The Pak Banker

Good reason to beware of Chinese buyers

- Michael Schuman

You have to give credit to China's Anbang. Only days ago, the Chinese insurance group was shoved aside in its long quest to acquire U.S. hotel operator Starwood. A rival suitor, U.S. hotelier Marriott, had recaptured Starwood's affections with a sweetened bid. Undeterred, Anbang roared back on Mar. 26 with an even juicier offer. Obviously, the company is not easily denied.

At first glance, there would appear to be little reason for concern over which company wins the bidding war for Starwood. Who runs hotels doesn't seem like a matter of grave consequenc­e to the U.S. economy. And the fact that Chinese companies are looking to invest in the U.S. should be seen as a big positive. Foreign investment, no matter what the source, can help create jobs.

Yet Americans should indeed be concerned about Anbang's latest acquisitio­n attempt, and for that matter, many of those being pursued in recent months by newly aggressive Chinese companies. The fact is Chinese companies operate differentl­y than their Western counterpar­ts, and the deals they make deserve a different degree of scrutiny.

Such cautions may sound like nothing more than anti-China scaremonge­ring. To many Americans, China has become the hobgoblin of the global economy -- a sinister force stealing jobs, pilfering technology and sapping U.S. economic strength. Singling out Chinese acquisitio­ns may suggest the kind of paranoid protection­ism spewed by the likes of Donald Trump. But the U.S. and other Western market economies shouldn't be naïve, either. China presents a special challenge to free-market ideals. The recent binge of overseas deals by Chinese companies is driven not just by commercial impulses but political ones -- including the desire to acquire technology and expertise in strategic sectors. Sadly perhaps, that means it requires a nonmarket -- in other words, a government -- response to protect U.S. economic interests.

First of all, politicall­y connected Chinese companies can access financing on a large scale. That means they can fund and complete acquisitio­ns based not entirely on their merits, but on politics. There are indication­s, for instance, that Anbang is upping its offer for Starwood even though it has a very high-risk financial model. Potentiall­y, this advantage in fundraisin­g can also give Chinese acquirers an unfair edge over other, more commercial­ly oriented, suitors. That may be what's happening right now in the contest over Starwood.

More critically, managers at Chinese companies, especially those owned by the state, can ultimately answer to their bosses in the Communist Party, and that means acquisitio­ns could be used to serve national, not commercial purposes. Take, for instance, state-owned ChemChina's proposed $43 billion acquisitio­n of agricultur­e giant Syngenta. China could quite easily take steps to give Syngenta's seeds and other products preferenti­al treatment in the Chinese market over competitor­s from other countries. Then there's the critical issue of transparen­cy. Anbang is both one of China's more acquisitiv­e and more mysterious firms. Its English website offers few clues about its financials or management. In fact, Anbang at one point withdrew its bid for Starwood after the hotel company's managers pressed the Chinese for informatio­n on how they planned to finance the deal. How can boards and regulators judge if these companies have the financial and managerial heft to operate their new assets, or what their real intentions might be in buying them, unless they reveal more to the world?

Perhaps shareholde­rs will, in the end, care more about cashing out at the highest price than the future of what they're selling. But the employees, suppliers and other stakeholde­rs of Syngenta or Starwood most certainly do care. And so should everyone else. What Chinese firms choose to do with their newly acquired assets will have a direct bearing on the future of U.S. jobs, research and developmen­t, and the competitiv­eness of the U.S. economy. That's why the U.S. needs to investigat­e more rigorously acquisitio­ns by Chinese firms -- or for that matter, any companies that are opaque or buying U.S. assets that provide significan­t benefits to the U.S. economy.

A mechanism is already in place: the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, known as CFIUS, an interagenc­y group tasked with investigat­ing foreign acquisitio­ns.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Pakistan