Sept / Oct 2003


View Online
 
Username (your email
 address / no _ character) 
and password (xiblb37)

IBLB
International Business Law Bulletin
Center for International Legal Studies, P.O. Box 19, A5033 Salzburg, Austria
Tel: 43662 835399, Austria Fax 43662 835171, US Fax 1509 3560077, Email / Web
In cooperation with LexUniversal.com / Subscribers This Issue:
5,742

Unfair Competition
in the Alps
Litigating in an International Arena
International Secured Transactions
Printer Friendly Page
View Archives
You have received this
newsletter because you
are a registered
subscriber. To access
online newsletter
archives,
click, enter user
name / password.
Would you like to publish an article? Click here and  propose a topic.
The links above and for email and web sites function only if viewed while online. The "continue"  and "author and firm" links will function while in offline mode.

The opinions expressed
in the International
Business Law Bulletin are those of the authors and do not reflect the policies of the Center for
International Legal Studies. Nor does the Center for International Legal Studies assume responsibility for the accuracy or the reliability of the information provided here.
 

/ investments

Heiko A. Giermann 
Huth Dietrich Hahn
Hamburg, Germany

Contact Information and Profiles

»» The security of financial investments is of utmost importance for investors. Recent financial turmoil and bank crashes in South America have demonstrated the consequences investors face in the event of bank insolvencies.

The German system of deposit-guarantee schemes is comprised of a statutory scheme and supplementary private schemes established by banking associations. The German statutory scheme under the Federal Act on Deposit Guarantee and Investor Compensation (Einlagensicherungs- und Anlegerentschädigungsgesetz - ESAEG), which entered into force on 1 August 1998, is based on European Union (EU) legislation.

EU Directive 94/19/EC on deposit-guarantee schemes of 30 May 1994 and EU Directive 97/9/EC on investor-compensation schemes of 3 March 1997 resulted in some standardization in terms of the minimum amount of protection (ECU 20,000) and a requirement for deposits with branches (but not subsidiaries) of EU banks to be covered by the home country scheme. Consequently, branches of EU banks will normally be exempted from host-country arrangements, although supplementary cover may be available if the guarantee in the home country provides less cover ("topping-up"). Conversely, for competitive reasons, protection by the home country scheme is limited to the ceiling of the host country scheme if the former provides more cover.

In Germany the statutory scheme under the ESAEG is supplemented by four independent private schemes established by the Bundesverband deutscher Banken (BdB), representing private commercial banks, the Verband Öffentlicher Banken in Deutschland (VÖB), representing central giro institutions, the Bundesverband der Volksbanken und Raiffeisenbanken (BVR), representing credit cooperatives, and the Sparkassenorganisation, representing savings banks.

Membership in the VÖB and BdB schemes is voluntary. For commercial banks, it will usually be necessary on competitive grounds to become a member of the BdB scheme. Participation in the schemes of the savings and cooperative banking associations is, in principle, voluntary.

CONTINUE . . .

/ MERGERS

Laura Otis
Borenius & Kemppinen Ltd.
Helsinki, Finland

Contact Information and Profiles

»» Under a United States law known as the Exon-Florio Amendment, the President has broad authority to block a proposed merger, acquisition, or takeover of a United States business by a foreign entity if the transaction might threaten United States national security.

Past administrations have applied the Exon-Florio Amendment with restraint, but heightened national security concerns could lead to a more aggressive application of the statute, creating a significant obstacle for international investors pursuing merger and acquisition opportunities in the United States.

The Exon-Florio Amendment is administered by an inter-agency group called the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), which is chaired by a representative from the Treasury Department and includes representatives from the Departments of Defense, Commerce, and State, the United States Trade Representative, and other federal agencies.

In an uninterrupted process, CFIUS and the President have up to 90 calendar days to review, investigate, and determine whether to temporarily suspend, block, or demand restructuring of a transaction. The review process involves several steps.

When CFIUS receives notice of a proposed acquisition, it conducts an initial 30-day review of the transaction to determine whether there are any significant national security concerns warranting a full-scale investigation. If deemed necessary, CFIUS conducts a 45-day full-scale investigation, culminating in a recommendation to the President either to block or authorize the transaction. The President has 15 days from the end of the investigation to make the ultimate decision on what action to take.

Critics have long argued that the review process is susceptible to abuse and politicization. In practice, however, CFIUS has avoided full-scale investigations and presidential determinations and has generally focused on clear national security threats associated with the transfer of sensitive, defense-related information, and technologies to military adversaries. 

CONTINUE . . .


INVESTMENTS (Continued)

All independent compensation schemes are based on funds which are established by regular subscriptions of the member institutions. However, there are two different philosophies behind the schemes. On the one hand, the funds of the BdB and VÖB compensate investors after the insolvency of a member institution. On the other, the schemes of the BVR and the savings banks protect their member institutions against insolvency through financial support, thereby safeguarding the deposits of investors.

Whereas most EU member state branches of institutions incorporated in other EU countries are covered by their home state schemes, the scheme for commercial banks (BdB) also provides for the protection of foreign depositors of member banks operating abroad, wherever located.

Each of the schemes is limited to protecting non-bank deposits, with somewhat different definitions of precisely what that means. Deposits are protected irrespective of currency. Under the statutory scheme, the maximum compensation payable in the event of bank insolvency is 90 per cent of the aggregate deposits held by a depositor, subject to a maximum of EUR 20,000.

For compensation purposes, the entire balance held in the depositor's name is aggregated in order to calculate the funds owed to the individual depositor by the institution. Joint account balances are apportioned equally between each account holder and aggregated with other balances held by that particular account holder. From the aggregate balance of all its accounts and joint accounts, the individual depositor's debts owed to the institution are deducted in order to calculate the eventual compensation payment to that depositor.

Under the statutory scheme, the compensation payment process is initiated by the Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht (BAFin) as the federal supervisory agency determining that a credit institution is unable to repay deposits due to its financial condition.

Since the statutory scheme may only provide for basic compensation, it is evident that the independent schemes of the banking associations are of great importance. The largest scheme is that of the association of commercial banks (BdB), representing approximately 250 institutions. The scheme of the BdB comes close to providing full protection to non-bank deposits, with the maximum compensation for each depositor being defined as "30 per cent of the liable funds (Kernkapital), plus 25 per cent of the general equity capital (sonstiges haftendes Eigenkapital)" of the preceding fiscal year.

Consequently, the current maximum compensation for the largest German commercial bank, Deutsche Bank AG, is EUR 6,736,830,000, for the largest private commercial bank, Bankhaus Sal. Oppenheim jr. & Cie., it is EUR 210,749,000.

Contact the Author


MERGERS (Continued)

Only one transaction has been formally blocked under the Exon-Florio Amendment, and it involved the proposed acquisition of a United States aircraft component manufacturer by a Chinese company which reportedly had performed intelligence work for the Chinese government inside the United States.

In the aftermath of 11 September, with the United States engaged in a war against terrorism, the Bush administration may use the Exon-Florio Amendment to assess a broader range of transactions, well beyond those concerning the traditional defense sector.

The statute could, for example, be routinely applied to foreign acquisitions of United States industries and infrastructure considered vulnerable to terrorist attacks, such as water systems and reservoirs, energy production plants, information technology networks, transportation networks, and financial markets and services. The statute also could be used to prevent foreign entities or foreign individuals from gaining control over industries or products which could be used as weapons in a terrorist attack, or as weapons of mass destruction.

For this reason, foreign acquisitions of United States companies that are involved in the production of certain chemicals and/or biological agents or engaged in medical or pharmaceutical research and development could become more difficult.

The President's authority to block transactions is subject to certain legal limitations. For example, international treaties generally prohibit the United States government from erecting and maintaining barriers to international investments. Moreover, the Exon-Florio Amendment contains requirements limiting the President's authority.

Under the statute, the President may not act to prevent a transaction unless there is "credible evidence" that the foreign controlling entity or individual might threaten national security. The statute also requires a finding that no other United States law is available which adequately protects the national security interest in question.

Still, these limitations do not provide much comfort to international investors. CFIUS and the President retain a high degree of discretion to determine whether a transaction presents a threat to "national security", a term which was purposefully left undefined in the Exon-Florio Amendment and thus is open to broad interpretations. Even more troubling is that the decisions are not subject to judicial review or oversight. 

Contact the Author


CONTACT INFORMATION AND PROFILES

Dr. Heiko A. Giermann, LL.M. -  is an associate with Huth Dietrich Hahn in Hamburg, Germany specializing in corporate law, mergers and acquisitions, private international, and international procedural law. He received his Masters of Law in 1998 from McGill University, Montreal, his Dr. iur. in 2000 from University of Hamburg, and was admitted to the German Bar in 2002. Dr. Giermann is a member of the Canadian German Lawyers‘ Association and the Association of German Navy Officers, and has published numerous manuscripts.

Huth Dietrich Hahn, Rechtsanwälte, Warburgstrasse 50, 20354 Hamburg, Germany, Tel (+49) 40 41 52 50, Fax (49) 40 41 52 51 11, Email / Web. Huth Dietrich Hahn, established in 1990, is a large law firm which handles complex cases such as corporate and stock market transactions, and provides individualized, competent legal advice. Its international orientation, underscored by extensive experience in foreign countries, has lead to associations with several leading, foreign law firms, and to the opportunity of offering its services in many other parts of the world.

Laura Otis - Laura Otis received her Juris Doctor degree from American University’s Washington College of Law in 1997, and her Bachelor of Science degree from Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service in 1992. In 1993 - 1994, Ms Otis was a Fulbright Scholar to Finland. Ms Otis is admitted to the Bars of Washington DC and Maryland and is a member of the Federal Communications Bar Association. Her practice areas include broadcast and wireless telecommunications regulation and licensing, cross-border mergers and acquisitions, and international business matters. Prior to joining Attorneys at law Borenius & Kemppinen Ltd in 2001, Ms Otis practiced communications law in Washington DC for Rosenman & Colin LLP, representing a broad range of clients connected to the media and communications industries.

Borenius & Kemppinen (B&K), Yrjönkatu 13 A, FI-00120 Helsinki, Finland, Tel. +358 9 615 333, Fax +358 9 615 33 499,  Email/Web. B&K, established in 1911, is one of the leading commercial law firms in Finland providing its clients with comprehensive business law services in Finland and also in the Baltic region. B&K offers its domestic and international clients expert advice on matters relating to business and corporate law, complex legal issues regarding intellectual property law, antitrust law and merger control rules, and provide advice in highly specialized fields of IP/IT. The firm is closely involved in major projects undertaken by various government and municipal bodies. Its consultative role ranges from advising on transactions relating to energy production, to other privately funded public projects. B&K has a thorough understanding of the new industries and developments in the general business environment. The firm invests in continuous education and specialization of its lawyers and strives to understand the business and future goals of its clients.