Magnachip Semiconductor Corporation (“Magnachip”), a South Korea-based semiconductor company, recently disclosed that the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (“CFIUS” or the “Committee”) threatened to recommend that President Biden exercise his authority to block a Chinese private equity firm’s acquisition of Magnachip due to unresolvable national security concerns.  Given Magnachip’s very limited nexus to the United States, this case demonstrates the willingness of CFIUS to stretch its jurisdictional arms, especially when it comes to transactions implicating sensitive sectors.
Continue Reading CFIUS Threatens to Block Magnachip Deal; Shows Willingness to Interpret its Jurisdiction Broadly

The “Supplemental Arrangement Concerning Mutual Enforcement of Arbitral Awards between the Mainland and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region” was signed on November 27, 2020 and entered into force partially on the same day and partially on May 19, 2021.

Significantly, the Supplemental Arrangement modifies and expands the existing “Arrangement Concerning Mutual Enforcement of Arbitral

The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) recently released its 2020 annual report, which provides information and statistics regarding transactions reviewed by CFIUS in 2020.[1]  For the first time, the 2020 annual report also includes information regarding so-called non-notified transactions identified and reviewed by CFIUS.
Continue Reading CFIUS Releases 2020 Annual Report

While large financial institutions have traditionally been hesitant to enter new areas of financial products, particularly virtual assets, many more banks and companies have expressed interest in virtual currencies as cryptocurrency has become increasingly mainstream.  Given the use of such services by terrorist groups, it is important for banks and other financial institutions to consider evolving dynamics in this area.  On the one hand, one of the widely described benefits of virtual currency is the transparency and public nature of transactions since they are typically recorded in a publicly accessible blockchain, which could facilitate policing and enforcement against illicit activity.  At the same time, the relevant legal framework for combating terrorist funding creates potential areas of liability, including, in particular under the Anti-Terrorism Act (“ATA”) and the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (“JASTA”).  These considerations are important for companies and banks that provide services related to virtual currency, but also are relevant to any company that could be the target of ransomware attacks since attackers may be sanctioned entities or have ties to terrorism and as a matter of practice demand that the ransom payment be made in virtual currency.

Continue Reading Cryptocurrency and Other New Forms of Financial Technology: Potential Terrorist Financing Concerns and Liability

The U.S. government recently announced that it issued multiple subpoenas to Chinese companies pursuant to an executive order that provides the U.S. government with the authority to review and prohibit or restrict transactions conducted by any person, or involving any property, subject to U.S. jurisdiction, if they involve certain categories of information and communications technology

On May 5, 2021, the European Commission proposed a new draft regulation that, if adopted, would introduce sweeping measures aimed at controlling the impact of foreign subsidies on the EU single market.  The Proposed Regulation reflects the EU’s policy priority to pursue an “open strategic autonomy” and fits into the EU Industrial Strategy,

The new year comes in the midst of an evolving landscape for economic sanctions, including the transition away from a U.S. administration that has relied on tightening economic sanctions as a key component of a number of foreign policy initiatives. In 2021, boards of directors should be aware of the ongoing implementation of new China-related sanctions, sanctions risks relating to ransomware attacks and the potential sanctions implications of foreign-policy shifts by the Biden administration.
Continue Reading Developments in U.S. Sanctions and Foreign Investment Regulatory Regimes

Cleary Gottlieb partner Paul Marquardt, counsel Chase Kanieki, and associates Nate Kurcab, Nora McCloskey, and Elise Lane co-authored the United States chapter in Lexology Getting The Deal Through Foreign Investment Review 2021.
Continue Reading Lexology Getting The Deal Through: Foreign Investment Review 2021

In one of a series of lame-duck sanctions and export control actions rushed into place before the transition to the Biden Administration, on January 5, 2021, President Trump issued an Executive Order Addressing the Threat Posed by Applications and Other Software Developed or Controlled by Chinese Companies (the Executive Order)[1] authorizing the Commerce Department to regulate or prohibit any transaction involving a U.S. person or within the jurisdiction of the United States with persons that develop or control the following Chinese connected software applications, or with their subsidiaries:
Continue Reading President Trump Authorizes Restrictions on Additional Chinese Applications and Calls for Potential New Export Restrictions on Personal Data; Details to Come