China Restricting Entry by U.S. Firms
Foreign companies are finding the atmosphere in China chilly -- and it’s only going to get worse.
Doing business in China will keep getting harder for foreign companies. Beijing is leveraging its huge government purchasing power to encourage homegrown firms to develop import substitutes, with the aim of creating national champions to compete against multinationals both in China and worldwide.
“Japanese, European and American companies … used to think that China welcomes foreign technology, welcomes our presence to help develop,” says Frank Vargo, vice president for international economic affairs at the National Association of Manufacturers. “Increasingly, they don’t feel that way anymore. They feel they are being discriminated against, being shut out of certain market segments.”
A growing number of procurement rules from central government ministries insist that foreign firms hand over sensitive technology to Chinese partners or government regulators. Those that comply run the risk of having their intellectual property compromised and used to compete against them. Companies that refuse risk the loss not only of sales to Beijing but also to state owned enterprises, which still make up one-third of the economy, as well as to provincial and local governments.
Sign up for Kiplinger’s Free E-Newsletters
Profit and prosper with the best of expert advice on investing, taxes, retirement, personal finance and more - straight to your e-mail.
Profit and prosper with the best of expert advice - straight to your e-mail.
One rule that has serious potential to disrupt U.S. business in China is Beijing’s National Indigenous Innovation Product Accreditation Work for 2010. The regulation restricts government procurement in six key areas of high technology: computing and application hardware, software, telecommunications equipment, modern office equipment, renewable energy technology and energy saving products. That list is certain to expand to cover other industries.
As originally framed in November, the rule mandated that foreign manufacturers seeking to do business in China would have to transfer their patents and trademarks to Chinese firms. Beijing softened the language in response to vigorous protests by the U.S., Japan and the European Union. But even before the rule is implemented, it is having a chilling effect. According to an April 2010 survey conducted by the American Chamber of Commerce in China, 28% of U.S. companies said the rule has already cost them business. More than 40% said they expect to suffer, a number that jumped to 57% for companies in the six targeted high-tech sectors.
A related rule, announced in December, encourages Chinese firms to develop import substitutes for heavy equipment, the demand for which has escalated along with China’s growing infrastructure needs. As a prime example, Beijing singles out Caterpillar’s diesel engines for high efficiency electric drills.
Adding to the problem is that China insists firms meet its unique technical standards, distinct from internationally recognized ones, before they can sell certain products to government agencies. One recent variation of this affects encryption technology used in telecommunications and information technology. It will require makers of network routers, firewall software and smart cards to hand over source codes, encryption algorithms and design specifications to the government controlled testing labs that dole out certification. This transfer of intellectual property poses a high theft risk.
Washington’s options are limited because China has yet to sign the World Trade Organization’s (WTO) Government Procurement Agreement. It pledged to do so when it joined the WTO but did not even begin talks on the subject until December 2007. The two-plus years of negotiations since have been disappointing, with Beijing unwilling to provide the same level of access as do current parties to the pact.
Unless China does sign, the only tool the U.S. has at its disposal is diplomacy. It will continue to argue that Beijing’s policies will discourage the sharing of valuable research, stifling Chinese innovation rather than stimulating it. So far, though, that approach isn’t working. Beijing still resents Washington’s decision to block its participation in U.S. government procurement of iron and steel products under the Buy American rules of last year’s stimulus.
The bottom line is that U.S. companies will damp down hopes for the potential of the Chinese market. They won’t pull out precipitously or entirely. The sheer size of the market makes it impossible to ignore. U.S. direct investment rose to $45 billion in 2008, the last year for which figures are available. And income of U.S. affiliates in China hit $6.9 billion in 2009, a hundredfold increase from 15 years earlier. China still falls short of other leading U.S. investment destinations -- the Netherlands, Ireland, Switzerland, the U.K. and Canada. But the potential for growth in China is unmatched, and rivals Brazil, India and Russia offer even less hospitable business climates.
Still, look for U.S. firms to grow more wary of new investments in China. Much as they may regret the lost business, they know they’ll regret it even more if the trade secrets they share today create unbeatable competitors tomorrow.
To continue reading this article
please register for free
This is different from signing in to your print subscription
Why am I seeing this? Find out more here
-
What You Can Learn from Blue Zones
Many of the tactics used to increase longevity in "blue zones" are attainable, and as people age longer, habits and financial planning need to adapt accordingly.
By Quincy Williamson Published
-
TikTok Ban Passes Ahead of Meta Earnings: What To Know
Lawmakers voted in favor of banning social media platform TikTok just ahead of rival Meta Platforms' earnings report.
By Joey Solitro Published
-
The Robots Are Coming... But Not For a While
The Kiplinger Letter There’s excitement in the tech sector over the potential of humanoid robots, but widespread adoption is likely to be years away.
By John Miley Published
-
Farmers Face Another Tough Year As Costs Continue to Climb: The Kiplinger Letter
The Kiplinger Letter Farm income is expected to decline for a second year, while costs continue to up-end farm profitability.
By Matthew Housiaux Published
-
H-1B Work Visa Rules Get a Revamp
The Kiplinger Letter H-1B visas allow employers to hire high-skilled foreign workers. Regulators have finalized new rules for this visa program following last fall's proposal.
By Matthew Housiaux Published
-
Woes Continue for Banking Sector: The Kiplinger Letter
The Kiplinger Letter Regional bank stocks were hammered recently after news of New York Community Bank’s big fourth-quarter loss.
By Rodrigo Sermeño Published
-
Are College Athletes Employees of Their Schools?: The Kiplinger Letter
The Kiplinger Letter A recent ruling has ramifications for labor relations and the unionization of student athletes.
By Sean Lengell Published
-
Salton Sea Clean Energy and Lithium Project Gets Approval: The Kiplinger Letter
The Kiplinger Letter California's Salton Sea is due to see the construction of a new lithium extraction and geothermal clean energy power plant.
By Matthew Housiaux Published
-
More Woes for Anheuser-Busch as a Strike Looms: The Kiplinger Letter
The Kiplinger Letter Drinkers of Anheuser-Busch beers may want to stock up soon. A looming strike threatens to shutter its U.S. breweries later this month.
By Sean Lengell Published
-
The Auto Industry Outlook for 2024
The Kiplinger Letter Here's what to expect in the auto industry this year. If you’re in the market for a car it won’t be quite as daunting as it was during the pandemic and after.
By David Payne Published