The Costs of Perceived Hypocrisy: The Impact of U.S. Treatment of Foreign Acquisitions of Domestic Enterprises

By Deas, Destiny Duron | Duke Law Journal, April 2008 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

The Costs of Perceived Hypocrisy: The Impact of U.S. Treatment of Foreign Acquisitions of Domestic Enterprises

Deas, Destiny Duron, Duke Law Journal


The People's Republic of China's revised rules governing foreign acquisitions of domestic enterprises, promulgated in the fall of 2006, disappointed many observers who had hoped for a more open and transparent approach to Chinese foreign investment. On closer inspection, however, the United States' own laws and policies restricting foreign acquisition of domestic enterprises influenced the Chinese rules' protectionism. The costs of U.S. trade policy have extended beyond Chinese law. Both the U.S. and Chinese rules limiting foreign investment likely violate each country's respective GATS commitments. These violations bring consequences beyond the borders of these two nations, undermining free trade in the global economy.


"If American companies are allowed to buy out any Chinese company they like, but Chinese companies are prevented from doing the same in the U.S., that's not fair." (1)

In August of 2006, the People's Republic of China (China) promulgated its long-awaited revised regulations governing foreign acquisitions (2) of Chinese companies, the Provisions on Acquisition of Domestic Enterprises by Foreign Investors (Chinese M&A Rules). (3) Despite hopes that the revised rules would provide clearer guidance than earlier acquisition regulations, (4) the revised rules continue to lack precision. More controversially, the revised rules continue to give the Ministry of Commerce broad power to review and refuse acquisitions of China's domestic companies by foreign entities on a case-by-case basis with few concrete judging criteria. (5) The crux of the controversy is the vaguely worded Article Twelve, which allows the Ministry of Commerce to refuse and even undo acquisitions if they affect "economic security." (6)

The United States is one of China's biggest trading partners, (7) and American investors and others reacted strongly to the Chinese M&A Rules. (8) Many observers both in the United States and abroad saw the revised rules as a step back in China's progressive economic liberalization. (9) The United States, however, may have actually contributed to the content of the new rules. Although the U.S. Congress did not pen the words of Article 12, U.S. policies resisting acquisitions of domestic American companies by foreign entities had a discernible impact on the content of the revised rules. After the United States prevented a Chinese company from acquiring a California corporation, China responded with revised rules that heightened Chinese protectionism. (10)

Both the Chinese and U.S. acquisition rules may also run afoul of World Trade Organization (WTO) commitments. The United States has argued that its own acquisition (11) rules are no more restrictive than necessary to maintain national security. (12) Even if this argument is accepted, the perceived hypocrisy of the United States blocking politically unpopular acquisitions of U.S. entities by Chinese companies while simultaneously urging more openness in the global market undermines American influence and credibility. The costs of this perceived hypocrisy are not always clearly defined or restricted to national borders.

Part I of this Note examines the relationship between the U.S. and Chinese policies regarding acquisitions of domestic enterprises by foreign investors. It describes how U.S. policies have triggered heightened protectionism in China. Part II analyzes the legality of U.S. and Chinese acquisition rules in light of both countries' commitments to the WTO's General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). It concludes that both countries have violated their obligations under the GATS, and it argues that these violations carry potential costs to the United States, China, and the world economy. Given U.S. commitments to free trade in services through the GATS, the United States must consider the impact of the perception of its own seemingly anti-free trade policies on the rest of the world, both in terms of developing the policies of their trading partners and in terms of the economic costs of violating treaty obligations.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Cite this article

Cited article

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

The Costs of Perceived Hypocrisy: The Impact of U.S. Treatment of Foreign Acquisitions of Domestic Enterprises


Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?