Just as Taiwan is investigating XPEC Entertainment Inc, the German government has in the past week canceled permission it had granted a Chinese firm to make an acquisition in that nation.
Grand Chip Investment Fund (FGC) was seeking to purchase Germany’s Aixtron for 670 million euros (US$743 million). The decision to cancel was based not only on concerns about the acquisition process, but was also due to a warning issued by US intelligence agencies that China is playing games, trying to acquire the latest LED technology.
Aixtron is the world’s foremost LED chip equipment manufacturer, and Taiwan, South Korea and China are its main customers.
There are, of course, major differences between the Aixtron and XPEC cases. The situations in their respective countries are different, for example, and there are also differences in the levels of the companies’ respective technological competencies.
It is difficult to say with any certainty whether anything illegal actually took place in the acquisition processes. Nevertheless, it is useful to explore the similarities in the two cases.
The aspect that has attracted the most attention is that of alleged market manipulation.
According to a New York Times article, Aixtron’s stock price plummeted to nigh on half following the cancelation of a major order by Sanan Optoelectronics Co, one of Aixtron’s main Chinese customers. Not only are there financial links between Sanan and FGC, they share — in a state-owned enterprise — a stockholder, and therefore investment. There have been suggestions that Sanan pulled the order to suppress Aixtron’s stock price so that FGC would have an advantage in the acquisition.
In the same way, the XPEC case reeks of financial game-playing. It has been suggested that Chinese Internet tycoon Wang Ji (王佶), who has been named as the person funding the deal from behind the scenes and possibly even orchestrating the whole show, conspired to have XPEC chairman Aaron Hsu (許金龍) and former stockbroker Yang Jui-jen (楊瑞仁) inflate the share price by saying they were interested in acquiring XPEC, against the interests of the company’s many shareholders.
The Aixtron acquisition was initially given the go-ahead by German authorities in September, only for the decision to be retracted last month and another review ordered on the grounds that officials had received “previously unknown security-related information.”
US intelligence agencies reportedly provided the German government evidence that Aixtron’s products could potentially be put to military use, possibly to boost China’s nuclear program.
While the XPEC case lacks the technological component of the Aixtron acquisition, it is seen as an inroad for Chinese investors wanting to enter Taiwan’s gaming market.
Germany, with its advanced technology, tops the list of nations where Chinese investors want to make acquisitions, but has only recently drafted legislation allowing restrictions — when deemed necessary — on industrial acquisitions from outside of the EU on telecommunications, IT, military and utilities entities, particularly when Germany’s national interests or security are concerned.
The legislation is aimed at four areas: when the investment entails the industrial policy of foreign governments; when the investors are subsidized by foreign governments; when the buyer is part of a state-run sector of a foreign country; and when the country of the investor places restrictions on German companies that want enter into its market.
China’s market is deemed insufficiently deregulated with asymmetrical conditions of entry, the two factors most often criticized by Western companies. Also, given the economic reality in China, the vast majority of investors there fall within the scope of the German regulations.
At the same time, according to Germany’s Foreign Economic Law, the government has the option to initiate a review of an acquisition as soon as the investors obtain a 25 percent stake, the threshold at which they gain voting rights on the company board.
As Chinese investors try to buy up a string of German technology companies, such as KUKA Robotics Corp, a manufacturer of industrial robots, Berlin is concerned about advanced technology, intellectual property rights and technological secrets flowing the way of China.
The German Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy, which is responsible for the reviews, is to embark upon a meticulous investigation of the true identities and funding sources of investors. It will also investigate the real motivations of investors in acquisitions involving core technologies.
It is not only the German government: Last month the US Department of Defense issued a report in which it said that the military was concerned about computers and handheld devices produced by China’s Lenovo Group Ltd and how they could represent a security threat to the department’s supply chain.
About 27 percent of Lenovo’s shares are held by the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), a state research institute. A member of the CAS, Zhou Zhixin (周志鑫), was recently named to a senior post in the Chinese military’s new Strategic Support Force, a unit in charge of space, cyber and electronic warfare.
In Australia, too, the government has blocked offers from Chinese investors for electricity distributors, citing national security concerns, and four ranching families have joined forces to stop Chinese buyers acquiring the sprawling Kidman cattle empire.
These examples demonstrate that there has already been quite a backlash against Chinese investment attempts in advanced economies around the world.
As China rises and seeks to develop its industrial and military technologies, supplementing its own research and development through espionage and cybertheft, and lately also commercial acquisitions and financial game-playing, the situation has led to almost universal concern. Nations around the world are adopting measures and drafting legislation to maintain national security, safeguard core technologies, bolster industrial development, and protect jobs and competitive advantages.
The nations have not had to face direct, sustained threats to national security from China, and yet they are still adopting increasingly stringent measures against Chinese investment. If those countries feel the need to be this vigilant, Taiwan needs to be even more so.
Taiwan has legislation in place to address the issue of Chinese investment, placing restrictions on everything involving economic monopolies or oligarchies, or anything that might be harmful to economic development or financial stability,as well as things that are politically, socially or culturally sensitive, or pose national security concerns.
However, it is imperative to emphasize that Taiwan does not lack an investment agenda of its own. It is difficult to know for sure what the previous government’s intentions were when it pushed the cross-strait service trade agreement.
It is worth looking at the German government’s approach, with its four conditions to evaluate investment and the rules on investigating the motivations of investors.
This lesson needs to be applied by officials here when evaluating interest among Chinese investors.
Translated by Paul Cooper
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), joined by the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), held a protest on Saturday on Ketagalan Boulevard in Taipei. They were essentially standing for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which is anxious about the mass recall campaign against KMT legislators. President William Lai (賴清德) said that if the opposition parties truly wanted to fight dictatorship, they should do so in Tiananmen Square — and at the very least, refrain from groveling to Chinese officials during their visits to China, alluding to meetings between KMT members and Chinese authorities. Now that China has been defined as a foreign hostile force,
RSS