On April 11, 2024, the U.S. Department of the Treasury announced a notice of proposed rulemaking that would expand the enforcement authority of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (“CFIUS” or the “Committee”). If implemented, the proposal’s main impact will be to empower the Committee in its engagement with transaction parties before, during, and after the Committee’s review of a transaction. There are three main areas impacted by the rulemaking:
The proposed rule is a supplement to, rather than an overhaul of, the CFIUS regulations that were extensively revised in the years after the enactment of the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act of 2018. The rulemaking nevertheless could have a significant impact on how certain transaction parties evaluate the legal and business decisions concerning when and how to engage with CFIUS.
Information Collection
While most transaction parties expect robust questioning from agencies’ staff after voluntarily disclosing a transaction for CFIUS review, the proposed rule would expand the Committee’s ability to engage parties that either have not voluntarily filed with, or have already concluded a review with, CFIUS.
These new information gathering authorities for the Committee should be viewed in combination with the Committee’s new penalty authority.
Civil Monetary Penalties
In line with CFIUS leaders’ focus on the Committee’s enforcement responsibilities in recent years (CFIUS Enforcement and Penalty Guidelines), the proposed rule increases the authority to penalize violations.
In combination, the proposed rule’s increased penalty authority and the information gathering authority described above provide the Committee with an enhanced ability to target cross border transactions not voluntarily disclosed to CFIUS and to deter and correct violations of national security risk mitigation measures.
Mitigation Negotiations
CFIUS annual reports show an increased percentage of its transaction reviews resulting in mitigation measures, most of which are negotiated rather than unilaterally imposed. Current regulations do not specify any timeframe for negotiations other than the statutory period for the transaction review. The absence of more specific milestones can mean that certain parties have little incentive for timely engagement (for example, if their transaction has already closed). The proposed rule would require transaction parties to substantively respond within three business days to mitigation measures that the Committee staff proposes, subject to extension by the Staff Chairperson.
The remedy for noncompliance with the proposed change would be the Committee’s rejection of the parties’ notice. This action may not be feasible in practice for the Committee in all circumstances, given that rejection in some ways limits the Committee’s options to mitigate national security risk, but the proposed rule sets a clear standard that the Committee expects prompt engagement and finalization of mitigation terms.
The comment period is open until May 15, 2024. The Committee can be expected to finalize the rule later in 2024, at which time we plan to review the implications for transaction parties in more detail.