Thanks for your post. It is questionable whether the US government has oversight in an NWBO/Huawei acquisition transaction. This is not my legal specialty but FIRRMA and CFIUS were created by special legislation as a cabinet level committee under the US treasury Secretary to screen certain foreign based transactions involving US companies or funds.
Most of the applications to the committee or I should say notices of intended acquisitions were voluntarily made. In more benign times, the US wanted to encourage foreign investment especially by the Chinese. They did not want to scare the money away for obvious reasons. However the security landscape has become less benign especially wrt the tariff tiff between the US and China and accusations of fraud and possible espionage initiatives that have been alleged but are far from a serious cause of action. Trump talks big but he knows that he cannot do without chinese investment and he and the Chinese President are playing chicken and power bluff. In the end saner and wiser heads prevail and a compromise is worked out.
Now, in certain cases, where critical technologies that may affect the national interest are involved in an acquisition, the committee will have oversight and may recommend that such an acquisition is contrary to the national interest and block it. However, what is a "critical technology" and what is its connection to the national interest? Is DC VAX such a critical technology that its transfer by acquisition to a Chinese company is contrary to national interests? I don't know but I am sure that IF there is some follow-on deal, either licensing, partnership or BO, that LP/LG have it covered. They did not go into this, structure a deal and then say, oooooppps we did not consider government oversight. Note that the Meng/Huawei case and the closing of the Sawston transaction were roughly contemporaneous. JMHO.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
