Impact of China's foreign exchange control on foreign investment in China
Being a vast market, China has been attracting an increasing amount of foreign investment since the implementation of its open-door policies in the late 1970s. However, foreign investments are, to date, still subject to various restrictions, including those arising from China’s foreign exchange control regime.
In this article, we set out several foreign exchange issues that commonly affect foreign investment into China.
The State Administration of Foreign Exchange (including its authorised local counterparts, collectively, SAFE) is the regulator in charge of foreign exchange control matters in China.
Background
Incorporated foreign-invested enterprises (FIEs) include equity joint ventures (EJVs), cooperative joint ventures (CJVs) and wholly foreign-owned enterprises (WFOEs). FIEs are subject to a general equity/debt ratio requirement which means that a certain percentage of the total investment of an FIE must be funded by capital (which is referred to as “registered capital”) contributed by the investors. The amount of total investment and registered capital is required to be set out in the constitutional documents of the FIE and is subject to approval by the governmental authorities.
Capital contribution
Opening of a foreign exchange capital account by an FIE is subject to SAFE approval.
- Each capital payment by the investors of an FIE is subject to verification conducted by a duly qualified accounting firm registered in China before the capital may be used by the FIE.
- Registered capital may be contributed in the form of currency (foreign currency or lawfully obtained RMB), industrial assets, land use rights, intellectual property or other assets that may be agreed by the parties and approved by the approval authorities.
- Registered capital may be paid in one lump sum or in instalments and should be paid in full within 2 years (or within 5 years for foreign-invested holding companies) of the issuance of the FIE’s business licence.
Use of foreign exchange capital
- An FIE may convert foreign exchange capital into RMB for use in its business operations which fall within its business scope. The bank responsible for handling the conversion of the foreign exchange capital will review the relevant transaction documents and process the payment in respect of such conversion for the FIE directly without the need first to obtain an approval from SAFE.
- The RMB amount converted from the foreign exchange capital of an FIE cannot generally be used for any further onshore equity investment. This general restriction constitutes a significant obstacle for any foreign-invested onshore investment vehicles (RMB funds in particular) to use foreign exchange capital received from foreign investors for making further investments in China (for more information regarding foreign-invested RMB funds, please refer to our article Recent regulatory developments in China: FIPs and FIVCIEs
- Foreign exchange capital received by foreign-invested holding companies or venture capital investment companies may be used for onshore investment in China subject to SAFE approvals and verifications.
- Foreign exchange capital of an FIE may be used under a “cash pooling” arrangement through qualified PRC banks so that companies within the same group may benefit from the foreign exchange “cash pool” contributed by the parent and associated companies incorporated in China in accordance with the applicable SAFE rules promulgated in October 2009.
Foreign debt financing of FIEs
- An FIE is only allowed to obtain foreign debt financing (i.e. loans provided by an offshore lender) for an amount up to the difference between its total investment amount and its registered capital (such difference is normally referred to as the “borrowing gap”).
- Foreign debt of the FIE is required to be registered with the local SAFE within 15 days after the signing of the relevant loan agreement.
- FIEs may provide security in favour of an offshore entity to secure its own foreign debt without the need first to obtain an approval from SAFE. In the case where an FIE is to provide foreign security in favour of an offshore entity for the foreign debts of a third party, (subject to certain qualification requirements) the prior approval of SAFE would be required if the FIE is a joint venture enterprise; but if the FIE is a WFOE, only SAFE registration would be required.
- FIEs are not allowed to provide foreign security for the foreign debts of a foreign entity which is not the relevant FIE’s subsidiary. In other words, the provision of only downstream foreign security is feasible.
Remittance of dividends or sale proceeds to foreign shareholders
- Distribution of profits of an FIE to foreign shareholders is conditional upon the satisfaction of various conditions (for example, that: all taxes have been fully paid; all losses of the previous financial years have been made up; allocations have been made to statutory funds; and the registered capital of the FIE has been paid in accordance with the approved schedule).
- A qualified PRC bank will review the application documents and, upon its satisfaction with the application documents, it will process the payment in respect of the remittance of dividends to foreign shareholders for the FIE (the prior approval of SAFE is not required).
- EJVs are required to distribute profits to the shareholders in proportion to the shareholders’ respective equity interests in the EJV. CJVs and WFOEs enjoy more flexible arrangements in terms of the distribution of profits to shareholders.
- An FIE may use its own foreign exchange income or purchase foreign exchange from a bank in order to remit dividends in a foreign currency to foreign shareholders.
- The collection of proceeds by a foreign shareholder arising from the sale of its equity interest in an FIE to an onshore entity is subject to SAFE approval, but such SAFE approval will not be required if the foreign shareholder sells its equity interest to another foreign entity.
Popular related articles
-
On July 1, 2010, China's Tort Liability Law ("the Law"), which was passed on December 29, 2009, came into effect.
-
China has recently eased foreign investment into China by relaxing certain policies and approval requirements.
-
US companies often send headquarters personnel to assist the start-up and development of Chinese affiliates, and later to supervise and manage them in their growth.
-
As China speeds towards becoming an innovation-based economy, foreign businesses have no choice but to engage with the Chinese intellectual property (IP) system.
-
On May 25, 2010, the Anti-Monopoly and Anti-Unfair Competition Enforcement Bureau (CEB) of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce of the PRC (SAIC) published three draft anti-monopoly regulations for public comments: "Provisions of the Administration for Industry and Commerce on Prohibiting Monopolistic Agreements" (Monopolistic Agreement Provisions),"Provisions of the Administration for Industry and Commerce on Prohibiting the Abuse of Dominant Market Positions" (Abuse of Market Dominance Provisions) and "Provisions of the Administration for Industry and Commerce on Curbing Abusive Acts of Administrative Powers to Eliminate or Restrict Competition" (Abuse of Administrative Powers Provisions).
-
The SAIC has circulated three draft regulations expanding on the following non-price-related behavioural prohibitions of China's Anti-Monopoly Law: monopolistic agreements; abuse of dominant market position; and abuse of administrative powers.
-
On July 5, 2010, China's Ministry of Commerce ("MOFCOM") published Provisional Rules on Divestitures of Assets or Businesses to Implement Concentrations between Undertakings (the "Divestiture Rules") with immediate effect.
-
On May 25, 2010, the State Administration of Industry and Commerce (SAIC) issued for public comments three sets of draft AML regulations relating to: (1) abuses of dominance; (2) monopoly agreements; and (3) administrative abuses.
-
The Italian financial police have arrested Chinese and Italian nationals and have seized control of several companies and a range of assets in connection with an alleged Chinese money laundering syndicate in Italy.
-
In the coming months Shanghai will launch an over-the-counter equity exchange for high-tech firms in an attempt to lure private investors into the city.
-
Two recent decisions by United States federal courts serve as useful reminders to companies and their advisors of the rules regarding disclosure of merger negotiations.
-
The funding difficulties for the biotechnology are well known, but financiers have come up with new and innovative ways to respond to these funding challenges - namely the Standby Equity Distribution Agreement ("SEDA").
-
It has been three years since rumblings of syndication difficulties in bank loans and high-yield bonds presaged the credit crisis and just under two years since Lehman Brothers' dramatic collapse and the virtual shutdown of the global credit markets.
-
The UK has successfully retained its leadership position in Europe for inward investment.
-
This morning, Aon Corporation and Hewitt Associates, Inc., announced the merger of Hewitt with a subsidiary of Aon.
-
On July 15, 2010, after a lengthy and sometimes contentious legislative process, the Senate approved the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the Act).
-
Swiss telecom equipment firm Tyco Electronics boosted its presence in the U.S. market with a $1.25 billion agreement to purchase ADC Telecommunications, a key supplier of wireline and wireless network infrastructure to Verizon Wireless and AT&T.
-
The Takeover Panel has issued a consultation paper on the regulation of UK takeover bids.
-
Earlier today, President Obama signed into law the far-reaching "Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act" (the "Dodd-Frank Act" or "Act") previously approved by the Senate on July 15, 2010, and by the House on June 25, 2010.
-
On July 21, 2010, President Obama signed into law the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the "Dodd-Frank Act").
-
British Gas intended to lease a number of floors at 400 George Street, Brisbane.
-
In March this year the Supreme Court of NSW endorsed the refusal of Consolidated Minerals Limited (CML) to pay fees to JP Morgan and as a result JP Morgan earned fees of approximately $30 million less than was claimed.
-
A recent decision of the Supreme Court of Queensland makes it clear that cashing an unconditional bank guarantee is not always straight forward, depending on the wording of the construction contract which refers to bank guarantees or other security.
-
It is common practice for contractors to enter into joint venture arrangements (JVs) when working on major infrastructure/construction projects.
-
It is not unusual to see in construction contracts a short-form clause referring particular disputes to mediation or expert determination without the particular rules or procedures for the mediation or expert determination being specified.
-
In November 2009, the Federal Court of Australia (in Hine v New South Wales Land and Housing Corporation [2009] FCA 1242) considered whether or not a legal remedy was available for perceived injustices arising from a direction given by the Department of Housing (DOH) to its contractors, in circumstances where losses claimed were pure economic losses arising from dealings in a wholly commercial context.
-
Almost without public comment the Healthcare Identifiers Act 2010 (Cth) (the Act) came into effect on 29 June 2010.
-
Global mobility is on the rise leading to increased incoming and outgoing expatriate employment.
-
A decision of the Federal Court provides some useful reminders about misrepresentations by financial brokers and reliance on statements passed on by those brokers.
-
A judgment recently handed down by Rares J of the Federal Court of Australia stemming from the myriad litigation involving Timbercorp Group and their agricultural managed investment schemes provides guidance in the interpretation of the legal effect of the statutory novation procedure contained in Chapter 5C of the Corporations Act 2001 (Act).
If you are interested in submitting an article to Lexology, please
contact Andrew Teague at ateague@lexology.com.