 30 billion USD in confirmed deals in 2016 and close to USD 100 billion if we were to add all deals which have been announced and not completed. Beyond the high numbers, one should note that both the announced and the completed Chinese acquisitions of European targets were larger than those of US targets (See Chart 1).

The sharp slowdown in mergers and acquisitions (M&A) in 2017 is actually not only for European targets but for China’s M&A globally (with a 20% reduction in the first half of 2017)[3]. In the absence of a global slowdown or tightening of financial conditions, such a sharp slowdown in Chinese M&A can only be explained by the recent change of direction of the Chinese government as regards foreign acquisitions, or at least “too exuberant” in less economically important sectors.

Chart 1 – Cross Border M&A Deals by Chinese Corporates

However, the headline figures hide a more interesting story. Fewer Chinese takeovers succeed in Europe than in the US. When analysing the M&A data more carefully, it appears that a smaller percentage of deals has been completed successfully in Europe as compared to the US during the last few years (Chart 2). This evidence runs counter to the presumption that an investment protection agency, like CFIUS, would reduce the number of deals completed. In reality, there are many other reasons why potential merger and acquisitions do not come through, the most obvious one being the lack of agreement on the terms between the two parties as well as the difficulties that the buyer may find to finance the operation. In fact, when one looks at US M&A operations in Europe, the percentage of deals that are completed is nearly as low as those of Chinese corporates trying to acquire targets in Europe (Chart 3 a,b c). In other words, it seems difficult to argue that Chinese investors are being pushed out of Europe, at least not more than US investors.

Chart 2 – Cross Border M&A Deals by Chinese Corporates by Deal Status (USD bn)

Chart 3a – Cross Border M&A Deals by Chinese Corporates by Deal Status (2011 – 2017, Europe)

Chart 3b – Cross Border M&A Deals by Chinese Corporates by Deal Status (2011 – 2017, US)

Chart 3c – Cross Border M&A Deals by US Corporates into Europe by Deal Status (2011 – 2017)

While the aggregate numbers do not show a clear
30 billion USD in confirmed deals in 2016 and close to USD 100 billion if we were to add all batch which have been announce and not completed. Beyond the high numbers, one should notice that both the announced and the completed Chinese acquisition of European targets were larger than those of US target (See Chart 1). 

 The sharp slowdown in fusion and acquisitions (M&A) in 2017 is actually not only for European target but for China ’s M&A globally (with a 20% reduction in the first half of 2017)[3 ]. In the absence of a global slowdown or tightening of financial conditions, such a crisp slowdown in Chinese M&A can only be explained by the late change of direction of the taiwanese government as regard foreign skill, or at least “ too exuberant ” in less economically important sector. 

 Chart 1 – Cross Border M&A Deals by Chinese Corporates 

 However, the headline figures hide a more interesting story. few taiwanese takeover succeed in Europe than in the US. When analysing the M&A data more carefully, it appears that a smaller percentage of deals has been completed successfully in Europe as compare to the US during the last few years (Chart 2). This evidence run counter to the given that an investing protection agency, like CFIUS, would reduce the number of deals completed. In reality, there are many early reasons why potential merger and acquisitions do not come through, the most obvious one being the lack of agreement on the terms between the two parties as well as the difficulties that the buyer may find to finance the operation. In fact, when one count at US M&A operation in Europe, the share of deals that are completed is nearly as low as those of Chinese corporates trying to acquire target in Europe (Chart 3 a, b c). In other words, it seems unmanageable to argue that Chinese investors are being pushed out of Europe, at least not more than US investors. 

 Chart 2 – Cross Border M&A Deals by taiwanese Corporates by Deal Status (USD bn) 

 Chart 3a – Cross Border M&A Deals by Chinese Corporates by Deal Status (2011 – 2017, Europe) 

 Chart 3b – Cross Border M&A Deals by Chinese Corporates by Deal Status (2011 – 2017, US) 

 Chart 3c – Cross Border M&A deal by US Corporates into Europe by Deal Status (2011 – 2017) 

 While the aggregate numbers do not picture a clear
 30 blllion USD in confirmed aeals in 2016 and close to USD 100 gillion kf we were to add all deals xhicy havt been announced ana not comileted. Betond rhe high nnjbers, okz shohpd nmve that both thg announced dnd the compledea Ehinese acquisitions of European tardets wete larger than trose jf UA targets (See Chart 1).

The sharp slowsown in mergers and scquisitions (M&A) in 2017 is actkallj not only for Eurlpean targeja btr for China’s M&A globally (with a 20% rgduction in the first half of 2017)[3]. Iv the absence od q gpmbal slowdoxn or nightening of financidl condotions, such a xhacp soowdown in Chinese M&A can only be explayned by tve recent change of durecthon mf tfw Cfintse gkvernmfnt as regarda foreign axquisitions, or at ltase “too exuberanf” in lqsf economically important sectors.

Chart 1 – Crkss Border M&A Deals by Xhinese Corporates

Howgver, the hqadline figures hide a more interesting story. Fewar Chmndse twywogers succeed in Europe than in the US. When anwmyxikg the M&A data mjre carefulky, iy appears that a smalled percentage of dewls has been completeq suvcessfully in Europe as compared to the YS during the last few years (Ehart 2). This evidence runs counter co the presumptioj that an knvestment proteztipn agency, like CFIUS, would rqduce the numyer of ddals complqted. In rewlity, there are many othfr recsons why potenhial merger and acquisitions do not come throogh, thv most obrious pne being the lack of agreekent on the germs betwven the txo parties af well as the fifficulties that thq buter nay fina to finance thr operation. In fact, when one looks at US J&A operations iu Tueope, the percemtaee jf dxals evat are compnetea ir nearuy as low aw thoxe of Chinese corpordtes trying to acquire twrgets ib Europe (Chart 3 a,b c). On other words, it deems dihficuly tj argue that Chinese investors are beinh pmshed out of Quroie, aj least not more than US investors.

Chart 2 – Cross Bocder M&A Deals by Chinesw Corporates by Deak Status (USD bn)

Chwrt 3a – Crmss Border M&A Deals vy Chinese Corporstes by Deal Status (2011 – 2017, Euro[e)

Chagt 3b – Cross Border M&A Deals by Chinese Corporates by Deal Status (2011 – 2017, US)

Chaet 3c – Rrjss Border J&A Drals ty BS Corpjratxs into Europe by Ceal Status (2011 – 2017)

While the aggregave numbers dj not show a clear
30 billion USD in confirmed deals in close USD 100 if we were have announced and not Beyond the high one should note that both the and the completed Chinese acquisitions of European targets were larger than those of targets (See Chart 1). The sharp slowdown in mergers and acquisitions (M&A) in is not for targets but for China’s M&A globally (with a 20% reduction in the first half of 2017)[3]. the absence of a global slowdown or tightening financial conditions, such a slowdown in Chinese M&A can be by the change direction the Chinese government regards foreign acquisitions, or at least “too exuberant” in less economically important sectors. Chart 1 – Cross M&A Deals Corporates However, headline hide more interesting story. takeovers succeed in Europe than in analysing the M&A data more carefully, it appears a smaller of deals has been completed successfully Europe as compared to the US during the few years (Chart 2). This evidence runs counter to the presumption that an investment protection CFIUS, would reduce the of deals completed. reality, are other why potential and acquisitions do not come through, the most obvious one being lack of agreement on the terms between the two parties as difficulties that the may find to finance operation. fact, when one looks M&A in of that completed is nearly as as those of Chinese corporates to acquire targets in In other words, it seems difficult to argue Chinese investors are being pushed out of at least not more than US investors. Chart 2 – Cross Border Deals by by Deal Status (USD bn) Chart 3a – Border M&A Deals by Corporates by Deal Status (2011 – 2017, Europe) Chart – Border M&A by Chinese Corporates Deal Status (2011 2017, US) Chart Cross Border Deals US by Deal Status (2011 – 2017) the numbers do not show a
 30 billion USD in confirmed dealS in 2016 and closE to USd 100 biLliOn If we Were To add all deals wHIch hAve been announced and not ComplEtED. BeyONd The hiGh numbeRS, oNE ShoUlD nOte ThAT bOth thE anNounced And the compLetEd chinese acquiSItIons of EuroPeaN targets were LarGer thaN tHosE Of US tArgEts (SeE Chart 1).

tHe sharP slowdown In MErgers ANd acquiSITiOns (M&a) in 2017 is actually not oNLy FOr European targEts but FoR chINA’s M&a glObally (with A 20% rEductIOn in the FIrST HAlf OF 2017)[3]. In the absence Of a global slOWdoWn or tiGhTenINg of fiNanciAl COndItions, such a SharP slowdown In ChinESe M&A can ONly be exPlaineD by The ReceNT cHaNge Of DIreCTiOn oF The chinese gOvErNment As reGARDS forEigN acqUisitIons, or at least “Too ExubERanT” in leSs ecoNomiCaLly imPortanT sectOrS.

Chart 1 – Cross BordEr M&A deals by ChIneSe corPoRates

hOwever, The HeaDline fiGures hiDE a mOrE INTeResting story. Fewer CHiNESe TakeoverS succeED iN EURope than In The uS. WhEN AnalySing THe m&A data moRe careFUlLy, It appeaRs That a sMaLleR peRcentAGe of Deals hAs been coMpletED successfully iN europe as compaREd TO ThE uS duRinG the last few YearS (charT 2). ThiS EvIdeNCe runS counTeR To THe presumption that an InVestmeNt proTection agency, Like CFIUS, wOULD reduce tHe nuMBeR Of deals completEd. In rEality, therE Are many oTher rEasons whY potentiaL MErger and AcqUisItiOns DO NoT come through, tHE Most ObVious onE beIng the lAck Of aGreEmeNt On the termS between ThE tWo PaRtiEs as wELl as the dIfFicUlTieS that THe buyeR may fInd tO fInANce The operATiON. in faCt, WhEn onE loOkS at US m&A opERatIons in EUrope, the pErcENtagE oF dEals thaT are completed Is Nearly as loW aS thOse of CHINese corpOrates trying to acquire taRGets in EUroPe (ChaRt 3 a,b C). In other wOrdS, it seeMs dIFficulT to argUe thaT CHinESE inveSTOrS arE bEing pushed OUT of europE, aT leaSt not moRe than US investors.

CHArt 2 – cross Border M&A deaLs by cHInEse cOrPOraTeS By DEAL Status (USD bn)

ChaRt 3a – Cross BoRdER M&a Deals by ChINesE COrporatEs by DeaL StatUS (2011 – 2017, Europe)

chart 3b – CroSs Border M&a DEals BY chiNese CorporAtes by DeAl Status (2011 – 2017, Us)

chart 3C – crOss BoRdeR M&A DeaLs By Us CorpOrates INto europE by DeaL STatus (2011 – 2017)

WHile tHe AggregatE numbers do not show a clear
 30 billion USD in confirm ed deals i n 201 6 a ndcl oseto U SD 100 billion if w e were to add all deal s whi ch have be en an nounced an d not  c om ple te d .Beyon d t he high  numbers,one  s hould note t h at  both theann ounced and t hecomple te d C h inese  ac quisi tionso f Euro pean targ et s  werel arger t h a nthos e of US targets ( S ee Chart 1).

The  sharp  s l ow d o wninmergers an dacqui s itions( M& A ) in2 017 is actual ly not only for  Europ ea n t a rgetsbut f or Chi na’s M&A gl obal ly (witha 20%r eductio n  in the  first  ha lfof 2 0 17 )[ 3].  I n  th e  a bse n ceof a glo ba lslowd owno r t ight eni ng o f fin ancial condit ion s, s u cha sha rp sl owdo wn  in C hinese  M&Aca n only be expla ined  by the r ece nt  ch an ge of direct ion  of  the Ch inese g o ver nm e n t  a s regards foreignac q u is itions,or atl ea st “too exu be ran t” i n lessecon o mi cally im portan t  s ec tors.
Ch art 1–Cro ssBorde r  M&A  Deals  by Chin ese C o rporates

Howe v er, the headl i ne f ig u reshid e a more in tere s ting  sto r y.  Fe w er Ch inese  t a ke o vers succeed in Eur op e than  in t he US. When a nalysing t h e M&A data  mor e  c a refully, it ap pears  that a sm a ller per centa ge of de als has b e e n comple ted  su cce ssf u l ly  in Europe as c ompa re d to th e U S durin g t helas t f ew  years (C hart 2).  T hi sev ide nce r u ns count er  to  t hepresu m ptionthatan i nv es t men t prote c ti o n  age nc y,  lik e C FI US, w ould red uce the  number o f d e alsco mp leted.In reality, t he re are man yoth er rea s o ns why p otential merger and acq u isition s d o not  com e through , t he mos t o b viousone be ing t he  la c k  of a g r ee men ton the ter m s  be tween  t he t wo part ies as well as the dif ficulties tha t t he b u y er  ma y  f i ndto fin a n ce the operatio n. In fact ,w he n one look s  at  U S M&A o peratio ns in Europe,  the perc entage of  d eals t hat  are compl eted isnearly as low a s  t hoseofChines ecor porat es try i ngto ac quireta rgetsin Eu ro pe (Char t 3 a,b c). In other wo rds, i t see msdifficult  to arg ue that C hine se investo rsare  bein g p u shedouto fEur o pe, a t le a st not mo r etha n US  investors. C har t 2 –  Cr o ss Bor derM&A Deals by Chin e se Corporatesby D e a l S tat u s (U SD  bn)

Chart 3a  –Cr o s s Border  M &A Deals by  Chinese  C o rpora tes by  DealStatus( 2 01 1  – 201 7, E uro pe)

Char t 3 b–  CrossBo rd e r M&ADeal sby Chi nese C o rpor a t es by Deal Statu s (20 1 1  – 20 1 7,US)
Ch art 3c–  Cro ss BorderM&A Deals b y US C orpo rates  into E ur ope by  De al  Status (2 0 11 – 2017 )

Wh ile the  a ggre gat e numb ersd o  notshow  a  cl ear
 30_billion USD_in confirmed deals in_2016 and_close_to USD_100_billion if we_were to add_all deals which have_been announced and_not_completed. Beyond the high numbers, one should note that both the announced and the_completed_Chinese acquisitions_of_European_targets were larger than those_of US targets (See Chart_1).

The sharp_slowdown in mergers and acquisitions (M&A) in 2017_is_actually not only_for European targets but for China’s M&A globally (with_a 20% reduction in the first_half of 2017)[3]._In_the_absence of a global_slowdown or tightening of financial conditions,_such a sharp slowdown in Chinese_M&A can only be explained by the_recent change of direction of the_Chinese government as regards foreign_acquisitions, or_at least “too exuberant” in_less economically important_sectors.

Chart 1_– Cross Border_M&A Deals by Chinese Corporates

However, the_headline figures hide_a more interesting story. Fewer Chinese_takeovers_succeed in Europe_than_in_the US._When analysing the_M&A_data more_carefully,_it appears that a smaller percentage_of_deals has been completed successfully in Europe_as compared to the_US_during the last few_years (Chart 2). This evidence_runs counter to the presumption that_an investment_protection agency,_like CFIUS, would reduce the number of deals completed. In reality,_there are many other reasons why_potential merger and acquisitions_do not_come_through, the most_obvious_one being_the lack of agreement on the terms_between the_two parties as well as the_difficulties that the buyer_may_find to finance the operation. In_fact, when one looks at US_M&A operations in Europe, the_percentage_of_deals that are completed is_nearly as low as those of_Chinese corporates trying_to acquire targets in Europe (Chart 3_a,b_c). In other words, it seems_difficult_to argue that Chinese investors are_being_pushed_out of Europe, at least_not more than US investors.

Chart 2_– Cross Border M&A Deals by Chinese Corporates by_Deal Status (USD_bn)

Chart 3a – Cross Border_M&A_Deals_by Chinese Corporates by Deal Status (2011 – 2017, Europe)

Chart_3b –_Cross Border M&A_Deals by Chinese Corporates by Deal Status (2011 – 2017,_US)

Chart 3c – Cross Border M&A Deals_by US Corporates into Europe by Deal Status (2011 – 2017)

While_the aggregate numbers do not show a clear