The controversy has intensified in the past year, as Chinese companies have swept into Australia, Canada and other countries to buy up distressed energy companies and mines. Chinese buyers have been especially active in Australia, proposing more than $8 billion in resource investments since the beginning of last year.
In June, China Minmetals Non-Ferrous Metals Co. bought most of the assets of Oz Minerals Ltd., a Melbourne-based producer of copper and other minerals, for $1.4 billion.Sinosteel Corp. snatched up iron-ore company Midwest Corp. In a hostile takeover.Yanzhou Coal Mining Co. is trying to take over Australian coal producer Felix Resources Ltd. For $3 billion, and China Non-Ferrous Metal Mining Group is angling for a controlling stake in Lynas Corp., an Australian producer of "rare earth minerals" used to make hybrid-car batteries and other goods
4) An investment may impact on Australian Government revenue or other policies. Given that ResourceCo will pay all legally mandated taxes, the major provisions of this part of the law will not be a difficulty for ResourceCo. However, this provision of the law also includes a provision that the federal government can bar foreign investment if such an investment might produce environmental damage. This would certainly be a concern for FIRB given the extremely poor record that Chinese mining companies have in China. The Chinese government in 2009 began to consider fining companies that violated overseas environmental regulations where they were investing. If such laws were to pass in China, it would make it easier for China to invest in Australian mining.
5) An investment may impact on Australia's national security. This provision of the law would allow the government to bar a foreign investment if such an investment "might affect Australia's ability to protect its strategic and security interests." It is difficult to foresee how much of a barrier to the investment the proximity of the military installation might be, but it would certainly be a concern.
6. An investment may impact on the operations and directions of an Australian business, as well as its contribution to the Australian economy and broader community. This seems unlikely to put up any barriers for ResourceCo.
Connections Between ResourceCo and Chinese Government
Any investment in Australian mining by ResourceCo would be assessed by the Foreign Investment Relations Board under its...
The Board (FIRB) makes recommendations to the Government under its foreign investment policy.
Key to understanding the possibilities for ResourceCo to in vest in Australian Ore Ltd. are a number of provisions and definitions in the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act 1975. This act would probably define ResourceCO as a foreign government investor. Such as investor is defined as:
An entity is a foreign government investor if:
the entity is:
a body politic of a foreign country; or (ii)
a body politic of part of a foreign country; or (iii)
a part of a body politic mentioned in subparagraph (i) or (ii); or (b)
the entity is controlled by an entity mentioned in paragraph (a); or (c)
an entity mentioned in paragraph (a) holds an interest in the entity that satisfies the conditions specified in the regulations.
It is arguable that ResourceCo is a private corporate investor rather that a foreign corporate investor. However, for the purpose of exploring the possibility of investment it is better to assume the highest possible barrier to investment and determine if this would be acceptable.
Conclusions and Recommendations
There are a number of reasons that ResourceCo should consider investing in Australian Ore Ltd. China has a high demand for both nickel and iron, both especially for iron since this is the major element used in steel. Certainly ResourceCo would have no dearth of customers in China for iron. Given the lowered costs of investment in an Australian mining company as the world remains in a recession, ResourceCo could realize a substantial profit.
However, there are enough uncertainties and potential barriers to investment in this company that ResourceCo should certainly not rush into any investment. Such an investment is most likely to be approved by Australian government officials if Chinese investors were to move slowly and align themselves with locally powerful political operatives. There are legitimate reasons why Australian officials might prohibit such an investment or at least make it highly complicated and the company should carefully weigh these factors before proceeding with any investment.
Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, ?
Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, ?
China's Investment in Australia, ?
China's Investment in Australia, ?
These specifications are described both in FATA and by FIRB.
FIRB mission statement, ?
The text of the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act 1975 is available at http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/faata1975355/?
The documents we provide are to be used as a sample, template, outline, guideline in helping you write your own paper, not to be used for academic credit. All users must abide by our "Student Honor Code" or you will be restricted access to our website.
In 2006, production workers, earned $21.40 an hour in oil and gas extraction, $22.08 an hour in coal mining, $22.39 an hour in metal ore mining, and $18.74 an hour in nonmetallic minerals mining, compared to the private industry average of $16.76 an hour Figure 1 and Figure 2 below show the 'Average Earnings of Non-Supervisory Workers in 2006 and Median Hourly Mining of the Largest Occupations in Mining, May
There is also a lack of healthcare facilities capable of doing the screenings in many small, rural Kentucky communities, which is another barrier for many miners. Health professionals need to become more involved in information and screening information. They need to stress the importance of early screening and regular screening, and they need to create educational resources for the miners, so they can take steps to avoid black lung. Health
" President Truman did not deal with the UMWA because he had a love for labor, either. He feared that a prolonged strike would hurt a nation recovering from World War II, and so, he signed the fund into action with the union president. The UMWA was crucial in settling the strike and getting benefits for the miners and at the heart of the organization was its president, John L. Lewis. Lewis
In other words, the finances of a deficit country were constrained because they did not have enough gold to go around, while a country with a surplus did not face those issues. In addition, usually the weight of modification falls on these weaker countries, which is another flaw in the gold standard. Because the weaker countries could not react quickly enough to economic problems, they had less capital to
Another historian notes, "Economically, baby boomers experienced unprecedented national affluence throughout their childhood. During the 1950s and 1960s, the U.S. economy expanded greatly, raising the living standards of most American families" (Clydesdale 606). Religion played less of a role in society by the 1990s, as church attendance and membership began to decline in the 60s. Historian Clydesdale continues, "When the cultural challenges of the 1960's disestablished this religious ethos,
" The prominence of this type of mining method is underlined by a study prepared for the Governor of West Virginia which states that, "Mountaintop removal methods are essential to maintain the state's present level of coal production. The lower production costs of MTR have contributed significantly to maintaining West Virginia as a competitive coal producer." 3. Environmental impact of coal mining in the Appalachians. 3.1. Underground mining The earliest coal mining in Appalachia consisted