COMMITTEE ON 

FOREIGN INVESTMENT 

IN THE UNITED STATES 

ANNUAL REPORT 

TO CONGRESS 

Report Period: CY 2018 

PUBLIC / UNCLASSIFIED VERSION 
This page intentionally left blank. 
CFIUS ANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS 

Report Period: CY 2018 
This page intentionally left blank. 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) ................................. .iii 

SECTION I: COVERED TRANSACTIONS ................................................................................. 1 

Introduction .................................................................................................................................................... 1 

A Information Regarding 2018 Covered Transaction Notices ...................................................................... 2 

B. Specific, Cumulative, and Trend Data for Covered Transactions, Withdrawals, and Investigations ........ 3 

C. Information on the Time It Took the Committee to Provide Comments on, or to Accept, Notices ........... 4 

D. Covered Transactions by Business Sector and Country .......................................................................... 5 

1. Covered Transactions by Business Sector of U.S. Companies, 2010-2018 .................. 5 

2. Covered Transactions by Country or Economy, 2016-2018 ......................................... 20 

E. Withdrawn Notices .................................................................................................................................. 24 

F. Mitigation Measures ................................................................................................................................ 25 

G. Perceived Adverse Effects of Covered Transactions ............................................................................. 27 

H. Critical Technologies Pilot Program ........................................................................................................ 31 

1. Information Regarding 2018 Declarations ..................................................................... 31 

2. Declarations by Business Sector of U.S. Companies ................................................... 31 

SECTION II: CRITICAL TECHNOLOGIES ............................................................................... 33 

A Whether There Is Credible Evidence of a Coordinated Strategy to Acquire Critical Technology 

Companies ............................................................................................................................................ 34 

1. Key Judgments .............................................................................................................. 34 

2. Summary of Foreign M&A Activity in the United States ................................................ 34 

3. Frequency of Activity by Countries and Companies ..................................................... 34 

B. Whether Foreign Governments Used Espionage Activities to.Obtain Commercial Secrets Related to 

Critical Technologies ............................................................................................................................. 35 

1. Key Finding .................................................................................................................... 35 

SECTION 111: FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENT IN THE UNITED STATES BY COUNTRIES 

THAT BOYCOTT ISRAEL OR DO NOT BAN TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS ...................... 36 

Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 36 

A Summary of Findings and Conclusions of Study .................................................................................... 36 

B. Study Methodology ................................................................................................................................. 37 

C. Detailed Findings of Study ...................................................................................................................... 38 

APPENDIX .................................................................................................................................................. 40 
This page intentionally left blank. 

ii 
The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) 

CFIUS Authority and Composition 

The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) is a government body 

authorized by law to review certain transactions involving foreign investment in the United States. 

The review is solely to determine the effect of the transaction on the national security of the 

United States. 

CFIUS member agencies include the Departments of Treasury (chair), State, Defense, Justice, 

Commerce, Energy, and Homeland Security; the Office of the United States Trade 

Representative; and the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. The Office of the 

Director of National Intelligence and the Department of Labor are ex-officio members, and five 

White House offices are observers. As needed to assess the national security effects of a 

transaction, CFIUS involves other federal government agencies in its reviews, such as the 

Departments of Transportation, Health and Human Services, and Agriculture. 

CFIUS Process 

On August 13, 2018, the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act of 2018 (FIRRMA) 

was enacted. FIRRMA made various amendments and changes to the CFIUS review process 

and jurisdiction. Certain of the amendments and changes made by FIRRMA took effect 

immediately upon enactment; the remainder of the law took effect on February 13, 2020. This 

CFIUS Annual Report (also "Annual Report" or "Report") covers transactions filed in calendar year 

2018, and thus describes the CFIUS process as it existed both prior to, and in part after, certain 

provisions of FIRRMA became effective. 

Generally, prior to FIRRMA, parties voluntarily submitted notices of transactions to CFIUS. 

CFIUS also has the authority to review pending or completed transactions even absent a 

voluntary notice if a member of the Committee has reason to believe that the transaction is a 

covered transaction and may raise national security concerns. 

Until FIRRMA's enactment, CFIUS was required to complete a "review" of a notified transaction 

within 30 days. CFIUS could initiate an "investigation" that could last up to 45 additional days if 

CFIUS determined that it needed additional time to complete its assessment following the 

conclusion of the "review" period. Immediately upon enactment, FIRRMA increased the review 

period from 30 days to 45 days. The investigation period remained 45 days. 

CFIUS will conclude all action with respect to a transaction (i.e., clear it to proceed) if it 

determines that the transaction does not pose any national security concerns, that any national 

security concerns are adequately addressed by laws other than section 721 of the Defense 

Production Act of 1950, as amended by the Foreign Investment and National Security Act of 2007 

(FINSA) and FIRRMA (hereinafter "Section 721 ), and the International Emergency Economic 

Powers Act (IEEPA), or that mitigation measures agreed to or imposed by CFIUS resolve any 

national security concerns. If CFIUS determines that the transaction poses national security 

concerns that cannot be resolved, it will refer the transaction to the President, unless the parties 

choose to abandon the transaction. The President may suspend or prohibit the transaction, 

including by requiring divestment. By law, the President has 15 days after completion of CFIUS's 

investigation to make a decision. The President must publicly announce his decision. 

iii 
CFIUS will seek mitigation measures or refer a transaction to the President only after such action 

is justified in a detailed written analysis of the national security risk posed by the transaction. 

CFIUS determinations are confirmed at senior levels by all CFIUS member agencies. 

With limited exceptions, any transaction submitted to CFIUS for review that CFIUS determines is 

a "covered transaction" under 31 C.F.R. 800.301 and for which it concludes all action receives 

"safe harbor." This means that CFIUS and the President will not subject the transaction to review 

again, absent certain exceptional circumstances. 

By law CFIUS does not publicly disclose information provided to CFIUS by parties to a 

transaction, nor does it reveal the fact that the parties have submitted the transaction for review. 

Critical Technologies Pilot Program 

On October 10, 2018, the Department of the Treasury, as chair of CFIUS, issued temporary 

regulations to protect U.S. critical technologies and intellectual property from potentially harmful 

foreign investments (the "Pilot Program"). The Pilot Program implemented authorities provided by 

FIRRMA that expand the scope of transactions subject to CFIUS review to include certain noncontrolling investments in U.S. businesses involved in critical technologies ("other investments"). 

The Pilot Program also made effective a provision in FIRRMA allowing CFIUS to require 

declarations, which the Pilot Program requires for transactions that fall within its scope. 

The Pilot Program commenced on November 10, 2018, and ended on February 12, 2020, when 

the final FIRRMA regulations were fully implemented. Under the Pilot Program, CFIUS conducts 

30-day assessments of declarations. Upon conclusion of an assessment CFIUS can take one of 

four actions: (1) conclude all action with respect to a transaction (i.e., clear it to proceed); (2) 

determine that CFIUS is unable to conclude action; (3) request that the parties to the transaction 

file a CFIUS notice; or (4) unilaterally file a CFIUS notice. 

This Annual Report includes summary data on the Pilot Program at Section H.I below. 

iv 
SECTION I: COVERED TRANSACTIONS 

Introduction 

This section of the CFIUS Annual Report to Congress has been prepared in accordance with 

Section 721(m) of the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended by the Foreign Investment 

and National Security Act of 2007 (FINSA) and FIRRMA. Specifically, Section 721 (m), as 

applicable for the reporting period, requires that the annual report provide, for 2018: 

A. a list of all notices filed and all reviews or investigations completed during the 

period, with basic information on each party to the transaction, the nature of the 

business activities or products of all pertinent persons, information about any 

withdrawal from the process, and any decision or action by the President under 

Section 721; 

B. specific, cumulative, and, as appropriate, trend information on the numbers of 

filings 1, investigations, withdrawals, and decisions or actions by the President 

under Section 721; 

C. information on the time it took the Committee to provide comments on, or to 

accept, notices submitted under subsection (b)(1)(C)(i); 

D. cumulative and, as appropriate, trend information on the business sectors 

involved in the filings which have been made and the countries from which the 

investments have originated; 

E. information on whether companies that withdrew a notice to the Committee in 

accordance with Section 721(b)(1)(C)(ii) later refiled such notices, or, 

alternatively, abandoned the transaction; 

F. the types of security arrangements and conditions the Committee has used to 

mitigate national security concerns about a transaction, including a discussion of 

the methods that the Committee and any lead agency are using to determine 

compliance with such arrangements or conditions; and 

G. a detailed discussion of all perceived adverse effects of covered transactions on 

the national security or critical infrastructure of the United States that the 

Committee will take into account in its deliberations during the period before 

delivery of the next report, to the extent possible. 

FIRRMA includes additional requirements that will become effective on the date that is 

18 months after the date of enactment of FIRRMA (i.e., February 13, 2020). CFIUS 

anticipates these fields will be fully included in the Annual Report for CY2020. 

1 For the purposes of this Annual Report, "filings" means notices filed under Section 721. 

1 
A. Information Regarding 2018 Covered Transaction Notices 

For 2018: 

• CFIUS conducted a "review" with respect to the 229 notices of covered transactions that 

were filed. 

• CFIUS conducted a subsequent "investigation" with respect to 158 of those 229 notices. 

• CFIUS concluded action on 29 of the 229 notices after adopting mitigation measures 

pursuant to Section 721 to resolve national security concerns. 

• 66 of the 229 notices were withdrawn. In 34 of these instances, the parties filed a new 

notice in 2018. In eight of these instances, the parties filed a new notice in 2019. In 18 of 

these instances, the parties withdrew the notice and abandoned the transaction after either 

CFIUS informed them that it was unable to identify mitigation measures that would resolve 

its national security concerns or it proposed mitigation measures that the parties chose not 

to accept. In one of these instances, the parties withdrew the notice and abandoned the 

transaction because they failed to satisfy CFIUS process requirements. In three of these 

instances, the parties withdrew their notice and abandoned the transaction for commercial 

reasons unrelated to CFIUS review. In two of these instances, CFIUS permitted the parties 

to withdraw their notice subject to certain conditions. 

• CFIUS rejected two notices for failing to satisfy CFIUS process requirements. 

• CFIUS referred one transaction to the President. The President issued an order prohibiting 

the acquisition of Qualcomm Incorporated, a Delaware company, by Broadcom Limited, 

organized under the laws of Singapore. 

• No investigations were subject to an extension under subsection (b)(2)(C)(ii) of Section 721. 

2 
B. Specific, Cumulative, and Trend Data for Covered Transactions, 

Withdrawals, and Investigations 

From 2010 through 2018, companies filed 1,343 notices of transactions that CFIUS determined 

to be covered transactions under Section 721. About 2.5 percent (33) of the notices were 

withdrawn during the review stage, 15 percent (207) were withdrawn during the investigation 

stage, and 52 percent (694) resulted in an investigation. Withdrawal of a notice is a function of 

the particular facts and circumstances of the transaction being reviewed by the Committee and 

is not necessarily indicative of a trend. 

A sustained upward trend has continued from 2010 through 2018 in the number of notices filed. 

As shown in Table 1-1, the number of notices subject to CFIUS jurisdiction increased from 93 in 

2010 to 229 in 2018. The proportion of notices proceeding to investigation in 2018 was about 

69 percent, down slightly from about 73 percent in 2017. 

For notices filed after August 13, 2018, FIRRMA extended the statutory review period from 30 to 

45 days. This substantially reduced the proportion of notices proceeding to investigation. For 

notices filed before August 13, 76 percent proceeded to investigation. For notices filed after 

August 13, 53 percent proceeded to investigation. 

Apart from a general correlation between the number of notices and macroeconomic 

conditions-that is, when economies are strong, transaction quantity tends to increase-the 

information in the table below should not be indicative of any particular CFIUS trends. CFIUS 

considers each transaction on a case-by-case basis, and the disposition of any particular 

case-be it withdrawal, closing in review or investigation, or presidential decision-depends on 

the particular facts and circumstances of that case. 

3 
Table 1-1. Covered Transactions, Withdrawals, and Presidential Decisions, 2010-2018 

Covered Transactions, Withdrawals, and Presidential Decisions* 

2010-2018 

Number Notices Notices Withdrawn 

Year of Withdrawn Number of During Investigation Presidential 

During Review Investigations Decisions Notices Phase Phase 

2010 93 6 35 6 0 

2011 111 1 40 5 0 

2012 114 2 45 20 1 

2013 97 3 48 5 0 

2014 147 3 51 9 0 

2015 143 3 66 10 0 

2016 172 6 79 21 1 

2017 237 7 172 67 1 

2018 229 2 158 64 1 

Total 1343 33 694 207 4 

*Please see Section 1-E on page 24 for a discussion of reasons for which parties may seek to withdraw a 

notice. 

C. Information on the Time It Took the Committee to Provide 

Comments on, or to Accept, Notices 

FIRRMA requires that the Annual Report include the following information on the timing of 

certain processes for notices: 

• The average number of business days that elapsed between the date of submission of a 

draft notice and the date on which the Committee provided written comments on the draft 

notice; 

• The average number of business days that elapsed between the date of submission of a 

formal written notice and the date on which the Committee accepted or provided written 

comments on the formal written notice; and 

• The median and average number of days required to complete reviews and investigations. 

In 2018, the Committee did not have the infrastructure in place to provide the above information 

on time to comment on draft notices. Over the course of the last year, the Committee has 

established business processes to collect this information for notices filed in 2019 and future 

years. 

The Committee was able to collect the data necessary to provide the above information on 

formal written notices. For notices filed in 2018, the average number of business days that 

4 
elapsed between the date of submission of a formal written notice and the date on which the 

Committee accepted the formal written notice was 9 days. 

The Committee was also able to collect the data necessary to provide the above information on 

median and average number of days required to complete reviews and investigations. Two 

events impacted these figures in 2018: (1) FIRRMA extended the statutory review period from 

30 to 45 days for all reviews beginning on or after August 13, 2018; and (2) a lapse in 

appropriations ("shutdown") for certain U.S. Government agencies, including Treasury and 

several other members agencies of CFIUS, meant that reviews and investigations closing on or 

after December 24, 2018, had their closing date toll into 2019 when funding was restored. The 

following figures have been calculated so that they are net of days tolled. 

Table 1-2. Average and Median Days to Complete Reviews and Investigations 

For Covered Transactions in 2018 Average Median 

Calendar Days Calendar Days 

Closing in review, pre-FIRRMA 30 30 

Closing in review, post-FIRRMA 44 45 

Closing in investigation 74 75 

D. Covered Transactions by Business Sector and Country 

1. Covered Transactions by Business Sector of U.S. Companies, 2010-

2018 

The notices of covered transactions filed with CFIUS from 2010 through 2018 involved a wide 

range of industries.2 About three-fourths of the notices were in either the Manufacturing (533, or 

40 percent) or the Finance, Information, and Services sectors (483, or 36 percent). The 

remainder of the notices were in the Mining, Utilities, and Construction sector (211, or 16 

percent) and the Wholesale Trade, Retail Trade, and Transportation sector (116, or 9 percent). 3 

These figures, and those in the tables below and in Section I. 0.2 of this report, reflect the 

number of notices filed with CFIUS and are not adjusted to account for those transactions that 

were the subject of more than one notice-Le., where the original notice was withdrawn and 

then refiled, as discussed in Section I. D of this report. 

The table and chart on the next page provide data by sector and by year of the 1,343 covered 

transaction notices filed with CFIUS from 201 0 through 2018. In 2018, the relative proportions 

of notices in each sector did not change dramatically. As in 2016 and 2017, the greatest 

number of transactions occurred in the Finance, Information, and Services sector, accounting 

for 38 percent of transactions. The proportion of notices in the Manufacturing sector remained 

2 In this report, industry sectors and subsectors are defined using 2012 and 2017 North American Industry Classification System 

(NAICS) codes of the target company. Whenever possible, the NAICS code assigned to each target company is based upon 

information provided in the notice. If no NAICS code was provided, CFIUS determined the most appropriate NAICS code using 

public Internet searches and the www.naics.com database. 3 Throughout the Report, figures may not add to 100 percent exactly due to rounding. 

5 
constant at 35 percent. The proportion of notices in the Mining, Utilities, and Construction 

sector increased from 12 percent in 201 7 to 21 percent in 2018. The proportion of notices in the 

Wholesale Trade, Retail Trade, and Transportation sector remained the lowest, at 7 percent in 

2018. 

Table 1-3. Covered Transactions by Sector and Year, 2010-2018 

Covered Transaction by Sector and Year, 2010-2018 

Finance, Mining, Utilities, Wholesale Trade, Information, Year Manufacturing and and Retail Trade, and Total 

Services Construction Transportation 

2010 36 (39%) 35 (38%) 13 (14%) 9 (1 0%) 93 

2011 49 (44%) 38 (34%) 16 (14%) 8 (7%) 111 

2012 47 (41%) 36 (32%) 23 (20%) 8 (7%) 114 

2013 35 (36%) 32 (33%) 20 (21%) 10 (10%) 97 

2014 69 (47%) 38 (26%) 25 (17%) 15 (10%) 147 

2015 68 (48%) 42 (29%) 21 (1 5%) 12 (8%) 143 

2016 67 (39%) 68 (40%) 18 (10%) 19(11%) 172 

2017 82 (35%) 108 (46%) 28 (12%) 19 (8%) 237 

2018 80 (35%) 86 (38%) 47(21%) 16 (7%) 229 

Total 533 (40%) 483 (36%) 211 (16%) 116 (9%) 1343 

Graph 1-1. Covered Transactions by Sector and Year (2010-2018) 

Covered Transactions by Sector (2010-2018) 

120 

100 

"' C 

.Q 

u 

!)l 80 C 

~ 

I-

"O 

~ Q) 60 > 

0 

u 

..... 

0 

:;; 40 .0 

E 

::, 

z 

20 

0 

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 

- Manufacturing - Finance, Information, and Services 

Mining, Utilities, and Construction - wholesale Trade, Retail Trade, and Transportation 

6 
Graph 1-2. Proportion of Covered Transactions by Sector and Year (2010-2018) 

Proportion of Covered Transactions by Sector (2010-2018) 

50% 

45% 

40% 

35% 

30% 

25% 

20"/o 

15% 

10% 

5% 

0% 

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 

- Manufacturing - Finance, Information, and Services 

- Mining, Utilities, and Constru ction - wholesale Trade, Retail Trade, and Transportation 

Manufacturing Sector 

In 2018, Manufacturing accounted for 35 percent (80) of all CFIUS notices. The Manufacturing 

subsector with the most notices was again Computer and Electronic Product Manufacturing with 

28 (35 percent). The other significant subsector was Chemical Manufacturing with 14 notices 

(18 percent). 

Table 1-4. Covered Transactions from the Manufacturing Sector, 2016-2018 

NAICS 2018 % of Total Manufacturing 

Manufacturing Code Notices 2018 2017 2016 2016-18 

Textile Mills 313 5 6% 0% 0% 2% 

Paper Manufacturing 322 1 1% 0% 1% 1% 

Petroleum and Coal 324 0 0% 2% 0% 1% Products Manufacturing 

Chemical Manufacturing 325 14 18% 20% 12% 17% 

Plastics and Rubber 326 3 4% 2% 3% 3% Products Manufacturing 

Nonmetallic Mineral 327 2 3% 1% 0% 1% Product Manufacturinq 

Primary Metal 331 3 4% 5% 3% 4% Manufacturing 

7 
NAICS 2018 % of Total Manufacturing 

Manufacturing Code Notices 2018 2017 2016 2016-18 

Fabricated Metal Product 332 1 1% 7% 9% 6% Manufacturing 

Machinery Manufacturing 333 8 10% 10% 16% 12% 

Computer and Electronic 334 28 35% 33% 37% 35% Product Manufacturinq 

Electrical Equipment, 

Appliance, and 335 7 9% 7% 7% 8% 

Component Manufacturing 

Transportation Equipment 336 8 10% 11% 7% 10% Manufacturinq 

Miscellaneous 339 0 0% 1% 3% 1% Manufacturing 

Finance, Information, and Services Sector 

In 2018, the Finance, Information, and Services sector accounted for 38 percent (86) of all 

CFIUS notices filed. Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services continued to be the largest 

subsector with 25 notices (29 percent). Other significant subsectors included 

Telecommunications with 15 notices (17 percent) and Publishing Industries with 10 notices (12 

percent). 

Table 1-5. Covered Transactions from the Finance, Information, and Services Sector, 2016-2018 

Finance, Information, % of Total Finance, Information, and 

NAICS 2018 Services and Code Notices Services 2018 2017 2016 2016-18 

Publishing Industries 511 10 12% 8% 13% 11% ( except Internet) 

Motion Picture and Sound 512 0 0% 2% 0% 1% Recordinq Industries 

Telecommunications 517 15 17% 10% 13% 13% 

Data Processing, Hosting, 518 5 6% 5% 1% 4% and Related Services 

Other Information Services 519 5 6% 4% 1% 4% 

Credit Intermediation and 522 0 0% 3% 0% 1% Related Activities 

Securities, Commodity 

Contracts, and Other 523 3 3% 4% 3% 3% Financial Investments and 

Related Activities 

Insurance Carriers and 524 3 3% 5% 6% 5% Related Activities 

Funds, Trusts, and Other 525 1 1% 2% 1% 2% Financial Vehicles 

Real Estate 531 3 3% 8% 13% 8% 

Rental and Leasing 532 0 0% 2% 1% 1% Services 

8 
Finance, Information, % of Total Finance, Information, and 

and NAICS 2018 Services 

Services Code Notices 2018 2017 2016 2016-18 

Lessors of Nonfinancial 

Intangible Assets (except 533 0 0% 2% 1% 1% 

Copyriqhted Works) 

Professional, Scientific, 541 25 29% 37% 29% 32% and Technical Services 

Management of 

Companies and 551 4 5% 1% 3% 3% 

Enterprises 

Administrative and 561 5 6% 1% 4% 3% Support Services 

Waste Management and 562 2 2% 1% 1% 2% Remediation Services 

Educational Services 611 3 3% 0% 1% 2% 

Ambulatory Health Care 621 1 1% 3% 0% 2% Services 

Repair and Maintenance 811 0 0% 3% 4% 2% 

Personal and Laundry 812 0 0% 1% 0% 0% Services 

Religious, Grantmaking, 813 

Civic, Professional, and 1 1% 0% 0% 0% 

Similar Orqanizations 

Mining. Utilities. and Construction Sector 

In 2018, the Mining, Utilities, and Construction sector accounted for 21 percent (47) of all CFIUS 

notices filed. With 31 notices, the Utilities subsector accounted for two-thirds of the sector, 

roughly consistent with its 64 percent share in 2017. The Oil and Gas Extraction subsector was 

next largest, with five notices. 

Table 1-6. Covered Transactions from the Mining, Utilities, and Construction Sector, 2016-2018 

% of Total Mining, Utilities, and 

Mining, Utilities, and NAICS 2018 Construction 

Construction Code Notices 2018 2017 2016 2016-18 

Animal Production and 112 0 0% 0% 6% 1% Aquaculture 

Forestry and Logging 113 0 0% 0% 0% 0% 

Oil and Gas Extraction 211 5 11% 18% 6% 12% 

Mining (except Oil and 212 2 4% 0% 0% 2% Gas) 

Support Activities for 213 3 6% 4% 6% 5% Mininq 

Utilities 221 31 66% 64% 72% 67% 

Construction of Buildings 236 0 0% 4% 0% 1% 

Heavy and Civil 237 3 6% 7% 11% 8% Enqineerinq Construction 

9 
% of Total Mining, Utilities, and 

Mining, Utilities, and NAICS 2018 Construction 

Construction Code Notices 2018 2017 2016 2016-18 

Specialty Trade 238 3 6% 4% 0% 4% Contractors 

Wholesale Trade, Retail Trade, and Transportation Sector 

In 2018, the Wholesale Trade, Retail Trade, and Transportation sector accounted for 7 percent 

(16) of all CFIUS notices filed. The Merchant Wholesalers, Durable Goods, and Support 

Activities for Transportation subsectors remained the largest, accounting for 44 percent and 25 

percent, respectively, of notices filed within the sector. 

Table 1-7. Covered Transactions from the Wholesale, Retail, and Transportation Sector, 2016-2018 

Wholesale Trade, % of Total Wholesale Trade, Retail Trade, 

NAICS 2018 and Transportation Retail Trade, and Code Notices Transportation 2018 2017 2016 2016-18 

Merchant Wholesalers, 423 7 44% 32% 26% 33% Durable Goods 

Merchant Wholesalers, 424 0 0% 5% 11% 6% Nondurable Goods 

Motor Vehicle and Parts 441 0 0% 0% 0% 0% Dealers 

Health and Personal Care 446 1 6% 0% 0% 2% Stores 

Nonstore Retailers 454 0 0% 0% 5% 2% 

Air Transportation 481 0 0% 5% 0% 2% 

Rail Transportation 482 0 0% 5% 0% 2% 

Water Transportation 483 0 0% 5% 11% 6% 

Truck Transportation 484 0 0% 0% 5% 2% 

Pipeline Transportation 486 2 13% 5% 11% 9% 

Support Activities for 488 4 25% 32% 21% 26% Transportation 

Couriers and Messengers 492 0 0% 0% 0% 0% 

Warehousing and Storage 493 2 13% 0% 0% 4% 

Accommodation 721 0 0% 11% 11% 7% 

10 
Covered Transactions by Business Sector of 

U.S. Companies. 2016-2018 

Table 1-8 on the following pages provides a breakdown by subsector and by the three most 

recent reporting years for the covered transactions cumulatively filed with CFIUS from 2016 

through 2018. 

11 
Table 1-8. Covered Transactions by Business Sector of U.S. Companies, 2016-2018 

% of 3-Digit Corresponding 

4-Digit Business Sector 3-Digit 3-Digit NAICS Category 2018 NAICS Code4 

NAICS NAICS Notices 2018 2017 2016 2016-18 

Hog and Pig Farming 1122 112 Animal Production and Aquaculture 0 NIA NIA 100% 100% 

Oil and Gas Extraction 211 1 211 Oil and Gas Extraction 5 100% 100% 100% 100% 

Coal Mining 2121 212 Mining (except Oil and Gas) 1 50% NIA NIA 50% 

Metal Ore Mining 2122 212 Mining (except Oil and Gas) 1 50% NIA NIA 50% 

Nonmetallic Mineral Mining and 2123 212 Mining (except Oil and Gas) 0 0% NIA NIA 0% Quarrvina 

Support Activities for Mining 2131 213 Support Activities for Mining 3 100% 100% 100% 100% 

Electric Power Generation, 2211 221 Utilities 30 100% 83% 85% 90% Transmission and Distribution 

Natural Gas Distribution 2212 221 Utilities 0 0% 6% 15% 5% 

Water, Sewage and Other Systems 2213 221 Utilities 1 3% 11% 0% 5% 

Residential Building Construction 2361 236 Construction of Buildings 0 NIA 100% NIA 100% 

Nonresidential Building Construction 2362 236 Construction of Buildings 0 NIA 0% NIA 0% 

Utility System Construction 2371 237 Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction 2 67% 100% 50% 71 % 

Land Subdivision 2372 237 Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction 0 0% 0% 50% 14% 

Other Heavy and Civil Engineering 2379 237 Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction 0 0% 0% 0% 0% Construction 

Highway, Street, and Bridge 2373 237 Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction 1 33% 0% 0% 14% Construction 

Foundation , Structure, and Building 2381 238 Specialty Trade Contractors 2 67% 100% NIA 75% Exterior Contractors 

Building Equipment Contractors 2382 238 Specialty Trade Contractors 1 33% 0% NIA 25% 

Fiber, Yarn, and Thread Mills 3131 313 Textile Mills 1 20% 0% 0% 20% 

Fabric Mills 3132 313 Textile Mills 4 80% NIA NIA 80% 

4 For cells marked "NIA," there were no transactions corresponding to the 3-digit NAICS code for the given time period. 

12 
% of 3-Digit Corresponding 

Business Sector 4-Digit 3-Digit 3-Digit NAICS Category 2018 NAICS Code4 

NAICS NAICS Notices 2018 2017 2016 2016-18 

Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Mills 3221 322 Paper Manufacturing 1 100% 0% 0% 50% 

Converted Paper Product 3222 322 Paper Manufacturing 0 0% N/A 100% 50% Manufacturing 

Petroleum and Coal Products 3241 324 Petroleum and Coal Products Manufacturing 0 N/A 100% N/A 100% Manufacturing 

Basic Chemical Manufacturing 3251 325 Chemical Manufacturing 5 36% 6% 25% 21% 

Resin , Synthetic Rubber, and Artificial 

Synthetic Fibers and Filaments 3252 325 Chemical Manufacturing 2 14% 25% 13% 18% 

Manufacturinq 

Pesticide, Fertilizer, and Other 3253 325 Chemical Manufacturing 1 7% 25% 25% 18% Agricultural Chemical Manufacturing 

Pharmaceutical and Medicine 3254 325 Chemical Manufacturing 6 43% 31 % 38% 37% Manufacturing 

Paint, Coating, and Adhesive 3255 325 Chemical Manufacturi ng 0 0% 0% 0% 0% Manufacturing 

Other Chemical Product and 3259 325 Chemical Manufacturing 0 0% 13% 0% 5% Preparation Manufacturing 

Plastics Product Manufacturing 3261 326 Plastics and Rubber Products Manufacturing 2 67% 100% 100% 86% 

Rubber Product Manufacturing 3262 326 Plastics and Rubber Products Manufacturing 1 33% 0% 0% 14% 

Glass and Glass Product 3272 327 Nonmetallic Mineral Product Manufacturing 1 50% 0% N/A 33% Manufacturing 

Cement and Concrete Product 3273 327 Nonmetallic Mineral Product Manufacturing 0 0% 100% N/A 33% Manufacturing 

Other Nonmetallic Mineral Product 3279 327 Nonmetallic Mineral Product Manufacturing 1 50% 0% N/A 33% Manufacturing 

Iron and Steel Mills and Ferroalloy 3311 331 Primary Metal Manufacturing 1 33% 25% 0% 22% Manufacturing 

13 
% of 3-Digit Corresponding 

Business Sector 4-Digit 3-Digit 3-Digit NAICS Category 2018 NAICS Code4 

NAICS NAICS Notices 2018 2017 2016 2016-18 

Alumina and Aluminum Production 3313 331 Primary Metal Manufacturing 2 67% 25% 100% 56% and Processing 

Nonferrous Metal (except Aluminum) 3314 331 Primary Metal Manufacturing 0 0% 25% 0% 11 % Production and Processing 

Foundries 3315 331 Primary Metal Manufacturing 0 0% 25% 0% 11 % 

Forging and Stamping 3321 332 Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing 0 0% 0% 0% 0% 

Architectural and Structural Metals 3323 332 Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing 0 0% 0% 33% 15% Manufacturing 

Boiler, Tank, and Shipping Container 3324 332 Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing 0 0% 0% 0% 0% Manufacturing 

Machine Shops; Turned Product; and 3327 332 Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing 0 0% 33% 17% 23% Screw, Nut, and Bolt Manufacturing 

Coating, Engraving , Heat Treating, 3328 332 Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing 1 100% 0% 0% 8% and Allied Activities 

Other Fabricated Metal Product 3329 332 Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing 0 0% 67% 50% 54% Manufacturing 

Agriculture, Construction, and Mining 3331 333 Machinery Manufacturing 0 0% 13% 27% 14% Machinery Manufacturinq 

Industrial Machinery Manufacturing 3332 333 Machinery Manufacturing 0 0% 38% 55% 32% 

Commercial and Service Industry 3333 333 Machinery Manufacturing 4 50% 50% 0% 32% Machinerv Manufacturinq 

Ventilation , Heating, Air-Conditioning, 

and Commercial Refrigeration 3334 333 Machinery Manufacturing 1 13% 0% 0% 4% 

Equipment Manufacturing 

Metalworking Machinery 3335 333 Machinery Manufacturing 2 25% 0% 9% 11 % Manufacturinq 

Engine, Turbine, and Power 

Transmission Equipment 3336 333 Machinery Manufacturing 1 13% 0% 0% 4% 

Manufacturinq 

Other General Purpose Machinery 3339 333 Machinery Manufacturing 0 0% 0% 9% 4% Manufacturinq 

Computer and Peripheral Equipment 3341 334 Computer and Electronic Product 6 21 % 15% 17% 18% Manufacturing Manufacturing 

Communications Equipment 3342 334 Computer and Electronic Product 4 14% 19% 25% 19% Manufacturinq Manufacturinq 

14 
% of 3-Digit Corresponding 

Business Sector 4-Digit 3-Digit 3~Digit NAICS Category 2018 NAICS Code4 

NAICS NAICS Notices 2018 2017 2016 2016-18 

Audio and Video Equipment 3343 334 Computer and Electronic Product 2 7% 7% 0% 5% Manufacturing Manufacturing 

Semiconductor and Other Electronic 3344 334 Computer and Electronic Product 10 36% 44% 46% 43% Comoonent Manufacturinq Manufacturing 

Navigational, Measuring , Computer and Electronic Product Electromedical, and Control 3345 334 6 21 % 15% 13% 16% 

Instruments Manufacturing Manufacturing 

Manufacturing and Reproducing 3346 334 Computer and Electronic Product 0 0% 0% 0% 0% Magnetic and Optical Media Manufacturing 

Electric Lighting Equipment 3351 335 Electrical Equipment, Appliance, and 0 0% 0% 17% 6% Manufacturing Component Manufacturing 

Electrical Equipment Manu{acturing 3353 335 Electrical Equipment, Appliance, and 3 38% 17% 50% 39% Component Manufacturing 

Other Electrical Equipment and 3359 335 Electrical Equipment, Appliance, and 4 50% 83% 17% 56% Component Manufacturing Component Manufacturing 

Motor Vehicle Manufacturing 3361 336 Transportation Equipment Manufacturing 1 13% 22% 20% 18% 

Motor Vehicle Parts Manufacturing 3363 336 Transportation Equipment Manufacturing 1 13% 44% 20% 27% 

Aerospace Product and Parts 3364 336 Transportation Equipment Manufacturing 5 63% 33% 40% 45% Manufacturing 

Railroad Rolling Stock Manufacturing 3365 336 Transportation Equipment Manufacturing 1 13% 0% 20% 9% 

Ship and Boat Building 3366 336 Transportation Equipment Manufacturing 0 0% 0% 0% 0% 

Other Transportation Equipment 3369 336 Transportation Equipment Manufacturing 0 0% 0% 0% 0% Manufacturing 

Other Miscellaneous Manufacturing 3399 339 Miscellaneous Manufacturing 0 N/A 0% 100% 67% 

Medical Equipment and Supplies 3391 339 Miscellaneous Manufacturing 0 N/A 100% 0% 33% Manufacturing 

Motor Vehicle and Motor Vehicle 

Parts and Supplies Merchant 4231 423 Merchant Wholesalers, Durable Goods 0 0% 17% 0% 6% 

Wholesalers 

15 
% of 3-Digit Corresponding 

Business Sector 4-Digit 3-Digit 3-Digit NAICS Category 2018 NAICS Code4 

NAICS NAICS Notices 2018 2017 2016 2016-18 

Professional and Commercial 

Equipment and Supplies Merchant 4234 423 Merchant Wholesalers, Durable Goods 3 43% 17% 40% 33% 

Wholesalers 

Household Appliances and Electrical 

and Electronic Goods Merchant 4236 423 Merchant Wholesalers , Durable Goods 4 57% 67% 20% 50% 

Wholesalers 

Machinery, Equipment, and Supplies 4238 423 Merchant Wholesalers , Durable Goods 0 0% 0% 40% 11% Merchant Wholesalers 

Farm Product Raw Material Merchant 4245 424 Merchant Wholesalers , Nondurable Goods 0 N/A 0% 0% 0% Wholesalers 

Chemical and Allied Products 4246 424 Merchant Wholesalers , Nondurable Goods 0 N/A 100% 100% 100% Merchant Wholesalers 

Petroleum and Petroleum Products 4247 424 Merchant Wholesalers , Nondurable Goods 0 N/A 0% 0% 0% Merchant Wholesalers 

Health and Personal Care Stores 4461 446 Health and Personal Care Stores 1 100% 0% 0% N/A 

Electronic Shopping and Mail-Order 4541 454 Nonstore Retailers 0 N/A N/A 100% 100% Houses 

Nonscheduled Air Transportation 4812 481 Air Transportation 0 N/A 100% N/A 100% 

Rail Transportation 4821 482 Rail Transportation 0 N/A 100% N/A 100% 

Deep Sea, Coastal, and Great Lakes 4831 483 Water Transportation 0 N/A 100% 100% 100% Water Transportation 

Specialized Freight Trucking 4842 484 Truck Transportation 0 N/A N/A 100% 100% 

Pipeline Transportation of Crude Oil 4861 486 Pipeline Transportation 2 100% 100% 0% 60% 

Pipeline Transportation of Natural 4862 486 Pipeline Transportation 0 0% 0% 100% 40% Gas 

Support Activities for Air 4881 488 Support Activities for Transportation 1 25% 33% 50% 36% Transportation 

16 
% of 3-Digit Corresponding 

Business Sector 4-Digit 3-Digit 3-Digit NAICS Category 2018 NAICS Code4 

NAICS NAICS Notices 2018 2017 2016 2016-18 

Support Activities for Rail 4882 488 Support Activities for Transportation 0 0% 17% 0% 7% Transportation 

Support Activities for Water 4883 488 Support Activities for Transportation 3 75% 33% 0% 36% Transportation 

Support Activities for Road 4884 488 Support Activities for Transportation 0 0% 17% 0% 7% Transportation 

Freight Transportation Arrangement 4885 488 Support Activities for Transportation 0 0% 0% 50% 14% 

Warehousing and Storage 4931 493 Warehousing and Storage 2 100% N/A N/A 100% 

Software Publishers 5112 511 Publishing Industries (except Internet) 10 100% 100% 100% 100% 

Motion Picture and Video Industries 5121 512 Motion Picture and Sound Recording 0 NIA 50% N/A 100% Industries 

Wired Telecommunications Carriers 5171 517 Telecommunications 0 0% 18% 33% 14% 

Wireless Telecommunications 5172 517 Telecommunications 0 0% 9% 0% 3% Carriers (except Satellite) 

Wired or Wireless 51 73 517 Telecommunications 9 N/A 9% 0% N/A Telecommunications 

Satellite Telecommunications 5174 517 Telecommunications 3 20% 55% 33% 34% 

Other Telecommunications 5179 517 Telecommunications 3 20% 9% 33% 20% 

Data Processing, Hosting, and 5182 518 Data Processing , Hosting, and Related 5 100% 100% 100% 100% Related Services Services 

Other Information Services 5191 519 Other Information Services 5 100% 100% 100% 100% 

Activities Related to Credit 5223 522 Credit Intermediation and Related Activities 0 N/A 100% N/A 100% Intermediation 

Securities and Commodity Contracts 5231 523 Securities, Commodity Contracts, and Other 1 33% 60% 50% 50% Intermediation and Brokerage Financial Investments and Related Activities 

Securities and Commodity 5232 523 Securities, Commodity Contracts, and Other 0 0% 0% 50% 10% Exchanges Financial Investments and Related Activities 

Other Financial Investment Activities 5239 523 Securities, Commodity Contracts, and Other 2 67% 20% 0% 30% Financial Investments and Related Activities 

Insurance Carriers 5241 524 Insurance Carriers and Related Activities 3 100% 100% 100% 100% 

Insurance and Employee Benefit 5251 525 Funds, Trusts, and Other Financial Vehicles 0 0% 0% 100% 25% Funds 

Other Investment Pools and Funds 5259 525 Funds, Trusts, and Other Financial Vehicles 1 100% 100% 0% 75% 

Lessors of Real Estate 5311 531 Real Estate 2 67% 89% 56% 71 % 

Activities Related to Real Estate 5313 531 Real Estate 1 33% 11 % 44% 29% 

Automotive Equipment Rental and 5321 532 Rental and Leasing Services 0 N/A 100% 0% 33% Leasing 

17 
% of 3-Digit Corresponding 

Business Sector 4-Digit 3-Digit 3-Digit NAICS Category 2018 NAICS Code4 

NAICS NAICS Notices 2018 2017 2016 2016-18 

Commercial and Industrial Machinery 5324 532 Rental and Leasing Services 0 NIA 0% 100% 67% and Equipment Rental and LeasinQ 

Lessors of Nonfinancial Intangible 5331 533 Lessors of Nonfinancial Intangible Assets 0 NIA 100% 100% 100% Assets (except Copyrighted Works) (except Copyrighted Works) 

Accounting, Tax Preparation , 5412 541 Professional, Scientific, and Technical 0 0% 0% 5% 1% Bookkeeping, and Pavroll Services Services 

Architectural, Engineering, and 5413 541 Professional, Scientific, and Technical 7 28% 43% 20% 33% Related Services Services 

Computer Systems Design and 5415 541 Professional, Scientific, and Technical 11 44% 25% 35% 33% Related Services Services 

Management, Scientific, and 5416 541 Professional, Scientific, and Technical 1 4% 0% 5% 2% Technical Consultinq Services Services 

Scientific Research and Development 5417 541 Professional, Scientific, and Technical 3 12% 23% 20% 19% Services Services 

Advertising, Public Relations, and 5418 541 Professional, Scientific, and Technical 2 8% 3% 0% 4% Related Services Services 

Other Professional, Scientific, and 5419 541 Professional, Scientific, and Technical 1 4% 8% 15% 8% Technical Services Services 

Management of Companies and 5511 551 Management of Companies and Enterprises 4 100% 100% 100% 100% Enterprises 

Employment Services 5613 561 Administrative and Support Services 1 20% 0% 0% 11 % 

Investigation and Security Services 5616 561 Administrative and Support Services 3 60% 0% 100% 67% 

Other Support Services 5619 561 Admin istrative and Support Services 1 20% 100% 0% 22% 

Waste Treatment and Disposal 5622 562 Waste Management and Remediation 2 100% 0% 0% 50% Services 

Remediation and Other Waste 5629 562 Waste Management and Remediation 0 0% 100% 100% 50% Management Services Services 

Technical and Trade Schools 6115 611 Educational Services 3 100% NIA 100% 100% 

Offices of Physicians 6211 621 Ambulatory Health Care Services 0 0% 67% NIA 50% 

Outpatient Care Centers 6214 621 Ambulatory Health Care Services 0 0% 33% NIA 25% 

Other Ambulatory Health Care 6219 621 Ambulatory Health Care Services 1 100% 0% 0% 25% Services 

Traveler Accommodation 7211 721 Accommodation 0 NIA 100% 100% 100% 

Electronic and Precision Equipment 8112 811 Repair and Maintenance 0 NIA 33% 33% 33% Repair and Maintenance 

Commercial and Industrial Machinery 

and Equipment (except Automotive 8113 811 Repair and Maintenance 0 NIA 67% 67% 67% and Electronic) Repair and 

Maintenance 

Other Personal Services 8129 812 Personal and Laundry Services 0 NIA 100% NIA 100% 

18 
% of 3-Digit Corresponding 

Business Sector 4-Digit 3-Digit 3-Digit NAICS Category 2018 

NAICS NAICS 

NAICS Code4 

Notices 2018 2017 2016 2016-18 

Business, Professional, Labor 

Political, and Similar Organizations 8139 813 Religious , Grantmaking, Civic, Professional 

and Similar Oraanizations ' 1 100% 0% 0% 100% 

19 
2. Covered Transactions by Country or Economy, 2016-2018 

Table 1-9 organizes covered transaction notices from 2016 through 2018 by country or 

geographic economy. Acquisitions by investors from China accounted for the largest proportion 

of notices filed for the three-year period with 26.5 percent (169). Chinese investors also 

accounted for the most notices filed each year from 2016 to 2018 (54, 60, and 55, respectively). 

Investors from Canada, Japan, and France accounted for the second-, third-, and fourth-most 

notices filed from 2016 to 2018 with 11.4 percent, 10 percent, and 6. 7 percent (73, 64, and 43), 

respectively. 

Table 1-9. Covered Transactions by Acquirer Home Country or Geographic Economy, 2016-2018 

Covered Transactions by Acquirer Home Country or Geographic Economy, 2016-2018 

Country/Economy 2016 2017 2018 Total 

Australia 4 5 4 13 

Austria 1 2 1 4 

Belgium 0 3 1 4 

Bermuda 1 0 2 3 

Brazil 1 1 0 2 

British Virgin 6 4 0 10 Islands 

Canada 22 22 29 73 

Cayman Islands 5 8 2 15 

China 54 60 55 169 

Denmark 0 0 3 3 

Fiji 0 0 2 2 

Finland 3 0 0 3 

France 8 14 21 43 

Germany 6 7 12 25 

Guernsey 0 1 1 2 

Hong Kong 3 0 0 3 

Hungary 0 1 0 1 

India 1 3 4 8 

Ireland 3 3 1 7 

Israel 3 4 5 12 

Italy 0 2 3 5 

Japan 13 20 31 64 

Jersey 1 3 1 5 

Kuwait 1 2 0 3 

Lebanon 1 0 0 1 

Liechtenstein 0 1 0 1 

Luxembourg 5 2 0 7 

20 
Covered Transactions by Acquirer Home Country or Geographic Economy, 2016-2018 · . 

Country/Economy 2016 2017 2018 Total 

Malaysia 0 0 1 1 

Malta 1 0 0 1 

Mexico 1 2 0 3 

Netherlands 3 7 5 15 

Norway 2 2 0 4 

Papua New Guinea 0 1 0 1 

Portugal 0 5 0 5 

Qatar 0 0 1 1 

Russia 0 3 6 9 

Seychelles 1 0 0 1 

Saudi Arabia 0 1 1 2 

Singapore 2 6 5 13 

South Africa 0 2 1 3 

South Korea 7 6 4 17 

Spain 1 1 2 4 

Sweden 1 6 9 16 

Switzerland 0 7 2 9 

Taiwan 1 0 4 5 

Turkey 2 0 2 4 

UAE 1 2 3 6 

United Kingdom 7 18 5 30 

Grand Total 172 237 229 638 

Table 1-10 on the next two pages shows the geographic concentration of notices in each of the 

four listed industry sectors for the period 2016 to 2018. The Finance, Information, and Services 

sector accounted for 41 percent of all notices. The Manufacturing sector accounted for 

approximately 36 percent of all notices. The Mining, Utilities, and Construction sector 

accounted for approximately 14 percent, and the Wholesale Trade, Retail Trade, and 

Transportation sector accounted for approximately 8 percent. Notices from Canada, China, and 

Japan, which accounted for 48 percent of the notices from 2016 to 2018, were generally 

consistent with this general distribution across sectors. However, China accounted for a higher 

proportion of Manufacturing sector transactions, while Canada continued to account for a large 

proportion of Mining, Utilities, and Construction sector transactions. 

21 
Table 1-10. Covered Transactions by Acquirer Home Country or Economy 

and Target Sector, 2016-2018 

Covered Transactions by Acquirer Home Country or Geographic Economy, by Target Sector (2016-2018) 

Finance, Mining, Wholesale Trade, 

Country/Economy Information, Manufacturing Utilities, and Retail Trade, and Total 

and Services Construction Transportation 

Austral ia 8 1 2 2 13 

Austria 2 2 0 0 4 

Belgium 3 2 0 0 5 

Bermuda 0 0 0 2 2 

Brazil 0 2 0 0 2 

British Virgin Islands 5 2 3 0 10 

Canada 26 15 26 6 73 

Cayman Islands 9 3 0 3 15 

China 58 84 16 11 169 

Denmark 1 0 2 0 3 

Fiji 2 0 0 0 2 

Finland 0 3 0 0 3 

France 22 12 5 4 43 

Germany 7 15 2 1 25 

Guernsey 1 1 0 0 2 

Hong Kong 1 1 1 0 3 

Hungary 0 1 0 0 1 

India 3 5 0 0 8 

Ireland 6 1 0 0 7 

Israel 4 7 1 0 12 

Italy 0 5 0 0 5 

Japan 30 23 10 1 64 

Jersey 2 3 0 0 5 

Kuwait 2 0 0 1 3 

Lebanon 0 0 0 1 1 

Liechtenstein 1 0 0 0 1 

Luxembourg 4 2 1 0 7 

Malaysia 1 0 0 0 1 

Malta 0 1 0 0 1 

Mexico 1 0 0 2 3 

Netherlands 6 3 6 0 15 

Norway 1 2 0 1 4 

Papua New Guinea 0 0 1 0 1 

Portugal 0 0 5 0 5 

Qatar 0 0 0 1 1 

Russia 7 1 0 1 9 

Seychelles 0 2 0 0 2 

Saudi Arabia 1 0 0 0 1 

22 
Covered Transactions by Acquirer Home Country or Geographic Economy, by Target Sector (2016-2018) 

Finance, Mining, Wholesale Trade, 

Country/Economy Information, Manufacturing Utilities, and Retail Trade, and Total 

and Services Construction Transportation 

Singapore 6 5 0 2 13 

South Africa 0 1 1 1 3 

South Korea 6 5 4 2 17 

Spain 3 1 0 0 4 

Sweden 9 4 0 3 16 

Switzerland 2 2 5 0 9 

Taiwan 1 2 0 2 5 

Turkev 2 2 0 0 4 

UAE 3 2 0 1 6 

United KinQdom 16 7 1 6 30 

Grand Total 262 230 92 54 638 

23 
E. Withdrawn Notices 

Parties may withdraw an accepted notice of a transaction if the Committee approves a written 

request for withdrawal from the parties. Over time, parties have requested withdrawals for a 

number of reasons. For example, in some cases in which the parties are unable to address all 

of the Committee's outstanding national security concerns within the initial review period or 

subsequent investigation period, the parties might request to withdraw and refile their notice to 

provide themselves with additional time to answer questions or to attempt to resolve the 

Committee's national security concerns. In other cases, the parties might request to withdraw 

and refile their notice because a material change in the terms of the transaction warrants the 

filing of a new notice. In still other cases, the parties might request to withdraw their notice 

because they are abandoning the transaction for commercial reasons, or because the parties do 

not want to abide by CFIUS's proposed mitigation, or in light of a CFIUS determination to refer 

the matter to the President. The Committee has established processes to track, when 

appropriate, the status of a withdrawn transaction or interim protections to address specific 

national security concerns identified during the review or investigation of the withdrawn 

transaction. 

In 2018, CFIUS approved the withdrawal of 66 notices. The parties withdrew 2 notices during 

the review period and 64 notices after the commencement of the investigation period. In 34 of 

these instances, the parties filed a new notice in 2018; CFIUS concluded action in 15 of those 

cases. In 18 of these instances the parties withdrew their notice and abandoned their 

transaction after either CFIUS informed them that it was unable to identify mitigation measures 

that would resolve its national security concerns or it proposed mitigation measures that the 

parties chose not to accept. In one of these instances, the parties withdrew their notice and 

abandoned the transaction because they failed to satisfy CFIUS process requirements. In three 

of these instances, the parties withdrew their notice and abandoned the transaction for 

commercial reasons unrelated to CFIUS review. In two of these instances, CFIUS permitted the 

parties to withdraw their notices subject to certain conditions. In eight of these instances, the 

parties filed a new notice in 2019. 

As noted previously, the number of withdrawals is a function of the specific facts and 

circumstances of the particular transactions reviewed by the Committee. 

24 
F. Mitigation Measures 

In 2018, CFIUS concluded action after adopting mitigation measures with respect to 29 notices 

of covered transactions (approximately 13 percent of the total number of 2018 notices). Five 

CFIUS agencies served as the U.S. Government (USG) signatories to these measures as well 

as one non-CFIUS agency. 

Committee agencies have adopted procedures to evaluate and ensure that parties to a covered 

transaction remain in compliance with any risk mitigation measure under Section 721 that 

CFIUS negotiates with or imposes on the parties. For all mitigation measures executed since 

FINSA became effective, Treasury, as Chair of CFIUS, has designated at least one USG 

signatory to a mitigation measure as a lead agency for monitoring compliance with that 

measure. Lead agencies carry out their monitoring responsibilities on behalf of the Committee 

and report back to the Committee on at least a quarterly basis. In addition, in cases where 

mitigation measures were entered into before FINSA's effective date, signatories also report to 

CFIUS quarterly on compliance with those measures. As described below, all lead agencies for 

monitoring mitigation compliance have implemented processes to carry out their responsibilities. 

Mitigation measures negotiated and adopted in 2018 required the businesses involved to take 

specific and verifiable actions, including, for example: 

• prohibiting or limiting the transfer or sharing of certain intellectual property, trade secrets, or 

know-how. 

• establishing guidelines and terms for handling existing or future USG contracts, USG 

customer information, and other sensitive information. 

• ensuring that only authorized persons have access to certain technology; that only 

authorized persons have access to USG, company, or customer information; and that the 

foreign acquirer not have direct or remote access to systems that hold such information. 

• ensuring that only U.S. citizens handle certain products and services, and ensuring that 

certain activities and products are located only in the United States. 

• establishing a Corporate Security Committee and other mechanisms to ensure compliance 

with all required actions, including the appointment of a USG-approved security officer or 

member of the board of directors and requirements for security policies, annual reports, and 

independent audits. 

• notifying, for approval, security officers or relevant USG parties in advance of foreign 

national visits to the U.S. business. 

• security protocols to ensure the integrity of goods or software sold to the USG. 

• notifying customers regarding the change of ownership. 

• assurances of continuity of supply for defined periods, and notification and consultation prior 

to taking certain business decisions, with certain rights in the event that the company 

25 
decides to exit a business line. Establishing meetings to discuss business plans that might 

affect USG supply or national security considerations. 

• exclusion of certain sensitive assets from the transaction. 

• divestiture of all or part of the U.S. business. 5 

CFIUS agencies use a variety of means to monitor and enforce compliance by the companies 

that are subject to the measures, including: 

• periodic reporting to USG agencies by the companies; 

• on-site compliance reviews by USG agencies; 

• third-party audits when provided for by the terms of the mitigation measures; and 

• investigations and remedial actions if anomalies or breaches are discovered or suspected. 

Due to the number and complexity of mitigation measures implemented to date, as a general 

matter individual CFIUS agencies monitor compliance through a number of internal procedures, 

including: 

• assigning staff responsibilities for the monitoring of compliance; 

• designing tracking systems to monitor required reports; and 

• instituting internal instructions and procedures to ensure that in-house expertise is drawn 

upon to analyze compliance with measures. 

5 Divestiture of all of a U.S. business is an option parties may consent to in lieu of a referral to the President and typically effectuated 

through a withdrawal of the notice and abandonment of the transaction. For this reason, such divestitures are not included in data 

on cases cleared with mitigation. 

26 
G. Perceived Adverse Effects of Covered Transactions 

Section 721 (m) requires that this Annual Report include a discussion of all perceived adverse 

effects of covered transactions on the national security or critical infrastructure of the United 

States that the Committee will take into account in its deliberations during the period before 

delivery of the next report, to the extent possible. In reviewing a covered transaction, CFIUS 

evaluates all relevant national security considerations identified by its member agencies during 

the review and does not conclude action on a covered transaction if there are unresolved 

national security concerns. 

As discussed in the Guidance Concerning the National Security Review Conducted by CFIUS, 

which CFIUS published in the Federal Register on December 8, 2008, the transactions that 

CFIUS has thus far reviewed continue to present a broad range of national security 

considerations. CFIUS examines the national security considerations to determine whether, in 

light of the specific facts and circumstances related to the transaction, the transaction would 

adversely affect national security and pose a national security risk. Among the considerations 

presented by transactions reviewed by CFIUS are the following: 

Foreign control of U.S. businesses that: 

• Provide products and services to an agency or agencies of the U.S. Government, or state 

and local authorities that have functions that are relevant to national security. 

• Provide products or services that could expose national security vulnerabilities, including 

potential cyber security concerns, or create vulnerability to sabotage or espionage. This 

includes consideration of whether the covered transaction will increase the risk of 

exploitation of the particular U.S. business's position in the supply chain. 

• Have operations, or produce or supply products or services, the security of which may have 

implications for U.S. national security, such as businesses that involve infrastructure that 

may constitute critical infrastructure; businesses that involve various aspects of energy 

production, including extraction, generation, transmission, and distribution; businesses that 

affect the national transportation system; and businesses that could significantly and directly 

affect the U.S. financial system. 

• Have access to classified information or sensitive government or government contract 

information, including information about employees. 

• Are in the defense, security, and national security-related law enforcement sectors. 

• Are involved in activities related to weapons and munitions manufacturing, aerospace, 

satellite, and radar systems. 

• Produce certain types of advanced technologies that may be useful in defending, or in 

seeking to impair, U.S. national security, which may include businesses engaged in the 

design and production of equipment or components that have both commercial and military 

applications. Such transactions have included, for example, businesses engaged in the 

design, production, or provision of goods and services involving network and data security. 

27 
They have also included businesses that produce semiconductor manufacturing equipment, 

design integrated circuits, and fabricate integrated circuits, in light of the fact that 

semiconductors are an enabling technology for a range of national security critical devices, 

systems, and functions. They have also included businesses that are in the biotechnology 

sector, given the potential military applications of such technology and the sensitivity of the 

information such companies may collect. 

• Engage in the research and development, production, or sale of technology, goods, 

software, or services that are subject to U.S. export controls. 

• Are in a field with significant national security implications where there are few alternative 

suppliers or where a loss in U.S. technological competitiveness would be detrimental to 

national security. 

• With respect to the various technologies described above, could facilitate their transfer to 

third parties not directly related to the buyer, to the detriment of national security. 

• Have operations or facilities that are in proximity to military or other sensitive USG facilities. 

• Hold substantial pools of potentially sensitive data about U.S. persons and businesses that 

have national security importance. Such businesses could be in any number of sectors, 

including, for example, the insurance sectors, health services, and technology services. 

• Otherwise facilitate foreign intelligence collection against U.S. targets. 

Acquisition of control by foreign persons that: 

• Are controlled by a foreign government. 

• Are from a country with a record on nonproliferation and other national security-related 

matters that raises concerns. 

• Have historical records of taking or intentions to take actions that could impair U.S. national 

security. 

• Have a history of doing business in sanctioned countries. 

CFIUS reviews all relevant national security considerations and the particular facts and 

circumstances of a transaction to determine whether the transaction will pose a national security 

risk. Among the factors that CFIUS takes into account are the following, listed in Section 721 (f): 

1) domestic production needed for projected national defense requirements; 

2) the capability and capacity of domestic industries to meet national defense requirements, 

including the availability of human resources, products, technology, materials, and other 

supplies and services; 

3) the control of domestic industries and commercial activity by foreign citizens as it affects the 

capability and capacity of the United States to meet the requirements of national security; 

28 
4) the potential effects of the proposed or pending transaction on sales of military goods, 

equipment, or technology to any country -

a. identified by the Secretary of State -

i. under section 6U) of the Export Administration Act of 1979, as a country that 

supports terrorism; 

ii. under section 6(1) of the Export Administration Act of 1979, as a country of 

concern regarding missile proliferation; or 

iii. under section 6(m) of the Export Administration Act of 1979, as a country of 

concern regarding the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons; 

b. identified by the Secretary of Defense as posing a potential regional military threat to 

the interests of the United States; or 

c. listed under section 309(c) of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act of 1978 on the 

"Nuclear Non-Proliferation-Special Country List" (15 C.F.R. Part 778, Supplement 

No. 4) or any successor list; 

5) the potential effects of the proposed or pending transaction on United States international 

technological leadership in areas affecting United States national security; 

6) the potential national security-related effects on United States critical infrastructure, 

including major energy assets; 

7) the potential national security-related effects on United States critical technologies; 

8) whether the covered transaction is a foreign government-controlled transaction, as 

determined under subsection (b)(1)(B) of Section 721; 

9) as appropriate, and particularly with respect to transactions requiring an investigation under 

subsection (b)(1 )(B) of Section 721, a review of the current assessment ofa. the adherence of the subject country to nonproliferation control regimes, including 

treaties and multilateral supply guidelines, which shall draw on, but not be limited to, 

the annual report on "Adherence to and Compliance with Arms Control, 

Nonproliferation and Disarmament Agreements and Commitments," required by 

section 403 of the Arms Control and Disarmament Act 

b. the relationship of such country with the United States, specifically on its record on 

cooperating in counter-terrorism efforts, which shall draw on, but not be limited to, 

the report of the President to Congress under section 7120 of the Intelligence 

Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 [unclassified]; and 

c. the potential for transshipment or diversion of technologies with military applications, 

including an analysis of national export control laws and regulations; 

10) the long-term projection of United States requirements for sources of energy and other 

critical resources and materials; and 

11) such other factors as the President or the Committee may determine to be appropriate 

generally or in connection with a specific review or investigation. 

29 
In future reporting periods, CFIUS will continue to take into account these national security 

considerations and to consider whether the transactions may have had the above-listed or any 

other adverse effects. 

30 
H. Critical Technologies Pilot Program 

The critical technologies pilot program commenced on November 10, 2018. The pilot program 

has two purposes. First, the pilot program expands the scope of transactions subject to review 

by CFIUS to include transactions subject to a portion of FIRRMA's "other investments" 

provision. Second, the pilot program makes effective FIRRMA's mandatory declarations 

provision for transactions that fall within the specific scope of the pilot program. 

"Other investments" include direct or indirect investments by a foreign person in an unaffiliated 

pilot program U.S. business that could not result in control by a foreign person of a pilot program 

U.S. business, but that still affords the foreign person certain rights. 

These declarations were mandatory for investments in U.S. businesses that produce, design, 

test, manufacture, fabricate, or develop one or more critical technologies, consistent with the 

definition set forth in FIRRMA. 

The program authorized CFIUS to take the following actions after assessment of submitted 

declarations: 

• request that the parties file a written notice; 

• inform the parties that the Committee is unable to complete action; 

• initiate a unilateral review; or 

• notify the parties that the Committee has concluded all action under Section 721. 

Information Regarding 2018 Declarations 

For 2018: 

• CFIUS conducted an "assessment" with respect to the 21 declarations that were filed with 

CFIUS in 2018 that CFIUS determined to be covered transactions under Section 721. 

• CFIUS cleared two transactions, requested the parties to five transaction declarations to file 

a written notice, determined that it could not conclude action on 11 transaction declarations, 

and found that one declaration was not subject to the jurisdiction of the pilot program. The 

parties with.drew one declaration for business reasons. 

• Twelve declarations were determined to be "other investments" (as opposed to control 

transactions). 

31 
This page intentionally left blank. 

32 
SECTION II: CRITICAL TECHNOLOGIES 

Introduction 

This section of the Annual Report to Congress has been prepared in accordance with Section 

721 (m)(3), as applicable for the reporting period. Section 721 (m)(3) requires the annual report 

to include: 

"(i) an evaluation of whether there is credible evidence of a coordinated strategy by one or 

more countries or companies to acquire United States companies involved in research, 

development, or production of critical technologies for which the United States is a leading 

producer; and 

"(ii) an evaluation of whether there are industrial espionage activities directed or directly 

assisted by foreign governments against private United States companies aimed at 

obtaining commercial secrets related to critical technologies." 

(U) Subsection A addresses the requirement laid out in (i), and subsection B addresses the 

requirement laid out in (ii). 

Definitions & Methodologies 

The definition of "critical technologies," which includes technologies subject to certain U.S. 

export controls, is set forth in 31 C.F.R. § 800.209, Regulations Pertaining to Mergers, 

Acquisitions, and Takeovers by Foreign Persons (the "CFIUS regulations"), published in the 

Federal Register on November 21, 2008. 6 See the Appendix for this definition. "Critical 

technology companies" are U.S. companies that CFIUS identified for this section of the report 

involved in research, development, or production of critical technologies. The Appendix also 

provides the definition of "coordinated strategy" for purposes of this section of the report, 

describes the methodology and data sources used to identify transactions involving critical 

technology companies ("critical technology transactions"), and the approach used to conduct the 

analyses required by Section 721 related to critical technologies. Finally, it lists the agencies 

and other entities that participated in preparing this section of the report. 

6 This report reflects the CFIUS process in effect during 2018, the period covered by this report. 

33 
A. Whether There Is Credible Evidence of a Coordinated Strategy to 

Acquire Critical Technology Companies 

1. Key Judgments 

A meaningful summary of the U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) assessment cannot be 

provided on an unclassified basis. However, the USIC considered the unclassified data 

included in this section in conducting its analysis. 

2. Summary of Foreign M&A Activity in the United States 

Using the methodology described in the Appendix, CFIUS reviewed 76 covered transactions 

involving acquisitions of U.S. critical technology companies in 2018. CFIUS agencies and the 

USIC evaluated all 229 transactions for indications of a coordinated strategy, as defined for this 

report, to acquire U.S. critical technologies. 

3. Frequency of Activity by Countries and Companies 

Table 11-1 lists the originating countries for covered transactions involving acquisitions of U.S. 

critical technology companies in 2018: 

Table 11-1: Foreign Acquirers of U.S. Critical Technology in 2018 CFIUS notices 

Country 2018 

Australia 1 

Austria 1 

Belgium 1 

Bermuda 1 

Canada 9 

Cayman Islands 1 

China 8 

France 7 

Germany 7 

India 3 

Ireland 1 

Israel 3 

Italy 3 

Japan 9 

Netherlands 1 

Qatar 1 

Russia 3 

Singapore 3 

South Africa 1 

South Korea 1 

Sweden 5 

34 

' 
Country 2018 

Taiwan 1 

Turkey 1 

United Kingdom 4 

Total 76 

As shown in Figure 11-1 , the largest number of completed transactions filed with CFIUS in 2018 

involved foreign acquisitions of U.S. companies in the utilities, computers and electronics, 

professional, technical, and scientific services, telecommunications, and chemicals sectors. 

Figure 11-1: Completed Transactions by Sector of U.S. Target Company, 2018 

35 31 

30 28 

25 

25 

20 

15 14 

15 I I 10 

10 I 

8 8 7 7 

5 

0 I I I I 

·'l," ·<-" 'l,'-, t::-" ::-._'-, ~ rt--:.. t::-' <::-' ::-._'l, .,.__~ ov" ~,c ~o . (.,7, ~<::- <$'q; <$''l, ,_,7> -~ ~ x::,.-S' ::-._'l, '0• ~ rt- ·,<-7> ...._e; ~.Q ~,Q 'l,(., ::-.. '-, -<;:-q; ,<::- ~'l>c -.,::-0 

q;- o<::-7> <$'-> C Q' 'l,o:. 'l,(:j:. ~ 

/> (.,'l, ,;:;.O<::- ~ <::-' ~ 0,$' e,+ z,r..; ,<;:,'1> ,_,'1> ~ii'> <ic ~7> ~ ~<.; 

rt- ,;,_'-0 -<-.<V° ·,<::-Q,, ~'l, ~q; .::,~ ~p <$-IQ ~.§' ,:-c.; 

<.,0 ,:,,-> "',7> 

8. Whether Foreign Governments Used Espionage Activities to Obtain 

Commercial Secrets Related to Critical Technologies 

1. Key Finding 

The USIC judges that foreign governments are extremely likely to use a range of collection 

methods to obtain critical U.S. technologies. 

A 2018 National Counterintelligence and Security Center report to Congress stated that foreign 

economic and industrial espionage against the United States continues to represent a 

significant threat to America's prosperity, security, and competitive advantage. Foreign 

intelligence services-and threat actors working on their behalf-continue to represent the most 

persistent and pervasive cyber intelligence threat tied to economic espionage and the potential 

theft of U.S. trade secrets and proprietary information. Countries with closer ties to the United 

States also have conducted cyber espionage and other forms of intelligence collection to obtain 

U.S. technology. Federal research institutions, universities, and corporations are regularly 

targeted by online actors seeking all manner of proprietary information. 

35 
SECTION Ill: FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENT IN THE UNITED STATES 

BY COUNTRIES THAT BOYCOTT ISRAEL OR DO NOT BAN 

TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS 

Introduction 

This section of the CFIUS Annual Report to Congress has been prepared in accordance with 

section 7(c) of FINSA (codified at 50 U.S.C. § 4565 n.), which provides: 

(1) STUDY REQUIRED.-Before the end of the 120-day period beginning on the date of 

enactment of this Act and annually thereafter, the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation 

with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Commerce, shall conduct a study on foreign 

direct investments in the United States, especially investments in critical infrastructure and 

industries affecting national security, by-

(A) foreign governments, entities controlled by or acting on behalf of a foreign 

government, or persons of foreign countries which comply with any boycott of Israel; 

or 

(B) foreign governments, entities controlled by or acting on behalf of a foreign 

government, or persons of foreign countries which do not ban organizations 

designated by the Secretary of State as foreign terrorist organizations. 

(2) REPORT.-Before the end of the 30-day period beginning upon the date of completion 

of each study under paragraph (1) and thereafter in each annual report under section 

721 (m) of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (as added by this section), the Secretary of 

the Treasury shall submit a report to Congress, for transmittal to all appropriate committees 

of the Senate and the House of Representatives, containing the findings and conclusions of 

the Secretary with respect to the study described in paragraph (1), together with an analysis 

of the effects of such investment on the national security of the United States and on any 

efforts to address those effects. 

A. Summary of Findings and Conclusions of Study 

• Mergers with, and acquisitions of, U.S. companies (M&A), the main form of foreign direct 

investment (FOi) into the United States, by investors from the countries described in section 

7(c)(1) of FINSA that were completed between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2018 

("subject M&A transactions"), represent a small percentage of the total number of such FOi 

flows into the United States. 

• The value of subject M&A transactions with publicly reported values was $14.4 billion. As 

described in subsection 111.C below, not all publicly announced transactions are reported 

with dollar values, so the actual value of subject M&A transactions is greater than $14.4 

billion. 

• The subject M&A transactions cover several economic sectors. 

• With respect to each transaction contained in the study, CFIUS: (i) reviewed and concluded 

action under Section 721 with no unresolved national security concerns; (ii) previously 

reviewed and concluded action on a transaction that gave the foreign acquirer control of the 

36 
same U.S. business; or (iii) reviewed the transaction through procedures that CFIUS and its 

member agencies follow regarding those transactions that are not notified to CFIUS (nonnotified transactions). 

B. Study Methodology 

1. Identification of Relevant Countries 

To identify those countries that complied with any boycott of Israel in 2018, as required by the 

statute, CFIUS examined the "List of Countries Requiring Cooperation with an International 

Boycott," published by the Department of the Treasury (pursuant to section 999 of the 

International Revenue Code)7 and reports sent to Congress by the Department of State 

(pursuant to section 564 of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, FY 1994-95), as well as 

public sources of information describing the countries' observance of a primary boycott of Israel. 

Based on these sources of information, CFIUS interpreted the reporting requirement under 

section 7(c)(1)(A) of FINSA to apply to the following countries: Algeria, Iran, Kuwait, Lebanon, 

Libya, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, the United Arab Emirates, and Yemen. 

To identify those countries that did not ban foreign terrorist organizations in 2018, CFIUS 

interpreted section 7(c)(1)(8) of FINSA to apply to countries certified by the Department of State 

as "not cooperating fully with United States antiterrorism efforts" (pursuant to section 40A of the 

Arms Export Control Act, as amended). Those countries were Eritrea, Iran, North Korea, Syria, 

and Venezuela. 8 

2. Scope of FDI 

CFIUS is authorized to review mergers with, and acquisitions of, U.S. businesses, which are the 

primary form of FOi into the United States. Accordingly, the following types of transactions are 

included in the study: (i) transactions notified to CFIUS under Section 721; (ii) M&A transactions 

that were not notified to CFIUS but that its member agencies reviewed through procedures that 

each agency has adopted for this purpose; and (iii) M&A transactions that resulted in an 

ownership stake in a U.S. company of at least 10 percent, 9 as contained in the Thomson ONE 

database, which is a recognized financial database. 

Thomson ONE database: This database is a product of Refinitiv. The transaction information 

contained in this database includes the date of the transaction, the respective countries of origin 

of both the acquirer and the target company, and the economic sector of the target company. 

For most transactions, the Thomson ONE database provides the transaction value and the 

percentage of ownership rights acquired. 

7 81 Fed. Reg. 4739 (Jan. 27, 2016), 81 Fed. Reg. 20,720 (Apr. 8, 2016), 81 Fed. Reg. 51,967 (Aug. 5, 2016), 81 Fed. Reg. 87128 

(Dec. 2, 2016), 82 Fed. Reg. 15793 (Mar. 30, 2017), 82 Fed. Reg. 36076 (Aug. 2, 2017), and 83 Fed. Reg. 966 (Jan. 8, 2018). 8 81 Fed. Reg. 35436 (Jun. 2, 2016), 82 Fed. Reg. 24424 (May 26, 2017), 83 Fed. Reg. 23988 (May 23, 2018); Note: 84 Fed. Reg. 

24856 (May 29, 2019) came into effect after the CY18 reporting period and therefore is not applicable to this Report. 9 FOi is generally understood to imply ownership of at least 10 percent, a benchmark used by many statistical agencies around the 

world, including the Department of Commerce's Bureau of Economic Analysis, the Council of Economic Advisors (Economic Report 

of the President), the International Monetary Fund, and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. As noted in 

the description of the Thomson ONE database, these sources did not always provide information regarding the acquirer's total 

ownership stake that it acquired in the U.S. company. Therefore, some of the transactions analyzed in this study may be portfolio 

investments rather than FOi. 

37 
CFIUS did not include in the study those transactions listed in the Thomson ONE database that 

resulted in an ownership stake in a U.S. company of less than 10 percent, where data 

concerning the interest acquired was available. 

C. Detailed Findings of Study 

1. Identification of the Subject M&A Transactions 

The study identified 65 M&A transactions in 2018 involving investors from Kuwait, Lebanon, 

Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates, which are countries that comply with any 

boycott of Israel. 

The study did not identify any M&A transactions in 2018 involving investors from Iran, North 

Korea, or Syria, which are countries identified as not cooperating fully with U.S. antiterrorism 

efforts and which were subject to stringent economic sanctions. However, the study identified 

one M&A transaction involving investors from Venezuela, a country that was designated as not 

cooperating fully with U.S. antiterrorism efforts. 

50 of the 66 identified transactions had reported values. The combined value of the reported 

values is approximately $14.4 billion. Data sources consulted for this study did not report, and 

Treasury staff was unable to determine independently, values for 16 of the 66 transactions 

analyzed. As a result, the value of the 66 transactions is necessarily greater than $14.4 billion. 

Table 111-1 shows the number and aggregate value of the transactions for each of the relevant 

countries. 

Table 111-1. Aggregate Value of Transactions 

Country 2018 Transactions Known Transaction Value ($ million) 

United Arab Emirates 40 

Saudi Arabia 9 

Qatar 7 

Kuwait 5 

Lebanon 4 

Venezuela 1 

Total 66 

The 66 transactions represent several major sectors of the economy. Table 111-2 shows the 

various sectors represented by the 66 transactions, noting both the number and aggregate 

value of the transactions for each sector. A majority of transactions in the Information 

Technology sector-the largest category represented-was comprised of transactions in the 

Application Software Industry. 

38 

4051 

1727 

8340 

250 

46 

-

14414 
Table 111-2. Industries Represented 

Known Transaction Value . Sector ... ' 2018 Transactions ., - ($ million) ... ·~ ...-----· . =·-

Information Technology 13 727 

Industrials 11 8665 

Health Care 11 1600 

Financials 8 190 

Real Estate 8 1238 

Consumer Discretionary 7 1803 

Unknown 5 91 

Enerqy 2 -

Utilities 1 100 

Total 66 14414 

2. National Security Effects of the Subject M&A Transactions 

Each of the 66 transactions was either formally reviewed by CFIUS pursuant to a voluntary 

notified transaction or pursuant to procedures followed by CFIUS and its member agencies 

regarding non-notified transactions. According to these procedures, CFIUS agencies monitor 

M&A activity and identify those transactions that have not been voluntarily notified to CFIUS, but 

which may present national security considerations. 

If CFIUS believes that a non-notified transaction may raise national security considerations and 

may also be a covered transaction, CFIUS contacts the parties and requests additional 

information regarding the transaction. If CFIUS determines, after evaluating this additional 

information, that the transaction is covered and that it may raise national security 

considerations, CFIUS requests the parties file a notice. In most instances in which CFIUS has 

requested additional information regarding a transaction, the parties responded by filing a 

voluntary notice. However, should the parties decide they will not file a notice after CFIUS 

requests they do so, any CFIUS agency may initiate a review of the transaction. 

39 

i1 

~ 
APPENDIX10 

A. Definition of "Critical Technologies" 

The Regulations Pertaining to Mergers, Acquisitions, and Takeovers by Foreign Persons (the 

"CFIUS regulations"), published in the Federal Register on November 21, 2008, and codified at 

31 C.F.R. part 800, defines "critical technologies" with reference to U.S. export control 

regulations, as they were determined to be the most reliable and accurate means of identifying 

critical technologies. 

"§ 800.209 Critical technologies. 

The term critical technologies means: 

(a) Defense articles or defense services covered by the United States Munitions List (USML), 

which is set forth in the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) (22 C.F.R. parts 

120-130); 

(b) Those items specified on the Commerce Control List (CCL) set forth in Supplement 

No. 1 to part 774 of the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) (15 C.F.R. parts 730-774) 

that are controlled pursuant to multilateral regimes (i.e., for reasons of national security, 

chemical and biological weapons proliferation, nuclear nonproliferation, or missile 

technology), as well as those that are controlled for reasons of regional stability or 

surreptitious listening; 

(c) Specially designed and prepared nuclear equipment, parts and components, materials, 

software, and technology specified in the Assistance to Foreign Atomic Energy Activities 

regulations (1 0 C.F. R. part 810), and nuclear facilities, equipment, and material specified in 

the Export and Import of Nuclear Equipment and Materials regulations (10 C.F .R. part 11 0); 

and 

(d) Select agents and toxins specified in the Select Agents and Toxins regulations (7 C.F.R. 

part 331, 9 C.F.R. part 121, and 42 C.F.R. part 73)." 

B. (U) Methodology and Data Sources Used to Assess Foreign Acquisitions of U.S. 

Critical Technology Companies 

The definition of critical technologies contained in section 800.209 is specific to the CFIUS 

regulations. Therefore, for purposes of Section II of this Annual Report, CFIUS agencies 

responsible for administering U.S. export control regulations analyzed all covered transactions 

filed with CFIUS in 2018, and their agency's own internal records to identify those U.S. critical 

technology companies that were acquired by, or received significant investments from, foreign 

investors in 2018. Because each export control regulation applies to a specific type of critical 

10 This section describes CFIUS policies before the 2018 passage of FIRRMA, which introduced "emerging and foundational 

technologies controlled pursuant to section 1758 of the Export Control Reform Act of 2018" as an additional critical technology 

category. Final lists of emerging and foundational technologies have not been released; therefore, the Committee did not include 

this category in its assessment of transactions in 2018 after FIRRMA's implementation. The Committee anticipates fully including 

this category in its assessment for the Annual Report for CY2020. 

40 
technology, the amount of information that could be analyzed for Section II of this Annual Report 

was limited. 

31 C.F.R. § 800.209(a): This paragraph pertains to defense articles or defense services 

covered by the United States Munitions List (USML), which is set forth in the International 

Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) (22 C.F.R. parts 120-130). 

Under the provisions of the ITAR, the Department of State regulates robust registration, 

licensing, and compliance processes for any person, whether U.S. or foreign, involved in the 

export or temporary import of a defense article or defense service controlled by the ITAR. This 

approach enabled the Department of State to identify covered transactions in 2018 involving 

U.S. critical technology companies that produce defense articles or services covered under the 

ITAR. 

31 C.F.R. § 800.209(b): This paragraph pertains to those items specified on the Department 

of Commerce's Control List (CCL), which is set forth in Supplement No. 1 to part 774 of the 

Export Administration Regulations (EAR) (15 C.F.R. parts 730-774). The items on the CCL 

are controlled pursuant to multilateral regimes (i.e., for reasons of national security, chemical 

and biological weapons proliferation, nuclear nonproliferation, or missile technology) as well 

as for reasons of regional stability or surreptitious listening. 

Firms producing items under the regulations specified in paragraph of 31 C.F.R. 

§ 800.209 are not-required to register with the Department of Commerce, but, in many cases, 

must obtain a license from the Department of Commerce to export those items (including 

"deemed exports" to foreign nationals in the United States.) To identify acquisitions of 

companies producing items that fall under this part of the definition, the Department of 

Commerce analyzed all covered transactions filed with CFIUS in 2018 and its internal agency 

records of export license applications and commodity classification requests. 

31 CFR § 800.209{c): This paragraph pertains to specially designed and prepared nuclear 

equipment, parts and components, materials, software, and technology specified in the 

Assistance to Foreign Atomic Energy Activities regulations (10 C.F.R. part 810), and nuclear 

facilities, equipment, and material specified in the Export and Import of Nuclear Equipment 

and Materials regulations (10 C.F.R. part 110). 

The Department of Energy used a similar approach to that adopted by the Department of 

Commerce. This entailed comparing a list of all covered transactions filed with CFIUS in 2018 

against export authorizations issued under 10 C.F.R. part 810 and export license requests 

issued by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission under 10 C.F.R. part 110. 

31 C.F.R. § 800.209(d): This paragraph pertains to select agents and toxins specified in the 

Select Agents and Toxins regulations (7 C.F.R. part 331, 9 CFR 

part 121, and 42 C.F.R. part 73). 

The agents and toxins specified in this paragraph are generally subject to export controls 

administered by the Department of Commerce. Accordingly, the methodology used by the 

Department of Commerce would be the same as that described above. 

41 
C. Analyzing the Acquisitions of U.S. Critical Technology Companies 

CFIUS agencies addressed parts (i) and (ii) of section 721 (m)(3) of the Defense Production Act 

of 1950, as amended, by doing the following. 

Analyzing the pattern of M&A of U.S. critical technology companies during 2018, while also 

considering transactions in prior years, as appropriate. 

o CFIUS agencies concentrated on foreign direct investment through M&A of 

companies involved in all critical technologies, regardless of industry. 

o CFIUS agencies did not attempt to evaluate issues relating to other avenues of 

foreign access to U.S. critical technologies, such as licensing, contracting, or other 

arrangements that are not M&A transactions. 

Assessing illicit attempts by government intelligence services of major economic competitors to 

obtain military and dual-use critical technologies. 

o CFIUS agencies did not attempt to evaluate foreign espionage in areas other than 

dual-use, military, or other U.S. critical technologies, or against companies not 

headquartered in the United States. 

o In addition, CFIUS agencies reviewed available information about other countries 

that have historically sought information on critical technologies through the use of 

those countries' intelligence services. 

D. Defining "Coordinated Strategy" for Purposes of Section II of this Annual Report 

CFIUS agencies continue to use the following definition of "coordinated strategy." 

A plan of action reflected in directed efforts developed and implemented by a foreign 

government, in association with one or more foreign companies, to acquire U.S. companies with 

critical technologies. The efforts of a single company in pursuit of business goals, absent 

indications of specific government direction, were not considered to be a coordinated strategy. 

Individual company strategies encompass such business goals as: entry into the U.S. market; 

increased market share, increased sales, access to new technologies, and diversification out of 

mature industries. 

42 

o Examples of suspect behaviors that could be evidence of a coordinated strategy 

include: 

A pattern of actual or attempted acquisitions of U.S. firms by foreign entities; 

Evidence that specific completed or attempted acquisitions of companies with 

critical technologies had been ordered by foreign governments or foreign 

government-controlled firms; or 

The provision of narrowly targeted incentives by foreign governments or 

foreign-controlled firms (e.g., grants, concessionary loans, or tax breaks), 
especially those that appear to market observers to be disproportionately 

generous, to acquire U.S. firms with critical technologies. 

E. Participating Agencies and Entities - Section II 

Department of Commerce 

• Bureau of Industry and Security 

• International Trade Administration 

• National Telecommunications and Information Administration 

Department of Energy 

Department of State 

• Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs 

• Bureau of Political-Military Affairs 

• Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation 

Department of the Treasury 

Intelligence Community Elements 

• Office of the Director of National Intelligence, National Intelligence Council 

• Air Force Office of Special Investigations 

• Army Counterintelligence Center 

• Central Intelligence Agency 

• Defense Intelligence Agency 

• Federal Bureau of Investigation, National Security Branch 

• Department of Energy, Office of Intelligence and Counterintelligence 

• Department of Homeland Security, Office of Intelligence and Analysis 

• Department of State, Bureau of Intelligence and Research 

• Department of the Treasury, Office of Intelligence and Analysis 

• Marine Corps Intelligence Activity 

• Office of the National Counterintelligence Executive, Community Acquisition Risk Section 

• National Counterterrorism Center 

• National Geospatial-lntelligence Agency 

• National Security Agency 

• Naval Intelligence (Office of Naval Intelligence and Naval Criminal Investigative Service) 

Executive Office of the President 

• Council of Economic Advisors 

• National Security Council 

• Office of Science and Technology Policy 

43 
This page intentionally left blank. 

44