2014年12月的《亚洲商务法律》期刊(Asia Legal Business)的“ChinaOutbound”栏目采访了包括豪力合伙人Carl Hinze在内的该领域知名律师，讨论话题为中国政府最近作出的放宽对外投资管制的决定将增加境外交易数量,令国际收购竞争更加激烈,Raghavendra Verma报道。
中国公司正带着活力、新树立起来的自信和几十亿美元资金走向国际投资市场。几十年来把它们束缚于监管机构的繁文缛节和冗长审批流程中的那些限制终于被取消了。
根据十月份生效的新规定，境外投资金额在10亿美元以下（含）的中国公司将不再需要进行任何审批。之前这一门槛为1亿美元。
这一举措将令几乎所有对外投资交易都无需政府审批。中国商务部部长助理张向晨在近期一次新闻发布会上表示，在商务部2013年批准的6608宗对外投资交易中，根据新规只有100宗需要获得审批。
但能源和采矿行业的对外投资仍然需要审批，同时，每笔投资交易，无论其规模大小，仍需要在相关部门进行登记。
但美国美富律师事务所香港代表处合伙人马小虎认为，新的备案和审批制度要容易操作得多，书面工作量也大大减少了。他表示，“流程的关键部分已经放宽很多。投资者基本上能按照自己的意愿投资，除非项目价值几十亿美元并且涉及复杂的融资结构。”
美迈斯律师事务所上海代表处合伙人潘文森表示，中国推出的这项鼓励公司在境外投资和收购的措施被一些人称为中国版的新马歇尔计划。
尽管中国是世界第二大经济体，有着勃勃雄心，其在全球投资领域却落于人后。按照商务部部长助理张向晨的说法，中国公司在海外持有的资产仅占美国公司所持资产的10%和日本公司所持资产的一半。
马律师表示，“随着人均收入不断提高，中国已经非常接近于成为一个发达国家，而每个国家都需要在某个阶段改变政策。”
新政出台还有着政治背景。马律师认为，即使不是全球范围，至少在亚太地区，中国政府在彰显领导地位时的信心越来越强。他说，“中国的离岸投资将在全世界创造新的供应链，开发新的市场，建立新的产品基地。”
此外，他还认为，新一届政府遵循市场准则，而且再怎么样境外投资都不可能通过官方政令实现。他说，“尽管出台了鼓励出口资本的国家政策，但最终都要通过商业交易来实现。所有这些大型交易，至少是我们所面对的那些，都非常符合国际标准，受市场驱动。”
马律师还说，鉴于中国国内生产总值（GDP）目前的增速为7%左右，通胀低于2%，外汇储备达到4万亿美元，新开放政策出台的时机也恰到好处。
在马律师看来，中国拥有规模极其庞大的外汇储备，政府对此无需担忧。但政府忧虑的一个主要方面是国内市场存在投机行为，尤其是房地产市场。他认为，“热钱在很短的时间内流入流出，可能干扰国家经济稳定。”
澳大利亚豪力律师事务所驻布里斯班合伙人CarlHinze表示，中国政府的“走出去”政策于1999年出台，因此境外投资并不是新鲜事，但近年来数量增长迅猛。
中国政府放宽境外投资政策限制还有更紧迫的原因。Hinze认为，虽然许多中国公司拥有大量现金并希望通过对外投资寻找新的增长来源，但都受阻于中国的监管体制。Hinze律师主要为在澳大利亚的中国投资者提供服务。
Hinze律师说，中国政府意识到无论是国企还是私企，中国公司在国内市场继续有机增长的能力十分有限，因此需要去境外寻求新机遇。他表示，“政府还希望对外投资能更快速地获得技术、供应链、品牌和专长。”
瑞生国际律师事务所驻香港合伙人张清彦表示，新政还进一步明确了完成商业交易的时间和要求。他认为，“它让中国公司在进行境外投资时有更多的灵活性和自由度。” 张清彦说，过去每笔交易都会遇到政府审批的问题，造成了人们心中不确定性和风险的印象。他表示，“由于国际公司不能理解在交易流程中需要另一项政府审批的含义，这使得交易变得更为困难。如果可能的话，外国公司会试图将这一风险的皮球踢回给中国公司，因为它们觉得审批是中国特色的要求。”
美迈斯律师事务所的潘文森律师认为，对参与中国境外并购交易的律师、投资银行家和其他人而言，原有的监管体制让人颇为受挫。她说，“中国的竞购方处于极为不利的地位，不得不支付比其他竞购方更高的价格才能在竞标中胜出。”
史密夫•斐尔律师事务所北京办事处负责人邹兆麟表示，各家公司有可能迅速对这一变化作出回应，从明年1月份开始，中国公司将在境外收购中更为积极主动。邹律师认为，“与今年的市场相比，我相信对外投资将增加35%至50%。”
中国与全球化智库发表的《中国企业国际化报告（2014年）》中提到，仅2014年，预计对外投资就将超过1200亿美元，2013年则为1080亿美元。截止今年9月，这一数字已达到749.6亿美元，较去年同期增长20%。
此外，张向晨部长助理表示，预计中国对外投资金额将超过2013年1176亿美元的外商对华投资，这一发展具有重大象征意义。他还表示，“如果不是今年超过，就是近期内超过。”
张清彦律师说，中国公司将主要寻求资源收购以支持国内经济增长，并在包括食品、农业和技术等在内的各种新行业和目的地中实现多元化。他表示，“拥有主要品牌、专有生产技术、其他形式的知识产权以及表现出高增长机会的公司将是主要收购目标。”
张清彦还说，南美、澳大利亚、东南亚、中亚和非洲是这些投资的主要目的地。但潘律师认为，对于技术或产品推动的交易，美国仍是首选目的地。她说，“中国公司显然非常兴奋，它们正积极寻找中国境外的目标，尤其是技术、生命科学、娱乐、制造业和消费产品领域。”
对目的国的选择可能会有一些政治影响。按照邹律师的看法，中国国企认为与英国等其他司法管辖区相比，美国的监管制度有时可能挑战性更高一些，但本地私企仍很愿意继续与美国公司进行合作。邹律师说，“美国公司可选择的领域种类要多得多，而且中国私企的管理层大多在情感上都更喜欢美国的环境。” 潘律师表示，实际上一些美国公司本身也开始接触潜在的中国买家。她认为，“有时候，资产对中国买家的战略价值要高于美国买家。”
潘律师说，例如某种技术可能在美国并不是唯一的技术或最佳技术，但对中国买家而言，这可能是中国最佳或唯一的技术，因此就具有更高的协同价值。
潘律师眼中的另一项新进展是美国制造类公司有时并不只是寻找一个在中国的产品分销商而已。其实它们也在寻找能够进行股权投资的中国公司。潘律师表示，“这样一来，双方的利益达成一致，对我们来说，承接此类交易实在令人兴奋。”
邹律师认为，欧洲也有许多能为中国投资者提供有吸引力的市场的可再生能源公司。在他看来，对欧洲投资的增速有望超过对其他地区的投资增速。
Hinze律师则表示，与此同时，预计澳大利亚境内的中国投资将大幅增加市场中的外国资本量，其中绝大多数将流入硬商品等自然资源、石油和天然气、农业、基础设施、商业地产、零售、电信和旅游业。
马律师表示，最近美富律师事务所一直在帮助中国公司在境外进行房地产和医疗设备相关投资。“我们还帮助客户从离岸市场借得资金，这比在岸融资要便宜。”
以离岸金融中心为基地成立的控股公司是中国境外投资交易的普遍公司结构。潘律师说，尽管成立此类公司主要出于公司治理和税收原因的考虑，这也取决于目标公司的结构。她表示，“如果目标公司是开曼控股结构，买家也会在开曼成立一家控股公司，方便两家公司合并。如果目标公司是一家纯粹的美国公司，那买家很有可能会采用香港控股公司，由它成立一家美国子公司进行收购。”
Hinze律师表示，中国公司在澳大利亚进行收购时也普遍采用离岸结构。
但这些离岸结构令中国有关部门感到不快。邹律师认为对离岸结构的这种不信任是因为有人滥用这种结构从事令有关部门感到头疼的洗钱活动。
邹律师表示，政府在货币汇率管理方面一直采取灵活做法，帮助放开对外投资流程。
松绑后的投资制度初期积极的影响之一是提振了中国的私募基金业务。潘律师说，“越来越多的私募基金正与中国公司合作在中国境外开展收购。公司需要私募基金的丰富资金和大量海外收购经验，而私募基金则获得能释放协同价值从而使投资更具吸引力的战略合作伙伴。”
潘律师表示，事实上，一些基金是专门为并购目的成立的，借此为其投资组合公司寻找海外战略机会。
据Hinze律师介绍，即使在澳大利亚，中国投资者也在为私募类投资成立基金管理公司。
潘律师说，当中国投资者在为竞购海外目标而厉兵秣马时，大多数西方公司仍不了解松绑后的中国新制度。“几乎所有的西方卖家在谈判一开始就会问，‘请告诉我们，如果我们决定把资产卖给中国买家，需要什么样的监管审批，要花多长时间？’”
潘律师认为，尽管中国的监管制度有所改进，但仍存在其他挑战。她说，“文化差异和语言障碍仍然存在。找到优良的收购目标、执行并完成交易、以及最终对业务进行整合，这始终是竞争激烈而且有难度的。”
但普遍共识是这一新政的总体影响将十分重大。邹律师表示，“明年的前景非常光明，律所肯定会极其忙碌。”
Stepping Out with Vigour
Holding Redlich partner Carl Hinze has been quoted in thelatest edition (December 2014) of Asian Legal Business magazine, in the article “Steppingout with vigour” in the column ‘China Outbound’, discussing about the following:
“The recent decisionby the Chinese government to relax its outbound investment regulations will boost the number of overseas deals and make international acquisitions more competitive”, says RAGHAVENDRA VERMA.
Chinese companies are approaching the global investment market place with vigour, newfound confidence and billions of dollars. Restrictions that had bound them for decades into regulatory red tape with lengthy approval process have finally been lifted.
As per the new rules that took effect in October, Chinese companies making overseas investment of up to $1 billion will not be required to seek any official approval. Earlier, this threshold was $100 million.
The move will let virtually all outbound deals to go ahead without government approval. Out of6,608 overseas investments deals approved in 2013 by the Chinese Ministry of Commerce, only 100 would have required approval under the new regulations, Zhang Xiangchen, an assistant minister in the Chinese Ministry of Commerce, said in a recent press conference.
Overseas investments in the energy and mining sector,however, will still require approvals and every investment deal, irrespective of its size, will still need to be registered with the authorities.
However, according to Xiaohu Ma, Hong Kong partner at Morrison &Foerster, the new filing and approval system is much easier and the paperwork has been substantially reduced. “The key part of the process is much more relaxed,” he says, “People can do pretty much what they wish unless the projectis worth billions of dollars and involves a complicated financing structure.”
The move by the authorities to encourage companies to invest and make acquisitions outside China is being called by some as a Chinese version of the new Marshall Plan, says Wendy Pan, partner at O’Melveny & Myers in Shanghai.
Despite being the second-largest economy in the world and anation with high ambitions, China has been lagging behind on the global investment front. According to MOFCOM’s Xiangchen, overseas holdings of Chinese companies are only 10 percent of the assets held by U.S. companies and half of those heldby the Japanese.
“With the increasing per capita income, China is very close to becoming a developed nation and every country needs to have a policy changeat one stage,” says Ma.
There is also a political background to the new decision. The Chinese government feels much more confident while staking claim to the leadership, if not in the whole world, then at leastin Asia-Pacific region, says Ma. “China’s offshore investments will be creating new supply chains, developing new markets and making new product bases around the world,” he says.
Furthermore, according to Ma, the new government follows market norms and anyway such investments cannot be made through an offi- cialorder. “Though there is a state policy to encourage people to export capital,eventually it is going to be done though commercial deals,” he says, “All thosebig deals, at least all those in front of us, are very much of international standards and driven by markets.”
The timing of the new liberal policy has also been appropriate given that Chinese GDP(gross domestic product) is growing at around 7 percent, inflation is less than 2 percent and foreign exchange reserves are touching $4 trillion, says Ma.
According to Ma, China has very large foreign exchange reserves and the government does notneed to worry on that front. However, a major cause for concern for the government is the speculation in the domestic market, particularly the real estate market.“Hot money coming in and going out in a very short period of time could disturb the stability of the economy,” he says.
Beijing’s global investment approach is not new as it has had a “Going Out” policysince 1999 which in recent years has seen a major uptick, says Carl Hinze,partner at Holding Redlich in Brisbane.
There have been rather pressing reasons for adopting a less restricted overseas investment policy by the Chinese government. According to Hinze, who mainly serves Chinese investors in Australia, although many Chinese companies have large amounts of cash and are seeking new sources of growth through outbound investment, they have been hindered by the Chinese regulatory regime.
According to Hinze, the Chinese government realises that the ability of Chinese companies, both state-owned and private, to continue to grow organically in the domestic market is limited and, therefore, they need to seek new opportunities abroad. “The government also hopes that the outbound investment will result in more rapid acquisition of technologies, supply chains, brands and expertise,” he says.
The new announcement also gives greater certainty around thetiming and requirement for closing a commercial deal, says DavidBlumental, partner at Latham & Watkins in Hong Kong. “Itgives Chinese companies more flexibility and latitude to make investmentsoverseas,” he says.
In the past, says Blumental, the issue of government approval came up in every deal and created aperception of uncertainty and risk. “It makes the deals more difficult as international counterparties don’t understand what it means to see another government approval in the process,” he says, “They try to shift that risk, if possible, back to the Chinese company with the thought that it’s a Chinese requirement.”
For lawyers, investment bankers and other people involved in Chinese overseas M&A transactions, it was frustrating under the old regulatory regime, says Pan of O’Melveny & Myers. “Chinese bidders were placed in a severely disadvantaged position and had to pay a higher price over and above other bidders in order to win a competitive transaction,” she says.
Companies are likely to respond to the changed scenario rather quickly as according to Tom Chau, head of Herbert Smith Freehills’ Bejing office,from January, Chinese companies will be more active and aggressive in overseas acquisitions. “Compared to the market this year, I believe there will be an increase in outbound investment by about 35 percent to 50 percent,” he says.
In 2014 itself, overseas investments are expected to be more than $120 billion as compared to $108 billion in 2013, says the “Report on Globalisation of Chinese Enterprises (2014)” by the Centere for China and Globalization. Till September,the figure had reached $74.96 billion, 20 percent more than the year earlier.
Furthermore, in a big symbolic development, China’s outbound investment is expected to surpass the inbound investment which was $117.6 billion in 2013, Minister Zhang says. “If it doesn’t happen this year, it will happen in the near future,” he adds.
Chinese companies will mainly be looking at acquiring resources to support domestic economic growth and diversifying into various new industries and destinations, which include food, agriculture and technology, says Blumental. “Companies that have major brands, manufacturing technology know-how, other forms of intellectual property, and present high growth opportunities will be the main targets,” he says.
South America, Australia, Southeast Asia, Central Asia and Africa are the major destinations for these investments, says Blumental.
However, for technology or product motivated transactions,the U.S. remains the top destination, says Pan. “Chinese companies are obviously very excited, and they are actively looking for targets outside China especially in technology, life sciences, entertainment, manufacturing industries and consumer products,” she says.
The choice of destination may also have some political fallouts. According to Chau, Chinese state-owned enterprises believe that sometimes, the regulatory regime inthe U.S. could be a little more challenging compared to other jurisdictions like the UK, but local private enterprises continue to enjoy working with the US companies. “There isa much larger variety of sectors to choose from and also, much of the management of privately owned enterprises in the PRC are sentimentally attachedto the U.S. environment,” he says.
In fact, some U.S. companies have themselves started to reach out to potential Chinese buyers, says Pan. “Sometimes, the assets have higher strategic value for a Chinese buyer than for an U.S. buyer,” she says.
For example, says Pan, a particular technology may not be the only technology or the best technology in the U.S., but to a Chinese buyer,it could be the best or only technology in China and, therefore, would havemore synergistic value.
Another new development, according to Pan, is that American manufacturers sometimes do not look for just a distributor for their products in China. Instead, they scout for companies that can also invest in equity. “This way, the interests of both theparties are aligned and for us, such deals are really exciting to undertake,”she says.
There are also many renewable energy companies in the Europe that offer an attractive market to Chinese investors, says Chau. According to him, the rate of increase ininvestment in Europe will likely be higher than that in other places.
At the same time, in Australia, Chinese investments are expected to substantially increase the volume of foreign capital in the market,which will mostly be channelled into natural resources like hard commodities,oil and gas, agriculture, infrastructure, commercial property, retail,telecommunications and tourism, says Hinze.
Lately, Morrison & Foerster has been helping Chinese companies make real estate- and medical equipment-related investments abroad, say Ma. “We are also helping our client borrow money from the offshore market, which is cheaper than onshore financing,” he says.
The offshore financial centre-based holding companies are widely used as corporate structures for Chinese overseas investmenttransactions. According to Pan, although these decisions are mostly motivated by corporate governance and tax reasons, they also dependupon the structure of the target company. “If the target company has a Cayman holding structure, the buyer would set up a holding company in Cayman and so itwould be easier to merge the two companies,” she says, “If the target company is a pure U.S. company, then mostlikely it will use a Hong Kong holding company, which will set up a U.S. subsidiary company to acquire the target.” Offshore structures have also widely been used by Chinese companies for acquisitions in Australia, says Hinze.
However, these offshore structures make Chinese authorities uncomfortable. And Chau attributes this distrust to the misuse ofoffshore structures for purposes of money laundering which has been a concern.
In relation to currency exchange rate management, the government has been adopting a flexible approach, which has contributed to the freeing up of the outbound investment process, says Chau.
One of the early positive fallouts of the liberalised investment regime is the boost that it has provided to the private equity (PE)funds business in China. “More and more PE funds are teaming up with Chinese companies to make acquisitions outside China,” says Pan, “Companies look for large finances and overseas acquisition experience from PE funds, while funds get strategic partners who can unlock synergistic value to make their investments more attractive.”
In fact, some funds are being specifically formed for mergers and acquisitions purposes where they seek overseas strategic opportunities for their portfolio companies, says Pan.
According to Hinze, Chinese investors have also been setting up fund management companies for PE-type investments even in Australia.
While Chinese investors prepare themselves to bid for targets overseas, according to Pan, most Western companies are still ignorant about China’s new liberalised regime. “Almost all Western sellers would askvery early in the negotiation, ‘Please tell us how long it will take and what kind of regulatory approvals would be required if we decide to sell the asset to a Chinese buyer?’”
Pan says that despite the improvements in the regulatory regime in China, there are other challenges that still exist. “The culture difference and the language barrier still remain,” she says, “It is always competitive and difficult to find a good acquisition target, to execute andclose a deal, and to eventually integrate the business.”
However, there is a general consensus that the overalleffect of the policy will be substantial. ““Next year looks very promising, and will certainly keep law firms very busy,” says Chau.
