transaction occurred prior to February 13, 2020, according to the applicability rule at 31 C.F.R. §§ 800.104 or 802.104. Do I need to submit information to CFIUS through the CMS?

Yes. Parties who believe their transaction should be submitted to CFIUS under the pre-FIRRMA regulations according to the applicability rule should still submit their transaction through the CMS. This includes transactions submitted under the critical technology pilot program regulations at 31 C.F.R. part 801. There is no need to fill out the fields in the CMS for pre-FIRRMA transactions. Instead, parties should upload the declaration or notice and any other files using the “Upload Documents” function in the CMS. To submit a draft filing, no further action is needed, simply click “Submit Draft.” To submit a formal filing under the pre-FIRRMA regulations, please ask your case officer to waive the system’s field validation for you. Once your case officer confirms this has been done you can click the “Submit Formal” button to submit your formal filing.

Bureaus

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade (TTB)

Bureau of Engraving and Printing (BEP)

Bureau of the Fiscal Service (BFS)

Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN)

Internal Revenue Service (IRS)

Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC)

U.S. Mint

Inspector General Sites

Office of Inspector General (OIG)

Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA)

Special Inspector General, Troubled Asset Relief Program (SIGTARP)

Report Scams, Fraud, Waste & Abuse

Special Inspector General for Pandemic Recovery (SIGPR)

U.S. Government Shared Services

Enterprise Applications

Administrative Resource Center (ARC)- Bureau of the Fiscal Service

Treasury Direct Services for Governments

Financial Management Quality Service Management Office Marketplace Catalog

Additional Resources

Privacy Act

Small Business Contacts

Budget and Performance

TreasuryDirect.gov Securities/Bonds

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)

No FEAR Act Data

Whistleblower Protection

Other Government Sites

USA.gov

USAJOBS.gov

OPM.gov

MyMoney.gov

Data.gov

Forms.gov

Regulations.gov

PaymentAccuracy.gov

my Social Security

Vote.gov

العربية

中文

Español

한국어

Tagalog

TiếngViệt

Google Privacy

Site Policies and Notices

FAQs

Feedback

Careers

Accessibility

Required Plug-ins Adobe® Reader®

Twitter

Facebook

君合美国说S3:E6丨2023年CFIUS审查监管趋势及美国投资相关立法动向

中文

首页

君合招聘

联系我们

关于我们

君合概览

办公网络

国际平台

专业荣誉

专业排名

机构奖项

交易奖项

律师榜单

社会责任

新闻业绩

君合新闻

君合业绩

君合声誉

专业领域

专业人员

文章发布

君合法评

君合人文

首页 /

文章发布 /

君合法评 /

君合法评详情

君合美国说S3:E6丨2023年CFIUS审查监管趋势及美国投资相关立法动向

2023.11.02 杜江刘义婧曾文婷

自2020年10月CFIUS关于强制申报的相关法规生效以来，CFIUS根据现行生效的法律法规运作已有三年。2023年，CFIUS在审查、监管方面表现出了长期的政策调整趋势，此外，美国联邦及各州在房地产交易、特定国家安全技术和产品投资方面也出现了值得关注的立法动向。本文将对上述内容进行总结，同时对近期CFIUS审查的热点案例进行简要介绍。一、CFIUS 2023年审查监管趋势2023年7月31日，美国财政部海外投资委员会（The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States，以下简称“CFIUS”）向国会提交了2022年的年度报告（以下简称“年度报告”）1。2023年9月14日，CFIUS召开了2023年年度会议。会议总结了CFIUS在2023年的审查和执法趋势，并预告了2024年的立法新动态。1、加大处罚和执法力度2022年10月，CFIUS发布了首份《CFIUS执法和处罚指南（CFIUS Enforcement and Penalty Guidelines）》，宣告未来将更加关注执法和处罚。在2023年年度会议中，CFIUS再次强调将把合规和执法作为长期政策的调整方向。如果交易方有以下任一违规行为，CFIUS可能会向交易方发出处罚通知（notice of penalty），处罚其支付25万美元，或与交易额等同的罚款：（1）未完成正式申报（notice）或简易申报（declaration）；（2）未遵守缓解协议（mitigation agreement）；或（3）有重大错误陈述、遗漏或虚假证明。2值得注意的是，CFIUS提到其在2023年已处理两项民事处罚，但并未披露具体情况。而在2023年之前，CFIUS一共只公布过两起罚款：第一起罚款发布于2018年，交易方因违反缓解协议而被处以100万美元罚款；另一起罚款发布于2019年，交易方因在审查期间违反CFIUS的临时命令而被处以75万美元的罚款。3此外，会议还强调了主动披露（voluntary disclosure）的重要性。CFIUS在对执法和处罚进行决策时，当事方的主动披露行为将成为重要的减责理由。2、加大对未申报交易的审查力度CFIUS表示，未来将投入更多资源来识别和审查可能影响国家安全的未申报交易（non-notified transactions）。在2022年，共有19个未申报交易被CFIUS审查并要求申报，这些项目往往以缓解措施（mitigation）或自愿撤资结束。即使交易方不愿意谈判或合作，CFIUS也可能强制执行缓解措施。此外，在年度报告中，CFIUS表示其已基本完成对2018年FIRRMA颁布前的未申报交易的审查，因此未来的重点会转移到近期的未申报交易上，尤其是在关键技术领域的未申报交易。3、加大对缓解措施执行情况的监督力度根据CFIUS年度报告显示，2022年有约23%的申报交易被要求采取缓解措施。该比例相比前两年有所上升（2021年：10%，2020年：9%）。这表明CFIUS对交易的审查越来越严格，并且更倾向于通过采取缓解措施的手段，在确保美国国家安全的前提下，促进交易进行。CFIUS所采取的部分缓解措施包括：（1）禁止或限制某些知识产权、商业机密或专有技术的转让或共享；（2）确保只有获得授权的人才能接触到某些特定技术，获得美国政府、公司或客户信息，并确保外国收购方没有直接或远程访问持有该等信息的系统；（3）从交易中排除或剥离某些敏感资产等。如果交易各方被要求与CFIUS谈判达成缓解协议，那么CFIUS的审查过程有可能延长至90天以上。对于已签订缓解协议（mitigation agreements）的企业，CFIUS将在未来加大对协议执行情况的监督。监督方式包括但不限于实地考察、各级员工面谈和记录抽查。据委员会成员介绍，大约75%的违反缓解协议的行为都是在实地考察中无意发现的。4、预计将在2024年对CFIUS相关规则进行修订CFIUS表示其将在2024年对《外国投资风险评估现代化法案（the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act, “FIRRMA”）》进行修订，涉及方面包括：（1）提高审查效率和有效性；（2）更新CFIUS的罚款和执法机构；以及（3）优化发现未申报交易的审查手段。二、CFIUS 2022年年度报告及审查趋势2023年7月31日，CFIUS发布了2022年年度报告，对于该年度CFIUS审查的案件进行总结。年度报告显示，CFIUS在2022年内共审查了440起由交易方提交申报的交易，与2021年的436起基本持平。其中，今年新加坡投资者的完整申报数量有明显提升。整体而言，2022年CFIUS的审查过程表现出以下两个新趋势：（1）平均审查时间有所增加，主要体现在法定审查期限内直接审批通过的交易数量有所下降，而被要求重新申报并进入“进一步调查”阶段的交易数量有所上升；（2）作为审批通过的前提条件， CFIUS更多地要求交易方采取缓解措施，以降低国家安全风险。如果交易各方最终被要求与CFIUS谈判达成缓解协议，那么CFIUS的审查过程有可能延长至90天以上。我们预计这一趋势将继续持续，并建议交易各方在评估交易时机时考虑到进入“进一步调查”阶段审查以及被要求采取缓解措施的可能性。三、2023年美国针对外国房地产投资的立法动态（一）CFIUS受辖房地产清单增加2020年1月13日，CFIUS针对2018年出台的FIRRMA发布了最终法规4，首次将特定房地产交易纳入审查的受辖交易范围（Covered Transaction）。CFIUS有权从美国国家安全角度审查关于敏感地点（Sensitive Location）的房地产交易，其规则列出了超过200个敏感地点，包括各种军事基地、机场、海港等。美国财政部及投资安全办公室于2023年5月5日发布了一项CFIUS房地产法规的拟议规定5（Provisions Pertaining to Certain Transactions by Foreign Persons Involving Real Estate in the United States,以下简称“房地产规定”），并于8月23日发布了其最终版本6，增加八个新的军事设施基地至CFIUS有权审查房地产交易范围的地点名单中，并且将每个敏感地点外边界100英里内涉及房地产的交易纳入其管辖范围。该规定进一步扩大CFIUS对外国主体参与美国房地产交易的相关审查权力。该房地产规定于2023年9月22日生效。以上八个军事基地分别为：1. 空军42号工厂，位于加利福尼亚州帕姆代尔(Air Force Plant 42, located in Palmdale, California);2. 戴斯空军基地，位于德克萨斯州阿比林(Dyess Air Force Base, located in Abilene, Texas);3. 埃尔斯沃思空军基地，位于南达科他州博克斯埃尔德(Ellsworth Air Force Base, located in Box Elder, South Dakota);4. 大福克斯空军基地，位于北达科他州大福克斯(Grand Forks Air Force Base, located in Grand Forks, North Dakota);5. 爱荷华州国民警卫队联合部队总部，位于爱荷华州得梅因(Iowa National Guard Joint Force Headquarters, located in Des Moines, Iowa);6. 拉克兰空军基地，位于德克萨斯州圣安东尼奥(Lackland Air Force Base, located in San Antonio, Texas);7. 劳克林空军基地，位于得克萨斯州德尔里奥(Laughlin Air Force Base, located in Del Rio, Texas);8. 卢克空军基地，位于亚利桑那州格伦代尔(Luke Air Force Base, located in Glendale, Arizona)。（二）各州政府对外国主体投资美国房地产的立法限制除上述CFIUS针对房地产管辖的立法外，美国部分州一级政府立法机构正在采取对外国主体投资持有美国房地产的立法限制，包括提出并通过一些禁止包括中国在内的国家的特定实体或个人收购该州土地的立法提议。具体包括：（1）佛罗里达州：通过限制中国政府、中国公司和中国公民获得对佛罗里达州房地产权益和产权的法案，该法案已于2023年7月1日起生效；（2）犹他州：禁止47家中国军事企业7及其关联公司和中国政府实体收购或投资犹他州的房地产或持有地产权益，该法案已于2023年5月23日正式生效；（3）德克萨斯州：该州议会此前提出法案，拟禁止中国政府或其公民所拥有或控制的公司直接购买德州的农业土地和矿产资源，但该法案暂未通过。CFIUS受辖房地产清单的增加，加上近来美国多个州针对外国主体在州内持有不动产限制的立法推动，未来一段时间内中国对美房产领域的投资和商业运营将因此进一步被影响。我们建议客户在对美进行不动产投资之前咨询律师以进一步了解美国现行有效的相关法规，对拟收购资产进行充分的事先尽职调查及评估美国对此的监管范围和力度。四、美对华投资审查（反向CFIUS）2023年8月9日，美国总统拜登颁布了一项“关于解决美国在特定国家的特定国家安全技术和产品领域进行投资的行政令”8 （Executive Order on Addressing United States Investments in Certain National Security Technologies and Products in Countries of Concern）。该行政令的颁布是美国近年来推行反向CFIUS（Reverse CFIUS，“反向CFIUS”）审查计划的第一步。与CFIUS现阶段所审查的外国主体在美投资不同，反向CFIUS的审查对象是美国主体对外投资，旨在对美国在“特定国家”（Countries of Concerns）的关键技术领域的对外投资进行监管。行政令所认定的“特定国家”目前只包括中国。受限的投资领域包括半导体、量子计算和人工智能领域。如果美国主体在位于中国、受中国管辖或由中国主体所有的实体进行投资，并且投资领域涉及半导体、量子计算或人工智能，则可能被责令禁止交易或被CFIUS要求申报。在行政令颁布的同时，美国财政部发布了拟议规则通知（Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, ANPRM)，公开征求意见。目前，意见征求期已终止，美国财政部正在根据行政令和公众意见制定草案。9五、近期热点案例介绍（一）中国某生物制药公司收购在美国上市的某生物医药公司据报道，中国某生物制药公司在收购一家在美国上市的英国某生物科技公司过程中被CFIUS纳入监管范围。CFIUS于2022年12月发布临时命令，要求交易双方停止执行并购协议，以便CFIUS有充分的机会审查该交易，并评估能否采取缓解措施来完成该交易。为满足监管要求，交易双方曾多次延长收购日期。2023年3月，CFIUS以双方签署缓解措施协议为条件审核通过该交易。（二）CFIUS对中国某企业违反缓解协议进行调查中国某企业于2022年收购了美国某化工公司旗下剥离的业务及技术。CFIUS担忧收购方有可能使用该交易涉及的一项关键技术生产军事武器燃料，因此认为该收购涉及军事层面的美国国家安全风险。为了缓解该案引发的对美国国家安全的担忧，CFIUS最终与交易各方达成了国家安全协议，允许该收购交易继续进行，中国某企业不得获取美国某化工公司用于生产某关键产品的专有工艺。交易完成后，CFIUS得知这项生产工艺机密在转移过程中已经发生了违反国家安全协议的行为，并存在关键技术泄露风险，CFIUS对此正在展开调查，FBI也介入了该调查。（三）CFIUS要求中国某科技公司从美国某储能系统公司撤资2021年10月，中国某科技公司收购了美国某储能系统生产商51%的股份。2022年12月，CFIUS要求收购方就收购项目的国家安全风险与CFIUS进行谈判。该投资项目引发了CFIUS对国家安全问题的担忧：中国政府可能通过中国收购方获取美国被收购方所掌握的多户住宅储能技术。根据FIRRMA相关规则，CFIUS认为多户住宅储能技术是一项“关键技术”。为了解决国家安全问题，2023年3月，交易双方与美国财政部、国防部签订了一项国家安全协议，该协议要求中国收购方从美国被收购储能系统公司撤资。（四）CFIUS拒绝介入非管辖交易范围内的绿地投资项目CFIUS在近期某交易中表明，如果投资项目是绿地投资（greenfield investment）而非收购，且所涉房地产不在受辖交易范围内，那么CFIUS一般对该投资项目没有管辖权。据报道，一家生产电动汽车电池的中国企业计划在密歇根州梅科斯塔县进行土地收购，用以修建一座价值2.4亿美元的工厂。CFIUS拒绝干涉该房地产交易，原因是该交易不在受辖交易范围内，因而超出了CFIUS的管辖权。尽管在距离拟收购土地50至100英里的范围内有不少军事设施，但这些军事设施不在今年8月更新的房地产交易审查名单中。在另一起类似的案件里，CFIUS基于同样的原因拒绝审查一家中国企业在北达科他州的房地产交易。需要注意的是，在CFIUS拒绝采取行动后，地方政府在地方政客的施压下选择介入，通过拒绝批准建筑许可证和拒绝收购方使用工业基础设施，实际上扼杀了该房地产交易。六、结语近年来，美国政府对于特定领域中与中国实体的交易往来的审查力度逐步增强。CFIUS的整体审查力度也在不断加强，并且更多地要求交易方采取缓解措施以降低美国安全风险。同时，在中国实体投资美国房地产方面，一些州政府也正在通过立法限制或直接禁止特定中国企业进行投资。我们建议客户在对美进行投资之前咨询律师以进一步了解美国现行有效的相关法规，对拟收购资产进行充分的事先尽职调查及评估美国对此的监管范围和力度。我们也将持续关注反向CFIUS进一步的立法进展。感谢实习生王浩岚、胡栩嘉、刘阳禾和赖依你对本文的大力贡献。1.《美国财政部海外投资委员会致国会的年度报告》，见https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/206/CFIUS%20-%20Annual%20Report%20to%20Congress%20CY%202022_0.pdf2.CFIUS Executive Order on Evolving National Security Risks and CFIUS Enforcement Guidelines: https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF12415.3.同上。4.详见君合法评丨美国投资法律新动向—FIRRMA最终法规出台，赴美投资机遇与挑战并存5.《有关外国人在美国从事房地产交易的规定》，见https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2023-08-23/pdf/2023-17678.pdf [6.https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2023-08-23/pdf/2023-17678.pdf7.《威廉·m·(麦克)·索恩伯里2021年国防授权法案》https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/06/28/2021-13753/notice-of-designation-of-chinese-military-companies-under-the-william-m-mac-thornberry-ndaa-for-fy218. 白宫《关于处理美国在有关国家的某些国家安全技术和产品投资的行政命令》(2023年8月9日) （https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2023/08/09/executive-order-on-addressing-united-states-investments-in-certain-national-security-technologies-and-products-in-countries-of-concern/9. Outbound Investment Program: https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/international/outbound-investment-program

合伙人/顾问

Just a moment...

a moment...Enable JavaScript and cookies to conti

君合美国说S2: E8丨2022年CFIUS审查新动向及2021年申报情况概览

中文

首页

君合招聘

联系我们

关于我们

君合概览

办公网络

国际平台

专业荣誉

专业排名

机构奖项

交易奖项

律师榜单

社会责任

新闻业绩

君合新闻

君合业绩

君合声誉

专业领域

专业人员

文章发布

君合法评

君合人文

首页 /

文章发布 /

君合法评 /

君合法评详情

君合美国说S2: E8丨2022年CFIUS审查新动向及2021年申报情况概览

2022.11.01 杜江刘义婧

一、背景自2020年10月CFIUS关于强制申报的相关法规生效以来，CFIUS根据现行生效的法律法规运作已两年。今年CFIUS审查方面也发生了一些值得关注的新动向。此外，CFIUS于8月也发布了2021年度CFIUS审查情况的年度报告。鉴于2021年为CFIUS根据现行法律法规运作的第一个完整年度，该年度报告中反馈的相关数据具有一定的参考价值。因此，本文将对上述新动向进行介绍与分析，同时对近期CFIUS审查的相关热点案例进行简要介绍和梳理，并简评中国投资人在美投资须关注的要点。二、CFIUS相关指引及法规更新（一）总统行政令：CFIUS在审查受辖交易时应考虑的特定国家安全风险2022年9月15日，美国总统拜登发布了一项总统行政令1，就CFIUS对受辖交易进行国家安全审查应考虑的风险提供了明确指引，在CFIUS近50年的历史上属于首次。行政令重申了针对利用特定外国投资手段获得敏感数据和技术，对美国国家安全造成潜在威胁的行为，美国国家安全审查应作为打击此类行为的有效工具，并明确地将CFIUS的作用、行动和能力，与总体国家安全作为政府的当务之急（包括保持美国的技术领先地位，保护美国人的敏感数据，以及加强美国供应链弹性）相结合，以确保美国的国家安全的手段与目标相互一致并相辅相成。具体而言，该行政令为CFIUS提供了方向，阐述了现有的法定风险因素，并增加了几个国家安全因素供CFIUS在其审查过程中考虑。该行政令进一步明确了持续改进外国投资审查程序的重要性，并指示CFIUS继续定期审查其程序、做法和法规，以确保它们能够对不断变化的国家安全威胁做出及时的反应。该行政令具体列出下述五项风险因素要求CFIUS进行考虑，其中前两项为对CFIUS法条第721(f)2条中已经规定的国家安全因素的扩展，后三项为新增要求CFIUS考虑的因素。但须注意的是，这份行政令中列出的因素仅为说明性的，并不改变CFIUS现有的程序或法律管辖权，而是应该与前述现有国家安全因素共同纳入考量。1、受辖交易对美国关键供应链弹性以及国家安全的影响。如某项交易涉及将某些对国家安全至关重要的制造能力、服务、关键矿产资源或技术的所有权、权利或控制权转移给外国人士，可能会使美国在未来的关键货物和服务的供应断裂情况下处于弱势。该行政令同时指出，CFIUS应酌情考虑受辖交易对国防工业以及国防工业以外的供应链的弹性和安全性的影响，如：微电子、人工智能、生物技术和生物制造、量子计算、先进的清洁能源（如电池储能和氢能）、气候适应技术、关键材料（如锂和稀土元素）、对食品安全有影响的农产业基础要素等。相关考虑因素包括：整个供应链中替代供应商（包括位于盟国或伙伴国的供应商）的多样化程度；与美国政府的供应关系；以及外国人士在特定供应链中的所有权或控制权的集中程度。2、受辖交易对美国国家安全存在影响的相关领域的技术领先地位的影响。尽管外国投资在大多数情况下能够促进国内的技术创新，但保护美国的技术领先地位更为重要，尤其是当相关外国投资涉及对美国国家安全至关重要的领域时。该行政令特别列举了对美国的技术领先地位以及国家安全至关重要的领域，包括但不限于微电子、人工智能、生物技术和生物制造、量子计算、先进的清洁能源、气候适应技术以及对食品安全有影响的农业产业基础要素。行政令指示CFIUS应考虑受辖交易是否涉及上述领域的制造能力、服务、关键矿产资源或技术。除此以外，CFIUS还应考虑受辖交易是否会导致一些未来可能破坏国家安全的技术的进步和应用，以及参与交易的外国人士是否与可能对美国国家安全构成威胁的第三方存在联系。3、新增考虑因素：可能对受辖交易的相关美国国家安全产生影响的领域的整体投资趋势，以及与过去投资的累计效果。外国人士在某一领域或技术上的投资，如果孤立地看，构成威胁可能有限，但如果结合以往的交易综合来看，相关投资可能促进关键领域的敏感技术的转让，或以其他方式损害国家安全。例如，一个外国公司或国家收购一个领域的单一公司，相关风险相对较低，但一个外国公司或国家收购该领域的多个公司，相关风险则大幅增加。为了应对相关风险，该行政令提出，在审查某受辖交易的国家安全风险时，CFIUS应考虑该交易在该领域以及相关领域的累计投资趋势的大背景下所产生的风险。正如国会在《2018年外国投资风险评估现代化法案》（“FIRRMA”）第1702(c)(2)节3中所指出，在进行国家安全审查时，CFIUS可以考虑“相关外国政府或外国人士对任何一种关键基础设施、能源资产、关键材料或关键技术的累计控制以及最近的交易模式”。4、新增考虑因素：受辖交易可能存在损害国家安全的网络安全风险。某些外国投资可能会促使外国人进行网络入侵或进行其他恶意网络活动，因此对美国国家安全构成风险，例如：(A) 旨在破坏存储或数据库中数据的保护或完整性的活动，或存放敏感数据的系统。(B) 旨在干扰美国选举、美国关键基础设施、国防工业基地或2021年5月12日第14028号行政命令（改善国家网络安全）中规定的其他网络安全国家安全优先事项的活动；以及(C) 破坏关键能源基础设施，包括智能电网。就此，CFIUS应考虑受辖交易是否可能为外国人或其相关的第三方提供进行此类活动的途径，此外，还应考虑交易各方的网络安全态势、做法、能力以及可能允许外国人或其相关的第三方进行此类活动的途径。5、新增考虑因素：受辖交易对美国人敏感数据可能带来的风险。数据作为监视、追踪、跟踪和锁定个人或群体的一个日益强大的工具，对国家安全有潜在的不利影响。此外，技术的进步加上大数据的获取，曾经无法被识别的数据可能被重新识别或被去匿名化。该行政令指出，CFIUS应考虑受辖交易是否涉及能够获得美国人敏感数据的美国企业，相关外国投资者或与外国投资者有联系的各方是否已经或有能力通过商业或其他手段利用这些敏感信息损害美国国家安全。行政令特别指出，CFIUS应酌情考虑受辖交易是否涉及以下美国企业：(A)可以接触到美国人的敏感数据，包括美国人的健康、数字身份或其他生物数据以及任何可以识别或去匿名化的数据，这些数据可以被利用来区分或追踪个人的身份，从而威胁到国家安全；或(B)可以获得美国亚族群的数据，而这些数据可能被外国人士用来以威胁国家安全的方式来针对美国的个人或群体。在过去数年来，CFIUS审查所关注的方向与重点基本与本次的行政令中所列内容相互映证，并无特别出乎意料之处。虽然该行政令从法律层面并未修改现行的CFIUS审查的管辖范围以及程序，但通过行政令的方式来强调要求CFIUS考虑的因素从一定程度上再次提示了当下美国政府所最为关切的几大方面，尤其是行政令中明确列出的包括微电子、人工智能、生物技术和生物制造、量子计算、先进的清洁能源、气候适应技术等。我们建议拟进行类似相关领域投资的投资方予以重点关注。（二）CFIUS发布首份执法和处罚指引2022年10月20日，CFIUS正式出台了首份执法和处罚指引4，就CFIUS如何评估违规行为并如何进行处罚提供了重要信息。该执法指引概述了几种可能引起CFIUS关注的违规行为，包括公司未及时向CFIUS进行强制申报、未遵守与CFIUS达成的关于缓解措施的协议或对CFIUS提供的任何信息或陈述存在重大失实。在评估是否发生违规行为时，CFIUS会考虑各种来源的信息，包括美国政府各部门、公开渠道、第三方服务供应商（如审计师和监督员）、举报、以及交易方和申报方。该指引同时列出了CFIUS评估和实施处罚的关键步骤：1、CFIUS向受罚者发出处罚通知。通知中包括对受罚行为的书面解释和处罚金额、法律依据、以及CFIUS可能考虑的任何加重和减轻处罚的因素。2、受罚人可在收到处罚通知的15个工作日内，向CFIUS工作人员主席提交复议申请，包括任何辩护、理由、减轻因素或解释。3、收到复议申请后，CFIUS将在收到申请后的15个工作日内考虑该申请并发布最终的处罚决定。如有充分理由，相关期限可通过工作人员主席和当事人之间的书面协议延长。除此以外，该指引列举了CFIUS在评估违规行为进行处罚时所考虑的一些加重和减轻处罚的因素。以下列举几项值得重点关注的因素以供参考：1、问责和未来合规：对相关行为进行问责并激励未来合规的需要。2、危害：违规行为对美国国家安全的影响。3、疏忽、意识和意图：该行为在多大程度上是简单疏忽、严重疏忽、蓄意为之或故意的结果；公司是否试图隐瞒或拖延与CFIUS分享相关信息；以及该公司内知道或应该知道该行为的人员的职位高低。4、持续性和时间性：从意识到该行为到向CFIUS报告之间的时间间隔，以及该行为发生频率和持续时间。5、应对和补救措施：是否存在主动披露，向CFIUS所报告信息的及时性、内容和范围；在CFIUS的调查中是否完全合作；以及是否对该行为进行了及时、完整和适当的补救。6、公司的规模资历和合规记录：公司的历史和对CFIUS的熟悉程度；合规资源（如法律顾问、咨询师、审计师和监督员）；为防止该行为而制定的政策、培训和程序以及这些措施失败的原因；公司内部存在的合规文化；以及其他政府部门在评估该公司合规的质量和充分性方面的经验。该指引的出台提高了CFIUS国家安全审查的执法透明度，体现了CFIUS对执法问题的关注，但与此同时，可能预示着未来CFIUS的执法力度将会有所加大。因此，在与CFIUS的互动中，建议交易各方尽可能积极主动和坦诚。（三）美国国家科学技术委员会：关键和新兴技术清单更新2022年2月，美国国家科学技术委员会（National Science and Technology Council，简称“NSTC”）发布了《关键和新兴技术清单更新》5，这是自2020年10月美国白宫发布《国家关键与新兴技术战略》以来的首次更新。本次更新在原有的关键技术领域清单基础上进一步做出了整合和细化，缩减了技术类别的数量（从20类调整到19类）、更改了某些类别的名称、并将部分大类下细化至更详细的子类别。关于该清单的详细变化，请见此前2022年8月17日发布的题为《美国对新兴技术的管控措施及应对建议》的研究简讯。值得注意的是，虽然该清单并非由CFIUS发布，但大多数CFIUS的成员机构，包括美国国防部、能源部、国土安全部、司法部、国务院、商务部和科技政策办公室，均为发布该清单的NSTC小组委员会的成员，并且参与了清单发布前的跨机构审阅工作。同时，该报告指出，“部门和机构可参考此最新清单，用以制定例如国家安全技术的研究和开发、国际人才竞争、保护敏感技术免遭盗用和滥用等方面的措施。”6这意味着CFIUS成员机构在进行CFIUS申报的审查时可以也可能会参考此最新清单。根据FIRRMA及相关法规，除了传统的外国投资人获得控制权的交易以外，CFIUS还有权对掌握“关键技术”、“关键基础设施”或“敏感个人数据”的美国企业（简称“TID企业”）进行的其他非控制性投资交易进行审查。其中，“关键技术”的定义涵盖了《2018年出口管制改革法》（Export Control Reform Act of 2018，以下简称“ECRA”）中所认定的新兴和基础技术。根据ECRA，美国商务部有权制定相关法规，将特定技术定义为新兴和基础技术。在ECRA相关法规出台后，被归类为新兴和基础技术的特定技术则会自动成为CFIUS法律法规涵义下的关键技术。然而，截至目前，除了个别法规明确规定为属于关键技术领域的以外，ECRA的相关法规并未对“新兴和基础技术”进行定义或提供任何具体的指引，也并未出台任何清单。因此，这一份NSTC出台的关键和新兴技术清单可能会对CFIUS成员机构对关键技术的解读具有重要的参考意义。当然，该清单中所列类别相对而言较为宽泛，并不指向某一个或数个具体技术，被列入该清单中的领域并不意味着将全部受制于CFIUS的审查。此外，该清单也并未尽列所有可能存在CFIUS风险的关键技术领域。因此，在判断CFIUS成员机构对某项关键技术的解读，该清单仅提供一个大方向领域上的指引。若交易一旦涉及到该最新清单中的某项关键技术，交易各方需要提高警惕并评估相关交易的潜在CFIUS风险。（四）新增部分特定技术为关键技术2022年5月23日，美国商务部发布拟议规则公告（“5月拟议规则”），提议根据ECRA第1758条的标准，对四种自然发生的海洋毒素的出口进行单边管制。美国商务部认为，由于存在新的合成方法和设备，这些毒素目前能够更容易地被获取，如不进行出口管制，这些毒素可能会被用于生物武器。该拟议规则同时提议将该些海洋毒素列为商业管制清单（Commerce Control List）下的管制物项。一旦该拟议规则最终出台，受控的海洋毒素和相关技术将自动被视为CFIUS下的“关键技术”，并可能触发CFIUS的强制性申报要求。2022年8月15日，美国商务部发布了临时最终规则，新增指定了4项ECRA下的“新兴及基础技术”，包括超宽禁带半导体的两类基板（氧化镓及金刚石）、特别用于开发具有GAAFET结构集成电路的计算机辅助设计（ECAD）软件，以及用于生产和开发燃气轮机发动机的增益燃烧技术。除ECAD软件的管制将于2022年10月14日生效外，其他几项技术的管制已于8月15日生效。该些被指定为ECRA下“新兴及基础技术”的技术，也将被认定为CFIUS下的“关键技术”。（五）美国商务部：不再区分“新兴”和“基础”技术在发布5月拟议规则时，美国商务部还提出未来在ECRA下，美国商务部将不再试图区分“新兴”和“基础”技术，而是将所有此类技术统称为“第1758条技术”。此前，第1758条以及ECRA的任何其他条款均未对“新兴技术”和“基础技术”进行定义，也没有为区分这两个术语提供任何指导。该拟议规则生效后，以后美国商务部将不再试图对“新兴”和“基础”技术进行区分，而是统一视为“第1758条技术”这一新分类。通过此改变，美国商务部希望能够简化审查过程，并促进机构间对实施条例进行更有效的审查，因此能够更及时地实施对第1758条技术的出口管制。从CFIUS层面而言，这一改变可能使得部分技术更容易被认定为ECRA下的“新兴或基础技术”，从而也被认定为CFIUS下的“关键技术”并可能触发强制性申报的要求。三、CFIUS 2021年年度审查趋势2022年8月2日，CFIUS发布了2021年度的CFIUS审查情况年度报告7，对于该年度CFIUS审查的案件进行总结分析。这是CFIUS根据FIRRMA及相关法规和要求运作的第一个完整的日历年，我们以下提炼了一些报告中的值得重点关注的内容，以供参考。（一）案件审查整体趋势1、交易审查情况在2021年，CFIUS收到了交易方提交的共164份短版申报和272份完整申报，较2020年申报数量有显著增加。2020年的申报交易数量为126份短版申报和187份完整申报，2019年的申报交易数量为94份短版申报和231份完整申报。对于短版申报，2021年CFIUS总共审查通过了120份（2020年为81份），占总短版申报数量的73.17%（2020年为64.29%）；要求其中30份（2020年为28份）提交完整申报，占比18.29%（2020年为22.22%）；针对12份短版申报（2020年为16份），CFIUS表示无法根据短版申报所提供的信息作出决定，即交易方可以选择提交完整的书面申报为CFIUS提供足够的信息以作出决定，占比7.31%（2020年为12.7%）；CFIUS拒绝了剩余的两起交易提交的短版申报，其中一份重新递交了完整申报。在全部短版申报中，有47份（2020年为34份）为涉及强制申报要求的申报，占比28.66%（2020年为26.98%）。对于完整申报，CFIUS对于在收到通知后45天内无法完成审查的交易会进入“进一步调查”阶段。2021年CFIUS对收到的272份完整申报中的130份交易进行了进一步调查，占全部完整申报份数的约48%。而2020年和2019年分别为88份和113份，分别占当年审查总数的47%和49%。2021年进行“进一步调查”的比例与2020年和2019年相比大约持平。2021年CFIUS没有基于对完整申报的审查否决任何交易，也未发生由总统发布行政命令否决某项特定交易的情形。2、交易撤回情况短版申报方面，2021年没有交易方在申报后选择撤回的交易，2020和2019年各有一项交易方选择撤回的交易。完整申报方面，2021年交易方选择撤回通知的交易有74项，该数字明显高于2020年的29份及2019年的30份。撤回申请不一定代表放弃交易，部分撤回申请的交易方会在修改交易内容后重新提交申请。在2021年撤回的74份中，1) 有52份交易的交易方在2021年重新提交了通知；2) 有11份交易的交易方在2022年重新提交了通知；3) 有9份交易因交易方无法或不愿采纳缓解措施以降低国家安全风险，而最终由交易双方选择最终放弃交易；4) 有2份交易由交易双方因纯商业原因而被放弃。3、交易类型在交易类型方面，2021年正式申报数量最多的行业是金融、信息服务，占总量55%（147份），相比2020年的43%占比有所上升。随后是制造业，占比28%，不过比例与2020年的35%相比有所下降。自2010年CFIUS审查以来，制造业与金融服务业一直占比较高，近年比例也有进一步增加的趋势。可以看到，2019-2021年三年期间，CFIUS的整体审查的焦点集中在金融、信息服务以及制造业，其正式申报占整体数量82%，随后是采矿公用事业和建筑部门（占比11%）和批发贸易、零售贸易和运输部门（占比7%）。中国投资者方面，2019到2021三年期间，提交正式申报的领域分别是金融、信息服务（47份）、制造业（32份）、采矿公用事业和建筑部门（1份）以及批发贸易、零售贸易和运输部门（6份）。4、各国家申报情况在短版申报方面，2021年，加拿大投资者的申报数量最多（22份，占比13.4%），其次为德国、新加坡和韩国投资者，均为11份（占比6.7%）。反观2019至2021三年的整体情况，加拿大投资者的总申报数量居首位（54份，占比14%），日本和英国的投资者分别以43份（占比11%）和33份（占比8.6%）的申报数量位居第二和第三位，中国在这三年间仅提交了9份短版申报，占总量0.2%。在完整申报方面，2021年，来自中国投资者的申报数量最多（44份，占总量16.5%），其次是加拿大和日本的投资者，分别为28份（占比10.3%）和26份（占比9.6%）。反观2019至2021三年的整体情况，日本投资者的正式申报数量最多，共91份（占比13.3%），其次是中国和加拿大的投资者，分别为86份（占比12.6%）和62份（占比9.1%）。5、缓解措施2021年，共有26起交易在CFIUS采纳了缓解措施后予以批准，在272起完整申报中占比9.56%。2020年、2019年的该比例分别为8.57%（187起中的16起）和12.12%（231起中的28起），3年的比例基本持平。CFIUS的年报中列举了部分CFIUS采纳的缓解措施，例如：1) 禁止或限制某些知识产权、商业秘密或专有技术的转让或共享；2) 确保只有获得授权的人才能接触到某些技术，获得美国政府、公司或客户信息，并确保外国收购方没有直接或远程访问持有该等信息的系统；3) 确保只有美国公民才能处理某些产品和服务，确保某些活动和产品只在美国境内进行；4) 从交易中排除或剥离某些敏感资产等。（二）加强未申报交易的审查在发布该年报的新闻稿中，CFIUS着重强调其正在加强人员配备“以识别未向CFIUS自愿申报的交易以及推进其监测和执法活动”8。年报也进一步提到，CFIUS将会使用一系列的方法来识别“未声明/未完整申报的交易”，包括“跨部门的移交、公众提示、媒体报道、商业数据库和国会通知”，并计划雇用“专门负责未声明/未完整申报交易的工作人员”，并推进“对CFIUS成员机构现有工作人员[对未完整申报交易]的培训和关注…”9。在2021年，总共有135份未申报的交易被CFIUS主动发起问询，这些交易中有8份最终被要求提交申报。尽管最终被要求提交申报的比例不高（约6%），但在所有的这些未申报案例中，CFIUS都主动发起问询并至少进行了内部调查，相关调查无疑给外国投资者带来了不确定性。我们建议投资者将CFIUS的风险评估作为尽职调查的一部分尽早启动。即使最终交易双方作出了不进行自愿申报的决定，也需意识到将来CFIUS主动对已完成但未申报的交易发起主动问询的可能性，并提前考虑到相关的应对措施。四、近期热点案例介绍（一）中国某科技投资公司对美国小型飞机制造商Icon的投资Icon Aircraft, Inc.（“Icon”）是一家美国加州的飞机初创公司，制造休闲用的机翼可折叠的水陆两用小型飞机。中国某科技投资公司2015年开始投资Icon，2017年累计持股已达到可以控制Icon的水平。2021年6月，Icon的几位美国股东对Icon的控股中国股东在特拉华州提起诉讼，表示Icon的飞机可以改装成军用无人机，指控有技术转让的风险，并在两个月后向CFIUS递交通知，敦促CFIUS取消这笔交易。Icon表示，该中国科技投资公司的投资使公司免于倒闭，并指美国股东的做法是对CFIUS审查机制的不正当武器化。最终，2022年2月28日，CFIUS认为中国的投资不会引发国家安全风险，在无需采取缓解措施的情况下批准了交易。（二）中国私募股权公司收购美格纳中国某私募股权公司原计划收购美国纽交所上市公司韩国半导体厂商Magnachip Semiconductor Corp.（“美格纳”），美格纳主要经营显示屏驱动半导体和通用电源管理半导体，不持有生产设备，专门从事半导体设计工作。美国财政部称，该中国私募股权公司拟收购该公司的交易对美国国家安全构成风险，要求当事各方向CFIUS提交通知。美格纳方面表示其认为该交易本身并不需要美国批准，因为该公司所有制造和研发活动都在韩国境内进行且几乎所有的销售活动都在韩国进行，少部分销售活动位于中国、日本和德国。尽管如此，美格纳最终仍然配合CFIUS的审查要求。交易双方最终无法获得 CFIUS 对合并的批准，2021年12月31日，美格纳和该中国私募股权公司宣布撤回CFIUS申报备案并相互终止合并协议。（三）中资收购英最大微芯片厂2021年7月5日，中国某科技公司全资拥有的荷兰安世半导体公司（Nexperia）宣布完成收购英国最大微芯片制造厂纽波特晶圆制造公司（Newport Wafer Fab）。2022年4月19日，美国国会众议院共和党中国特别工作组（China Task Force）致信总统拜登，以可能威胁国家安全为由，敦促拜登政府尽快阻止英国方面将纽波特晶圆制造公司出售给安世半导体。信中建议，如英国方面不接受美方干预，美方应将纽波特晶圆厂纳入出口管制名单，甚至重新考虑英国在CFIUS的白名单地位。5月26日，英国商务大臣夸西‧夸滕下令对该交易展开英国法下的国家安全审查。虽然当前的地缘政治环境很容易令人以为任何中国公司都不可能在不被CFIUS阻止的情况下在美国投资，CFIUS对Icon的决定表明，并非所有中国投资者的交易都会被阻止。针对Icon这笔交易，CFIUS很可能审查了其用于制造休闲飞机的技术、材料和制造过程，并得出Icon没有任何敏感技术或专有技术足以超过中国目前可用技术的结论。CFIUS不会仅仅因为交易引发危险信号或符合某种模式而阻止交易，而是会对每笔交易逐个审查，并根据每笔交易的具体事实和情况决定是否阻止交易或要求采取缓解措施。但另一方面，从近期案例也看出CFIUS在审查上的广泛的自由裁量空间，对于美格纳拟议收购这类表面看来与美国并无明显关联性的交易，在涉及美国政府所关心的特定高新科技时，CFIUS仍然会实施“长臂管辖”，对相关交易进行审查。此外，CFIUS如今已不再是一个神秘的部门，很多有经验的公司和投资者都对CFIUS及其运作具有一定的了解。尤其在CFIUS积极加大审查力度及扩张审查范围的大背景下，对于选择不进行自愿申报并从CFIUS获得安全港（“safe harbor”）保护的外国投资者，还需小心竞争对手或敌对股东在数年后试图利用国家安全威胁及CFIUS事后审查来破坏其投资的潜在可能性及风险。1.https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2022/09/15/executive-order-on-ensuring-robust-consideration-of-evolving-national-security-risks-by-the-committee-on-foreign-investment-in-the-united-states/2.https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2017-title50/pdf/USCODE-2017-title50-chap55-subchapIII-sec4565.pdf3.https://home.treasury.gov/sites/default/files/2018-08/The-Foreign-Investment-Risk-Review-Modernization-Act-of-2018-FIRRMA_0.pdf4.https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/international/the-committee-on-foreign-investment-in-the-united-states-cfius/cfius-enforcement-and-penalty-guidelines5.https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/02-2022-Critical-and-Emerging-Technologies-List-Update.pdf6.https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/02-2022-Critical-and-Emerging-Technologies-List-Update.pdf7.https://home.treasury.gov/system/file s/206/CFIUS-Public-AnnualReporttoCongressCY2021.pdf8.https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy09049.https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/206/CFIUS-Public-AnnualReporttoCongressCY2021.pdf

合伙人/顾问

New CFIUS Rules – Eight Key Points

Toggle navigation

People

Practices

Insights

Technology & Innovation

Energy & Infrastructure

Finance

Litigation & IP

All Insights

Featured

ESG Maturity Model

Orrick Tech Studio

Life Sciences Venture Capital Quarterly Report

Israel Resource Center

RegFi Podcast: Financial Regulation for the Digital Economy

Channels

Podcasts

Blogs

Events

Careers

About

News

Locations

Diversity, Equity & Inclusion

Pro Bono

Racial Justice Fellowship Program

Innovation

The Observatory: Legal Tech Clearinghouse

Alumni

Orrick Tech Studio

People

Practices

Insights

Careers

About

Orrick Tech Studio

Technology & Innovation

Energy & Infrastructure

Finance

Orrick.com

People

Orrick.com

Practices

Orrick.com

Insights

Technology & Innovation

Energy & Infrastructure

Finance

Litigation & IP

All Insights

Featured

ESG Maturity Model

Orrick Tech Studio

Life Sciences Venture Capital Quarterly Report

Israel Resource Center

RegFi Podcast: Financial Regulation for the Digital Economy

Channels

Podcasts

Blogs

Events

Orrick.com

Careers

Orrick.com

About

News

Locations

Diversity, Equity & Inclusion

Pro Bono

Racial Justice Fellowship Program

Innovation

The Observatory: Legal Tech Clearinghouse

Alumni

Orrick.com

Orrick Tech Studio

Orrick.com

Technology & Innovation

Orrick.com

Energy & Infrastructure

Orrick.com

Finance

Technology & Innovation

Energy & Infrastructure

Finance

Search entire site

Submit

中文(中国) / Simplified Chinese

English

Search entire site

Home

Insights

CFIUS 新实施条例的八个要点

Facebook

Twitter

CFIUS 新实施条例的八个要点

International Trade & Compliance Alert

January.17.2020

English: New CFIUS Rules – Eight Key Points

2020年1月13日，美国外国投资委员会（CFIUS）发布了最终实施条例，以全面实施《2018年外国投资风险审查现代化法案》（FIRRMA）。[1] 该实施条例将于2020年2月13日生效。CFIUS 的现行规定将继续适用于2月13日前完成交割或已签署最终书面协议的交易。

CFIUS 于2019年9月发布了实施 FIRRMA 的拟议实施条例征求意见稿。最终实施条例与该拟议规则大致相似，但还是增加了一些重要的修订。大多提出缩小条例涵盖范围的公众意见均被驳回；总的说来，实施条例中广泛而详尽的定义、图示和详细说明将扩大其管辖范围和复杂性。

实施条例的要点如下：

新设某些非控制性投资和房地产交易的管辖权：该条例扩大了 CFIUS 对可能导致外国人控制美国企业的外国投资交易（即“涵盖控制交易”）之传统管辖权，其中包括两个附加的交易类型：

某些对涉及“关键技术”、“关键基础设施”或“敏感个人数据”的美国企业（即“TID美国企业”）进行的非控制性投资，且投资者在该投资中被赋予了某些“触发权”；及

某些涉及房地产的交易。

两类交易需进行强制申报：大多数CFIUS 申报仍属自愿，但某些涉及关键技术或外国政府所有权的外国投资交易将需进行强制申报（某些有限情况除外）。2018年10月，CFIUS 通过其“试点计划”实施了 FIRRMA 对某些关键技术投资的强制申报要求。该计划将于2020年2月13日结束，但其大部分规定已包含在实施条例内。与该计划不同的是，实施条例限制了需强制申报的关键技术交易范围，排除了获出口管制许可豁免的加密技术项目。

确定特定国家投资者资格的某些例外情况：在符合特定条件下，CFIUS 扩大管辖权后的例外规定可适用于来自“除外国家”（目前为澳大利亚、加拿大和英国）投资者的某些非控制性投资和房地产交易。不过这些例外规定的作用可能很有限，因为它们并未扩大至涵盖控制交易。

渐进式收购：该实施条例为先前已获 CFIUS 许可进行的控制性投资的外国人所进行的额外投资，提供免受未来CFIUS 审查的安全港，但同一外国投资者对原非控制性投资的增加投资不适用安全港保护。

投资基金：CFIUS 提出一项暂定规定，以“神经中心”测试来定义“主要营业地”，这可能会将某些在美国境外设立但由美国普通合伙人管理的投资基金，排除在CFIUS 的管辖范围外。此外，在满足特定条件下，由外国投资者通过美国人管理的投资基金对 TID 美国业务进行的间接非控制性投资（即使该外国投资者为该基金的咨询委员会或委员会委员）也不属于 CFIUS 的管辖范围。

可选的简化版申报：投资者可使用传统的“申报”或简化的“声明”方式来进行 CFIUS 申报。使用声明可能（但不保证）会简化审查流程。

尚未实施申报征费：CFIUS 尚未征收 FIRRMA授权的申报费。

对科技领域的重大影响：向中国转让技术的担忧引起了制定 FIRRMA的政策辩论。该实施条例和相关出口管制的变化无疑将对从前不受 CFIUS 或出口管制要求制约的大部分美国科技企业产生决定性影响。

随着实施条例的发布，CFIUS 正根据 FIRRMA 的授权对美国外国投资审查程序进行大范围的全面改革。未来的外国投资交易将根据范围广阔的条例被仔细审查，而对拟议交易的任何评估都将非常依赖事实。重要的是，交易方在考虑潜在交易时应尽早关注 CFIUS 问题。

要点讨论

CFIUS 扩大的管辖权

某些对关键技术、关键基础设施和敏感个人数据业务的非控制性投资：TID 美国业务投资

规章与拟议规则意见征求稿大致相同，规定 CFIUS一般对将以下非关联 TID 美国企业的特定触发权转让予外国投资者的非控制性投资（即“涵盖投资”）拥有管辖权：[2]

关键技术企业：生产、设计、测试、制造、编制或开发一种或多种“关键技术”的美国企业。关键技术包括：《国际武器交易条例》“美国军品清单”中的国防用品或服务；列在《出口管理条例》（EAR）“商业管制清单”中、并因与安全相关的特定原因而受到管制的项目；某些核设备和设施；特定药剂和毒素；以及“新兴”和“基础技术”（关键技术的主要子分类尚待美国商务部确定）。

“涵盖关键基础设施投资”企业：[3]针对某些系统和资产履行特定“功能”（拥有、运营、制造、供应或服务）的美国企业。[4]涵盖的关键基础设施和相应功能收录在规章的附录中。

敏感个人数据（SPD）企业：直接或间接保有或收集因国家安全原因而易遭到利用的美国公民 SPD 之美国企业。一般而言，美国企业如符合以下条件，将被视为保有或收集 SPD：（i）针对或为敏感团体（例如军事人员）定制产品或服务；（ii）在某些交易相关的事件发生前12个月内，已保有或收集超过100万个人的 SPD；或（iii）拥有明确要保有或收集超过100万人的 SPD 的商业目标，且此类数据是该美国企业主要产品或服务的组成部分。规章列明了 SPD 的特定类型，包括某些财务数据、保险数据和健康数据；某些非公开电子通讯信息；地理位置数据；生物识别数据；以及基因检测结果。

就对 TID 美国企业的非控制性投资而言，只要外国投资者在美国企业中获得以下一项或以上的触发权，CFIUS 便对其拥有管辖权：

获得与关键技术或涵盖关键基础设施相关的美国企业所拥有的重要非公开技术信息；

获得在美国企业的董事会或同等管理机构中担任或提名董事或观察员的权利；或

除作为股东行使表决权外，参与美国公司的实质性决策，包括使用美国公民的 SPD；开发或发布关键技术；或管理或供应关键基础设施。

房地产交易

CFIUS 将对某些由外国投资者购买、租赁或以特许形式获得某些位于敏感地区或与之相距特定距离内的美国房地产（“涵盖房地产”）、从而导致该外国投资者拥有特定财产权的交易拥有管辖权。敏感地区包括：（i）主要机场和具商业战略意义的海港；[5]以及（ii）因国家安全而属于敏感的美国军事设施和其他美国政府财产。相关军事设施和其他美国政府地点已列于房地产规定的附录中。

如果此类房地产交易一般向外国人提供以下三种或以上财产权，CFIUS 便对它们拥有管辖权：（i）物理进入房产的权利；（ii）排除他人物理进入房产的权利；（iii）改善或发展房产的权利；或（iv）对该房产附加固定或不动的结构或物体的权利。

CFIUS 对房地产交易的管辖权例外包括涉及以下情况：（i）与“除外国家”有关的合资格外国投资者（如下所述）；（ii）位于城市地区或城市群内的某些房地产；（iii）单个房屋单元的房地产；或（iv）某些外国航空承运人。

涵盖的房地产交易不需要进行强制申报。

强制申报要求及例外规定

根据规章，某些涉及关键技术或外国政府所有权的外国投资交易，通常必须在交易交割至少30天前进行强制申报。

关键技术

该规章实施并修改了试点计划的部分内容。涉及以下 TID 美国企业的涵盖交易（控制或非控制）都必须进行强制申报：（i）生产或以其他方式开发关键技术，以供北美产业分类系统（NAICS）代码界定的27个指定行业中的一个或以上行业的美国企业使用[6]或（ii）设计专门用于其中一个或以上行业的关键技术。[7]其中一项重要的改动，是如果美国软件公司的唯一关键技术符合 EAR 中加密产品许可豁免（License Exception ENC）的出口条件，该公司则可适用强制申报的例外规定，以减轻拟议规则征求意见稿中预期对使用关键技术定义范围内的加密技术之美国公司造成的负担。同样适用例外规定的还有外国、所有权、影响或控制缓解协议所涵盖的投资，以及例外投资者进行的涵盖控制交易（如下所述）。

外国政府的“实质利益”

由某些与外国政府存在直接或间接“实质利益”关系的外国投资者所进行的直接或间接获得 TID 美国企业“实质利益”的交易，皆须进行强制申报。在这种情况下，“实质利益”一词具有两种含义：如果外国投资者对 TID 美国企业进行的投资使其持有该企业 25% 或以上的直接或间接表决权，且外国政府持有该外国投资者 49% 的直接或间接权益，则一般须向 CFIUS 进行申报。与拟议规则征求意见稿不同的是，最终规章规定如果外国投资者拥有普通合伙人或具同等资格，则只有在外国政府持有该普通合伙人或同等资格 49% 或以上权益的情况下，该外国才被视为拥有实质权益（有限合伙权益除外）。

如下所述，两种类型的强制申报均对投资基金进行的某些交易设有例外规定。

如果未能进行强制申报，美国政府可能会向外国投资者、美国投资目标企业或两者处以民事罚款，每项违规的最高罚额为 250,000 美元或交易金额（以较高者计）。

除外国家：对 TID 美国企业的投资和房地产交易

重要的是，基于美国与“除外国家”间拥有的强大情报共享和国防工业基地整合机制，CFIUS 扩大的管辖权一般不会扩展至与任何“除外国家”有特定联系的外国投资者所进行的非控制性投资和房地产交易。CFIUS 在规章中仅列明了三个除外国家——澳大利亚、加拿大和英国。CFIUS 必须确定某国家拥有完善、基于国家安全考量以及能促进与美国协调的外国投资审查程序，以使该国家能在2022年2月13日后得以保留或加入例外名单中。

尽管这是一个重要的例外规定，但却不会影响 CFIUS 对涵盖控制交易的传统管辖权，所以其作用可能很有限。此外，为符合例外条件，外国投资者必须满足规章中概述的某些标准，例如当外国投资者为实体时，对非除外管辖区的董事、董事会观察员和股东的百分比或人数限制。另外，如果外国投资者违反了某些法律（包括美国制裁法），或被美国政府认定进行某些“不良”活动（例如被列入美国商务部的实体清单），或被 CFIUS 通知其先前违反了缓解协议，则不再具有除外投资者的资格。

CFIUS 对渐进式收购的管辖权

根据规章，一般而言，如果 CFIUS 根据申报或声明许可了涵盖控制交易，则该外国投资者随后对任何与美国企业有关的额外权益或变更权利的收购，皆不会构成涵盖交易。但若新交易的当事方为并未获美国企业控制权的其他外国投资者，随后的交易则有可能构成涵盖交易。值得注意的是，如果后续收购属于涵盖投资或涵盖控制投资的定义范围，CFIUS 对其非控制性投资的许可则不能为未来收购美国企业中的额外权益和权利提供安全港保护。

投资基金和新的主要营业地定义

为了回应公众就拟议规则征求意见稿中对由美国人管理和控制的投资基金的意见，CFIUS 同时发布了一项定义“主要营业地”的暂行规定，以供界定“外国实体”。根据外国法设立但主要营业地位于美国的组织并非外国实体。新的主要营业地定义应用了“神经中心”测试：“实体的管理层指导、控制或协调实体的活动的主要地点；或对于投资基金而言，主要由其普通合伙人、管理人员或同等人员领导、控制或协调其活动和投资的主要地点。”但是，如果某实体在最近提交予美国、州或外国政府的文件中表示其主要营业地、主要执行办公室或总部位于美国以外，该地点则将被视为其主要营业地，除非实体可以证明主营地已改为美国。此新定义有助某些位于美国由普通合伙人管理的外国构建投资基金避免被归类为外国实体，从而在投资美国企业时不受 CFIUS 管辖。

该规章还实施了 FIRRMA 的规定，将某些通过投资基金对 TID 美国企业进行的非控制性间接投资排除在 CFIUS 管辖权外。外国投资者通过其投资基金外国成员有限合伙人的身份，或在该基金的顾问委员会或委员会中具有同等资格的情况下，对 TID 美国企业进行的间接投资，在以下情况下不属于涵盖投资：

该基金完全由非外国的普通合伙人或同等人士管理；

顾问委员会或委员会无权控制基金的投资决定，或由普通合伙人或与投资该基金的实体相关同等人士所作的决定；

外国投资者并没有控制投资基金的能力；及

外国投资者并未获得上述任何（与获得关键技术信息、董事会/观察员权利或参与决策有关）的触发权。

此外，该规章免除了符合前文所述的大多数条件（但不是全部）、通过投资基金对 TID 美国企业进行任何涵盖投资的强制性申报要求——外国投资者可能会获得触发权，但例外规定仍可适用。[8]

替代传统申报的声明

交易方通常可以针对涵盖交易选择提交“声明”（简短版的申报）或常规的书面申报。在 CFIUS 收到声明后的 30 天内，CFIUS 将会（i）要求正式的书面申报；（ii）发起单方面审查；（iii）通知当事方，未能根据声明完成审查；或（iv）许可该交易。因此，简短声明或可加快审查过程。但是，视 CFIUS 对声明的处理结果，交易方最终也有可能不得不进行申报，因此其需仔细考虑哪种类型的通知对于特定交易来说更为合适。

申报费用

美国财政部将在稍后根据 FIRRMA 的授权，就评估涵盖交易和征收申报费上制定单独的拟议规定。

受影响最大的科技领域

尽管该规章将广泛影响从能源与基础设施到金融的各个范畴，但其对美国科技领域的影响实为最大。从前的 CFIUS 规定对许多人工智能和自动驾驶等领域的企业几乎没有影响，但随着出口管制扩展至这些领域，CFIUS 规定将对这些子行业的国际投资产生决定性影响。

[1] 该规章包括两项最终规章：C.F.R.31.第800和801部分（有关外国投资者在美国进行某些投资的规定）；和C.F.R. 31.第802部分（有关外国投资者在美国进行某些房地产交易的规定）。

[2] “涵盖交易”已被修改为包括涵盖控制交易和涵盖投资。它还包括外国投资者变更在其投资的美国企业中的权利（如果该变更可能构成涵盖控制交易或涵盖投资），以及旨在或意图逃避或规避 FIRRMA 或该规章的交易或安排。

[3] 涵盖投资关键基础设施是“关键基础设施”的子分类，“关键基础设施”的定义为“对美国至关重要的物理或虚拟系统和资产，即破坏此类系统或资产或使其丧失能力将对国家安全产生不利影响”。在涵盖控制交易中，CFIUS 将继续使用此关键基础设施的广义定义。

[4] 这些系统和资产的例子包括，例如，向军事设施和石油设施、液化天然气接收站或存储设施，以及州际石油和液化天然气管道提供电力或位于其附近的电力系统或设施。

[5] 港口本身也被视为涵盖的房地产。

[6] 行业清单已列在规章的附录中。

[7] CFIUS 表示其打算将该强制申报的要求，从基于 NAICS 代码修改为基于出口控制的许可要求，但仍没有修例时间表。

[8] 如果专门管理该基金的普通合伙人不是外国投资者或最终由美国国民控制，则可适用关键技术强制申报要求的例外规定。

Harry Clark

合伙人, International Trade and Investment, Mergers & Acquisitions

Washington, D.C.

D+1 202 339 8499

E[email protected]

See my bio

D:+1 202 339 8499

[email protected]

Practice:

Technology & Innovation Sector

International Trade and Investment

Mergers & Acquisitions

Environmental, Social & Corporate Governance (ESG)

Strategic Advisory & Government Enforcement (SAGE)

vCard

See full bio

Harry Clark

合伙人

Washington, D.C.

Harry Clark is leader of Orrick’s International Trade & Investment team. He advises major companies and industry associations on a variety of international trade and investment rules.

Harry is experienced in areas such as CFIUS/Exon-Florio examinations of foreign investment, military and “dual use” export control regulations (ITAR/EAR), economic sanctions administered by the U.S. Treasury Department (OFAC), customs regulations, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, anti-money laundering rules, anti-boycott requirements and defense industrial security requirements. He executes internal corporate investigations regarding trade and investment rules and advises on such rules in the context of corporate transactions.

Additionally, Harry has extensive experience with government contracting matters. His government contracting work has included, for example, design and implementation of U.S. Defense Department renewable energy projects. He also represents broad industry coalitions on major trade litigations and international negotiations. His experience in these areas includes a leading role in what is often considered the largest-ever international trade dispute: the controversy regarding unfair softwood lumber imports from Canada. It has involved myriad administrative proceedings before federal agencies, NAFTA panel appeals, WTO dispute proceedings, judicial proceedings and international settlement agreements.

Harry has represented a coalition of major U.S. oil companies in antidumping and countervailing duty litigation. As a related matter, he pursues policy issues with congressional and executive branch officials and advises on international trade rules (e.g., GATT, WTO agreements and NAFTA).

Chambers 2022 recognizes Harry as a leader in the field of export controls and economic sanctions (Chambers Global and Chambers USA), as well as CFIUS (Chambers USA). Previous editions have also recognized Harry’s achievements regarding his work related to the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Clients note that Harry provides “accurate, straightforward guidance incredibly efficiently” and “he has an ability to translate complex legal requirements and rules into business-friendly jargon.”

Jeanine P. McGuinness

合伙人, International Trade and Investment, 美国《反海外腐败法》（FCPA）与反腐败

Washington, D.C.

D+1 202 339 8543

E[email protected]

See my bio

D:+1 202 339 8543

[email protected]

Practice:

International Trade and Investment

美国《反海外腐败法》（FCPA）与反腐败

反洗钱与银行保密法

Mergers & Acquisitions

Environmental, Social & Corporate Governance (ESG)

Strategic Advisory & Government Enforcement (SAGE)

vCard

See full bio

Jeanine P. McGuinness

合伙人

Washington, D.C.

Jeanine McGuinness concentrates in U.S. trade and investment laws applicable to cross-border transactions, focusing on U.S. economic sanctions, anti-money laundering laws, anti-boycott laws, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), and transaction reviews by U.S. national security agencies, including the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS).

Jeanine’s clients include major U.S. and foreign financial institutions, and pharmaceutical, technology, telecommunications, energy, and natural resources companies. Examples of Jeanine’s experience include: Represents clients in preparing voluntary self-disclosures, administrative subpoena responses and license applications, and represents companies in connection with enforcement actions by the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) Provides policy and compliance advice to clients affected by frequent changes in U.S. sanctions, including sanctions targeting Iran, Cuba, and Russia/Ukraine Assists foreign purchasers of U.S. companies in national security reviews, including navigating the CFIUS process, through preparation of notices, meetings with CFIUS member agencies, advising on follow-on investigations, and negotiating and implementing mitigation agreements Assists clients in developing and updating economic sanctions, anti-money laundering, and anti-corruption compliance policies and procedures Represents financial institutions in connection with U.S. federal and state enforcement actions regarding compliance with U.S. anti-money laundering laws and regulations Represents lenders, underwriters, borrowers, and issuers in international lending and capital markets transactions regarding sanctions, anti-corruption, and anti-money laundering issues Advises a U.S. trade association and its member banks regarding U.S. sanctions, anti-corruption, and anti-money laundering issues in lending transactions, and prepares guidance for the industry on these matters Advises financial institutions on the application of U.S. anti-money laundering regulations, with specific emphasis on customer identification program (CIP)/know your customer (KYC)/customer due diligence (CDD) requirements and suspicious activity reporting requirements Regularly advises private equity and hedge funds regarding compliance with U.S. anti-money laundering and sanctions laws and regulations, including with respect to appropriate provisions in subscription materials and enhanced due diligence on high-risk investors Advises clients regarding sanctions-related inquiries from the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and state agencies implementing divestment laws and assists clients in preparing sanctions-related disclosure for inclusion in annual reports to the SEC Jeanine is ranked in both the CFIUS Experts and Export Controls & Economic Sanctions categories by Chambers USA in 2019, 2020, 2021, and 2022. An interviewee had this to say of their experience working with Jeanine, “I am continuously impressed by her extensive knowledge, excellent communication skills and her ability to wrap her subject matter expertise around the details of the matter and then drive conclusions or recommendations for next steps."

Elizabeth Zane

合伙人, International Trade and Investment, Mergers & Acquisitions

Washington, D.C.

D+1 202 339 8532

E[email protected]

See my bio

D:+1 202 339 8532

[email protected]

Practice:

International Trade and Investment

Mergers & Acquisitions

Strategic Advisory & Government Enforcement (SAGE)

vCard

See full bio

Elizabeth Zane

合伙人

Washington, D.C.

Elizabeth Zane, a partner in the Washington, D.C., office, is a member of the International Trade & Investment team. She regularly advises clients on Export Administration Regulations (EAR), International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) and regulations administered by the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC).

Elizabeth's experience includes work on internal investigations, voluntary disclosures, commodity jurisdiction requests and developing and implementing compliance programs. She also advises clients on government contracting matters.

Evgeniya Shakina

Senior International Trade Attorney, International Trade and Investment, Strategic Advisory & Government Enforcement (SAGE)

Washington, D.C.

D+1 202 339 8520

E[email protected]

See my bio

D:+1 202 339 8520

[email protected]

Practice:

International Trade and Investment

Strategic Advisory & Government Enforcement (SAGE)

vCard

See full bio

Evgeniya Shakina

Senior International Trade Attorney

Washington, D.C.

Evgeniya Shakina, an associate in the Washington, D.C., office, is a member of the International Trade & Investment team.

As part of her practice, Evgeniya advises clients on economic sanctions administered by the U.S. Department of the Treasury (OFAC), export control regulations (EAR/ITAR), the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and federal procurement regulations.She also has experience assisting clients in unfair trade practice disputes, including antidumping and countervailing duty proceedings, CFIUS/Exon-Florio examinations of foreign investment, and trade compliance due diligence in corporate transactions.

Gregory I. Hume

Economist and Compliance Specialist, Mergers & Acquisitions, International Trade and Investment

Washington, D.C.

D+1 202 339 8451

M+1 703 927 3684

E[email protected]

See my bio

D:+1 202 339 8451

M:+1 703 927 3684

[email protected]

Practice:

Mergers & Acquisitions

International Trade and Investment

Strategic Advisory & Government Enforcement (SAGE)

vCard

See full bio

Gregory I. Hume

Economist and Compliance Specialist

Washington, D.C.

Greg Hume, an economist based in the Washington, D.C., office, supports our International Trade & Investment team.

Greg assists in a variety of regulatory and investigatory activities relating to the Committee for Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), export controls, economic sanctions and anti-boycott regulations, including the preparation of CFIUS Notices, voluntary disclosures, internal audit documentation and compliance policies and procedures. He also actively participates in corporate transaction due diligence related to Trade Controls and the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, as well as internal investigatory activities.With over 20 years' experience in antidumping and countervailing duty investigations (and consequent administrative reviews) of unfairly-traded goods, Greg has been centrally involved in the statistical, economic and financial analysis of the confidential pricing, logistical, marketing and accounting information submitted by parties in such cases, as well as supporting the drafting and review of briefs and other pleadings filed by parties in the cases. Among the unfair trade cases in which he has participated are those involving crystalline solar voltaic panels, softwood lumber, warmwater shrimp, wooden bedroom furniture, outboard motors and various flat-rolled steel products.Greg has frequently presented litigation-related testimony before the International Trade Administration and actively participates in representing firm clients before the U.S. Department of Commerce, the International Trade Commission, the Court of International Trade, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the World Trade Organization.Greg actively participated in the negotiation of a major international trade agreement involving billions of dollars of trade, and the subsequent monitoring of that agreement. In binding arbitration emerging from that agreement, he developed a damages estimate adopted by the U.S. Government and accepted by the arbitral panel.Greg also supports a variety of litigation efforts requiring data analysis, and has developed and analyzed damages estimates for various arbitration and litigation matters.

International Trade and Investment

Mergers & Acquisitions

Additional Author

W. Clark McFadden II Former Senior Counsel, Orrick

Twitter

Facebook

Instagram

中文(中国) / Simplified Chinese

English

Search entire site

Legal Notices

Privacy Notice

Cookie Notice

Modern Slavery

Attorney Advertising

Secure Login

Austin

Beijing

Boston

Brussels

Chicago

Düsseldorf

Geneva

Houston

London

Los Angeles

Milan

Munich

New York

Orange County

Paris

Portland

Rome

Sacramento

San Francisco

Santa Monica

Seattle

Shanghai

Silicon Valley

Singapore

Taipei

Tokyo

Washington, D.C.

Wheeling, W.V. (GOIC)

Please read before sending e-mail.

Please do not include any confidential, secret or otherwise sensitive information concerning any potential or actual legal matter in this e-mail message. Unsolicited e-mails do not create an attorney-client relationship and confidential or secret information included in such e-mails cannot be protected from disclosure. Orrick does not have a duty or a legal obligation to keep confidential any information that you provide to us. Also, please note that our attorneys do not seek to practice law in any jurisdiction in which they are not properly authorized to do so.

By clicking "OK" below, you understand and agree that Orrick will have no duty to keep confidential any information you provide.

Cancel

美国财政部：外国投资审查条例（CFIUS）正式颁行 - 知乎

美国财政部：外国投资审查条例（CFIUS）正式颁行 - 知乎首发于枫美海外生活切换模式写文章登录/注册美国财政部：外国投资审查条例（CFIUS）正式颁行枫美的海外生活2020年1月13日，美国财政部代表美国外国投资委员会（CFIUS）正式发布了实施《外国投资风险审查现代化法案》（FIRRMA）的条例，并将于2020年2月13日生效。早在2018年8月，特朗普总统就已签署通过了FIRRMA法案，以求扩大CFIUS对外国投资的审查范围并修改审查程序。经过漫长的试行及征求意见过程，条例的正式版本终于今年年初出炉。条例分为两个单独的条例，第一个条例涉及常规投资，第二个条例涉及房地产交易。本文主要介绍在条例的正式版本实施后CFIUS对常规投资的审查。条例扩大了CFIUS对外国投资的审查范围：关键技术为了适应不断变化和出现的技术，CFIUS条例的正式版本没有列明关键技术的完整清单，而是根据商务部的出口管制技术清单来定义关键技术的范围。被包含的关键技术包括美国军需品清单（USML），商业管制清单（CCL）上的某些项目以及出口管制改革法案（ECRA）识别和管制的新兴与基础技术等（有关出口管制改革法案（ECRA），美投行有过专门报道，请点击：美商务部拟对14类新兴技术实施出口管制）。同时条例也将2018年关键技术试点计划中提到的27个敏感行业作为附录列出，具体清单可见“美国财政部：27类关键技术限制中国投资”（美投行有过专门报道，请点击：美国财政部：27类关键技术限制中国投资）。如果一项交易导致一家从事敏感行业，且生产、设计、测试、加工、制造或开发关键技术的美国企业受外国投资者的控制，或外国投资者以非被动、非控股少数股权形式投资于此类美国企业，交易方必须向CFIUS提交申报文件（强制申报）。关键基础设施条例列举了28种涵盖在CFIUS审查范围内的关键基础设施和关键基础设施相关的功能投资，其中包括了电信、能源、运输等不同基础设施子部门内的系统和资产。敏感个人信息条例明确了CFIUS对11种特定类别的敏感个人数据的管辖权，包括金融、地理位置、健康、生物特征和安全许可数据，以及电子邮件、短信和聊天等电子通信数据。如果美国公司（1）为身份敏感的美国政府人员或承包商定制产品或服务；（2）维护或收集超过100万个人的此类数据；（3）已被证明其目标是维护或收集超过100万个人的此类数据，并且此类数据是其美国业务产品或服务的主要组成部分，那么投资该美国公司将受到CFIUS管辖。条例将CFIUS审查程序分为强制及自愿申报：强制申报条例规定，涉及以下外国投资时，交易方在交易时需提交强制性声明，并附上交易信息：（1）交易涉及“关键技术”；（2）外国投资者在涉及“关键技术”，“关键基础设施”和“敏感个人数据”的美国业务上持有重大权益，而外国政府持有该外国投资者重大权益。自愿申报如果投资（1）不符合关键技术强制性申报的标准，且（2）外国投资者不是外国政府，交易方可自愿提交申报。对于以自愿申报方式提交的交易，CFIUS审查期约为30天。例外投资者:条例还规定了“例外投资者”，他们将免于接受CFIUS对非被动、非控股少数股权投资和房地产交易（但不包括“控制”交易）的审查。财政部已选定澳大利亚、加拿大和英国作为最初的例外国家。确定哪些国家将来有资格成为“例外国家”的依据是，该国已经建立了有效、稳定的程序，用以筛选可能会造成国家安全风险的外国投资，并就相关事项与美国进行协调。但也可以预见，将来例外投资者的定义仍会相当狭窄，毕竟FRRMA法案提出的主要原因就是CFIUS对所有权结构日益复杂的外国投资的担忧以及防止其管辖权被规避的愿望。未来对于希望在美国投资的中国投资者，还需持续关注美国关于外国投资强制申报范围法规的变化，以避免未进行申报而产生的风险和损失。来源：美国投资银行网发布于 2020-01-20 12:04 cfius财政部美国投资移民赞同 11 条评论分享喜欢收藏申请转载文章被以下专栏收录枫美海外生活海外投资、移民咨询就找

CFIUS - 知乎

CFIUS - 知乎首页知乎知学堂发现等你来答切换模式登录/注册CFIUS暂无话题描述关注话题管理分享讨论精华视频等待回答切换为时间排序【私募基金20讲（7）】CFIUS的前世今生Xiaoxiao Liu律师法律职业资格证持证人#基金,公募基金,私募基金,venture capitalists,CFIUS,美国财政部,投资审查,FIRRMA,一般审查,特别审查,禁令,总统令,投资审查,特朗普,M&A,investment company,Fund Expense,投资公司,投资,直接投资,间接投资,私募,pr…阅读全文赞同添加评论分享收藏喜欢举报CFIUS审查的基本判断逻辑开府仪同3S1、基本概念 (1) CFIUS是什么。CFIUS全称 Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States，字面意思是指美国外国投资委员会这个跨部门委员会。CFIUS历史悠久，最初的职权和范围与目前所称已经有显著的差别。随着FIRRMA法案的实施，普遍认为FIRRMA法案重塑了原先管辖范围优先的CFIUS审查，从而给外国投资人对美投资产生重大影响。(2) CFIUS审查是什么意思。目前常谈到的CFIUS审查，多指根据FIRRMA(《2019年外国投资风险审…阅读全文赞同 1添加评论分享收藏赴美投资并购必知：美国外资投资委员会（CFIUS）成美律所提供海外投资并购，商业诉讼纠纷和知识产权法律服务的美国律所。美国成美律师事务所创始合伙人柳治平（大隐）律师撰写本文介绍美国外资投资委员会（CFIUS）的历史与现状，管辖范围和内容，以及中国资本赴美投资并购与CFIUS互动的案例。欢迎大家转发、指正。作者简介：柳律师，纽约大学法律博士（2007年），在美国著名大型律所执业逾七年, 为客户完成了超过百宗，总额累计超过70亿美元的并购，股份融资以及贷款交易，成美律师事务所（ http://www.ambizlaw.com ）创始合伙人。（A）CFIUS历史与现…阅读全文赞同 6添加评论分享收藏浏览量8024 讨论量4 帮助中心知乎隐私保护指引申请开通机构号联系我们举报中心涉未成年举报网络谣言举报涉企侵权举报更多关于知乎下载知乎知乎招聘知乎指南知乎协议更多京 ICP 证 110745 号 · 京 ICP 备 13052560 号 - 1 · 京公网安备 11010802020088 号 · 京网文[2022]2674-081 号 · 药品医疗器械网络信息服务备案（京）网药械信息备字（2022）第00334号 · 广播电视节目制作经营许可证:（京）字第06591号 · 服务热线：400-919-0001 · Investor Relations · © 2024 知乎北京智者天下科技有限公司版权所有 · 违法和不良信息举报：010-82716601 · 举报邮箱：jubao@zhihu.

im钱包下载地址 数字资产服务平台

tp钱包正版最新下载|cfius全称

赴美投资并购必知：美国外资投资委员会（CFIUS） - 知乎

CFIUS审查的基本判断逻辑 - 知乎

CFIUS Overview | U.S. Department of the Treasury

CFIUS Frequently Asked Questions | U.S. Department of the Treasury

君合美国说S3:E6丨2023年CFIUS审查监管趋势及美国投资相关立法动向

Just a moment...

君合美国说S2: E8丨2022年CFIUS审查新动向及2021年申报情况概览

New CFIUS Rules – Eight Key Points

美国财政部：外国投资审查条例（CFIUS）正式颁行 - 知乎

CFIUS - 知乎

im钱包下载地址
数字资产服务平台