The House and Senate have passed separate bills to modify the process the U.S. uses to evaluate the security implications of potential foreign investments.
Congress will have to address the differences between the two when it returns: Cfius overhaul back in spotlight (Stephanie Kirchgaessner, Financial Times, August 23):
After months of debate about how to reform the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (Cfius), the Treasury-led panel that reviews such deals, most insiders say legislators will pass a law that resembles the House proposal, which has been endorsed by the business community, or do nothing.
The House bill would force Cfius – which was lambasted for approving the sale of five US port terminals to Dubai-based DP World – to conduct mandatory 90-day investigations of all sensitive acquisitions by foreign state-owned companies. It would also require Cfius to notify relevant congressional committees once investigations into a deal are closed....
But with all eyes in Washington fixed on November’s elections, one lobbyist close to the debate says questions over DP World and other deals could resurface and colour the final outcome of the legislation.
The House bill is H.R. 5337 and the Senate bill is: S. 3549 . (These links to the bills are from a comment (by "Movie Guy") on this post by Mark Thoma: Protecting Open Markets (Economist's View, August 17)
The Council on Foreign Relations has recently released a report on the CFIUS process: Foreign Investment and National Security. Getting the Balance Right (Alan P. Larson and David M. Marchick, July 2006)
The Institute for International Economics published US National Security and Foreign Direct Investment by Edward M. Graham and David M. Marchick in May. This is available on line, but can't be printed out.
Douglas Holtz-Eaton discussed the issue in the Wall Street Journal on July 13: You Can't Be CFIUS . He's opined on trade more recently in Open Markets Start at Home (Washington Post, August 17)
Interest in revision of the CFIUS process is driven by the Dubai Ports World controversy of last winter. I reviewed the history of the controversy here: Countdown to controversy: Dubai Ports World (Ben Muse, March 6)
Comments