3 ms·

Does the legislation in fact specifically require sale to a US buyer, rather than a non-China buyer? Like EU buyer wouldn't fly? Oddly, the articles I've seen

Does the legislation in fact specifically require sale to a US buyer, rather than a non-China buyer? Like EU buyer wouldn't fly? Oddly, the articles I've seen don't feel the need to specify there. Seems like a big difference to me, and requiring sale to specifically US buyer seems rather more of a takeover.

JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> Does the legislation in fact specifically require sale to a US buyer, rather than a non-China buyer? Like EU buyer wouldn't fly? No, you are correct. Thank you. It must simply be no longer controlled by a foreign adversary [1]. (And yes, the term foreign adversary is defined in law [2].) An EU, Gulf or Indian buyer would be totally fine if done in good faith, i.e. without being a front for Chinese interests. [1] https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/7521/text https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/7521... § 2(g)(6) [2] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-15/subtitle-A/part-7/subpart-A/section-7.4 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-15/subtitle-A/part-7/subp...