Skip to content

Menu

Network by SubjectChannelsBlogsHomeAboutContact
AI Legal Journal logo
Subscribe
Search
Close
PublishersBlogsNetwork by SubjectChannels
Subscribe

Global Trade in 2025: Outbound Investment Restrictions

By Margaret A. Dale, Michael R. Hackett, John R. Ingrassia, William Komaroff, Dorothy Murray, Joshua M. Newville, Todd J. Ohlms, Robert Pommer, Seetha Ramachandran, Nathan Schuur, Jonathan M. Weiss, Mary Wilks, William D. Dalsen, Adam L. Deming, Adam Farbiarz & Hena M. Vora on May 16, 2025
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

Motivated by a rapidly evolving geopolitical climate, governments around the globe have increasingly scrutinized and intervened in transactions under foreign direct investment (FDI) screening regimes in recent years. Rising protectionism, concerns over cybersecurity threats, Covid-19 and the desire to protect critical domestic industries have driven the expansion of FDI regimes beyond purely national security or defense specific industries.

More than 100 jurisdictions now apply FDI screening in some form. The notification triggers and review processes vary significantly between these regimes, and their proliferation has significantly increased complexity for investors planning cross-border investments.

The New Frontier: Outbound Investment Screening

Having spent the last few years building and/or refining inward investment screening, governments are now turning to outbound investment screening, amidst concerns about economic dependence and technology leakage. Governments are increasingly concerned about offshoring of critical capabilities, which can facilitate the development of sensitive technologies in potentially hostile states and lead to over reliance on third countries, creating economic dependencies that can be exploited for geopolitical purposes.

The People’s Republic of China (PRC), Japan, South Korea and Taiwan already have outbound investment screening for domestic entities, primarily in sectors considered critical to national security and technological competitiveness. The US and Europe are now catching up, with US screening for outbound investments into certain sectors in “Countries of Concern” applicable from January 2025, and the EU launching an outbound investment monitoring exercise in similar categories of critical technology. While the EU and UK have not implemented formal outbound investment screening, each has signaled its concerns.

US: Outbound Investment Program (Executive Order 14105)

Regulatory expansions to maintain US technological leadership have included rules to monitor and restrict outbound investment – so-called “reverse CFIUS.” On August 9, 2023, President Biden issued Executive Order 14105 – “Addressing United States Investments in Certain National Security Technologies and Products in Countries of Concern.” On October 28, 2024, the US Department of the Treasury issued final regulations implementing Executive Order 14105, which address investments by US persons in certain identified technologies in “Countries of Concern”, including PRC and the Special Administrative Regions of Hong Kong and Macau.

The regulations, which became effective January 2, 2025, prohibit certain transactions by US persons implicating highly strategic technologies, and create a post-closing notification requirement for certain other transactions. Under the regulations, the obligations on US persons will apply if such person has actual or constructive knowledge of relevant facts or circumstances relating to a transaction. A US person has such knowledge under the regulations if it possesses actual knowledge that a fact or circumstance exists or is substantially certain to occur; an awareness of a high probability of the existence or future occurrence of a fact or circumstance, or could have possessed such awareness through a reasonable and diligent inquiry.

The categories of covered transactions include the acquisition of an equity interest or a contingent equity interest, certain debt financing that grants certain rights to the lender, the conversion of a contingent equity interest, certain “greenfield” investments (building a new facility) or other corporate expansions, the entry into a joint venture, and certain investments as a limited partner or equivalent (LP) in a non-US person pooled investment fund. Excepted transactions include investments in publicly traded securities, certain LP investments with a threshold of $2,000,000, derivatives, buyouts of country of concern ownership, intracompany transactions, certain pre-final rule binding commitments, certain syndicated debt financings, and equity-based compensation.

The regulations apply to the conduct of US persons only and defines a US person as “any United States citizen, lawful permanent resident, entity organized under the laws of the United States or any jurisdiction within the United States, including any foreign branch of any such entity, or any person in the United States.” Under the America First Investment Policy issued in February 2025, the US administration is considering new or expanded restrictions on US outbound investment in the PRC in sectors such as semiconductors, artificial intelligence, quantum, biotechnology, hypersonics, aerospace, advanced manufacturing, directed energy, and other areas implicated by the PRC’s national Military-Civil Fusion strategy.

EU: Market Monitoring to Inform Future Policy on Outbound Investment Screening

On January 15, 2025, the European Commission published a Recommendation on reviewing outbound investments in technology areas critical for the economic security of the Union. The Recommendation asks EU Member States to review investments made between January 2021 and June 2026 by EU-based investors into third countries in three critical technologies for economic security: semiconductors, artificial intelligence and quantum technologies.

The EU Recommendation applies to acquisitions, mergers, “greenfield” investments, joint ventures, venture capital investments and the transfer of certain tangible and intangible assets, including IP or know-how. Non-controlling investments limited to seeking a return on invested capital are excluded. Member States are requested to gather information through mandatory or voluntary notification processes, and to perform a risk assessment of covered transactions with the European Commission.

The EU Recommendation covers the same three technologies as the US outbound regulations, although some of the definitions are narrower. The US outbound regulations also apply to non-controlling investments, although in other respects the EU Recommendation is wider because it covers all third countries as well as IP licensing.

This will be a significant information gathering exercise for transaction parties, Member States and the European Commission, with Member State progress reports due in July 2025 and final reports in July 2026. The review will inform a decision on whether further action is needed to regulate outbound investment at EU and/or national level.

In the meantime, Member States are continuing to expand FDI screening regimes for inward investment, with Ireland’s the latest to come into force in January, and Greece publishing its proposed screening framework in April. On May 8, 2025, the European Parliament endorsed revised rules for screening foreign investments into and within the EU. Under the proposed new rules, certain sectors such as critical raw materials and transport infrastructure will be subject to mandatory FDI screening by Member States. National procedures will be harmonized, and the Commission will have the power to intervene. Member States are now negotiating the text of the legislation, currently aiming to reach agreement in June.

UK: Position on Outbound Investment

In May 2024, the UK government published updated guidance on the National Security and Investment Act (NSIA), emphasizing that it can apply to “outward direct investment” from the UK. The NSIA may apply to the acquisition of an entity or asset outside the UK if the entity carries on activities in the UK or supplies goods or services to the UK, or the asset is used for these purposes.

This is not a change. It has been the position since the NSIA came into force in January 2022. However, it is noteworthy that the UK government chose to underline these powers and provide examples of when the NSIA would apply to acquisitions of a non-UK entity or asset.

The UK government has indicated that it is considering more substantive rules on outward investment screening, to complement the existing tools of export controls and inbound investment screening.

Strategies For Asset Managers to Mitigate Risks to Deal Certainty, Timelines and Costs

  1. Conduct outbound investment reviews early in the deal process to assess exposure to “countries of concern” (e.g., China, Hong Kong, Macau).
  2. Screen for sector sensitivity — artificial intelligence, quantum technology and semiconductors.
  3. Include side-letter language addressing outbound investment screening compliance.
  4. Diligence efforts should conform to the knowledge standard in the US outbound regulations and include:
    • inquiries to the relevant counterparty (e.g. the prospective portfolio company, fund manager or seller).
    • contractual representations or warranties that the target portfolio company does not engage in the in-scope technologies; or that the target fund is not a covered foreign person.
    • consideration of relevant public and non-public information, including the use of available public and commercial databases to verify information provided by the counterparty.
  5. Monitor the evolving regulatory landscape and be prepared to adjust investment strategies and structures accordingly. Understanding the underlying policy drivers will enable investors to navigate regimes more effectively and reduce execution risk.
  6. And finally…reconsider your government relations strategy: governments are trying to strike a balance between protecting national interests and encouraging investment, so they are continually seeking feedback and there are many opportunities to shape the policy debate.

Read more of our Top Ten Regulatory and Litigation Risks for Private Funds in 2025.

Photo of Margaret A. Dale Margaret A. Dale

Margaret Dale is a versatile first-chair litigator who handles different types of complex business disputes for a wide variety of clients across many industries.

While her practice is diverse, she regularly handles privacy and data security matters, including regulatory investigations and class action…

Margaret Dale is a versatile first-chair litigator who handles different types of complex business disputes for a wide variety of clients across many industries.

While her practice is diverse, she regularly handles privacy and data security matters, including regulatory investigations and class action lawsuits stemming from data breaches. She also focuses on intellectual property, where she represents individual artists and arts-related organizations and museums. With respect to securities and corporate governance, Margaret handles SEC enforcement proceedings, shareholder and partnership disputes, stock option, warrant and preferred stock matters, escrow fights and Delaware 220 actions, as well as regulatory and internal investigations.

Read more about Margaret A. Dale
Show more Show less
Photo of Michael R. Hackett Michael R. Hackett

Michael R. Hackett is a partner in the Litigation Department and a member of the Asset Management Litigation practice. Mike is an experienced litigator and trial lawyer focused on sophisticated business disputes.

A significant portion of Mike’s practice concerns disputes and regulation involving…

Michael R. Hackett is a partner in the Litigation Department and a member of the Asset Management Litigation practice. Mike is an experienced litigator and trial lawyer focused on sophisticated business disputes.

A significant portion of Mike’s practice concerns disputes and regulation involving private funds, including private equity, venture capital, hedge, real estate and private credit funds, as well as other limited partnerships, where he regularly advises funds, fund sponsors, investment advisers and institutional and individual investors.

Mike’s experience representing private fund clients runs the gamut, from control contests within advisers, to disputes between limited partners and general partners, to representation of investment advisers in connection with regulatory examinations, investigations and enforcement matters. Mike also routinely represents fund sponsors and their portfolio companies, including in significant post-closing disputes.

In addition to his private funds practice, Mike represents public and private companies in a variety of complex commercial and securities litigation matters, including in the areas of corporate governance, fiduciary obligations, capital markets, financial services, and bankruptcy and insolvency.

Mike has been named a “Rising Star” by Massachusetts Super Lawyers, and was identified as an “associate to watch” by Chambers USA in 2017 and 2018.

During law school, Mike served as an intern judicial clerk to the Honorable William G. Young of the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts.

Read more about Michael R. Hackett
Show more Show less
Photo of John R. Ingrassia John R. Ingrassia

When competition or antitrust questions arise, John Ingrassia is sought out for his knowledge, reputation and credentials.

John is a recognized authority on Hart-Scott-Rodino antitrust merger review, and for more than 20 years has counselled businesses facing the most challenging antitrust issues and…

When competition or antitrust questions arise, John Ingrassia is sought out for his knowledge, reputation and credentials.

John is a recognized authority on Hart-Scott-Rodino antitrust merger review, and for more than 20 years has counselled businesses facing the most challenging antitrust issues and helped them stay out of the crosshairs — whether its distribution, pricing, channel management, mergers, acquisitions or joint ventures.

John is a senior counsel at the Firm, advising on the full range of antitrust matters in diverse industries, including chemicals, pharmaceutical, medical devices, telecommunications, financial services and health care, among others.  His practice focuses on the analysis and resolution of antitrust issues related to mergers, acquisitions, and joint ventures, and the analysis and assessment of pre-merger notification requirements. John has extensive experience with the legal, practical, and technical requirements of merger clearance and is regularly invited to participate in Federal Trade Commission and bar association meetings regarding Hart-Scott-Rodino practice issues.

Read more about John R. Ingrassia
Show more Show less
Photo of William Komaroff William Komaroff

Bill Komaroff is a partner in the Litigation Department and White Collar Practice Group. He has a nationwide federal practice focused on corporate defense and investigations, counseling and defending institutional and individual clients in connection with a broad array of complex government investigations…

Bill Komaroff is a partner in the Litigation Department and White Collar Practice Group. He has a nationwide federal practice focused on corporate defense and investigations, counseling and defending institutional and individual clients in connection with a broad array of complex government investigations, prosecutions and civil disputes.

Bill also has served as a member of the Criminal Justice Act Panel for the District Court for the Southern District of New York.

From 2003 to 2007, Bill served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York and prosecuted tax fraud, money laundering, bank fraud, mail fraud and wire fraud cases, among others. He tried numerous cases to successful jury verdicts and argued cases before the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.

Read more about William Komaroff
Show more Show less
Photo of Dorothy Murray Dorothy Murray

Dorothy Murray is a partner in the Litigation Department specializing in investment and commercial dispute resolution. She supports clients across a wide range of sectors, including financial services, asset management/private equity, energy, telecoms, and maritime.

Dorothy represents clients in disputes arising from all…

Dorothy Murray is a partner in the Litigation Department specializing in investment and commercial dispute resolution. She supports clients across a wide range of sectors, including financial services, asset management/private equity, energy, telecoms, and maritime.

Dorothy represents clients in disputes arising from all aspects of their business, whether those disputes are post M&A, shareholder, employment, contractual, partnership or JV related.

Dorothy has experience managing litigation in common and civil law jurisdictions, and in commercial and investor state arbitration.  She is fluent with all the key divisions of the English High Courts and major arbitral institutional rules, including LCIA, ICC, LMAA, SCC, ISCID and UNICTRAL.  One of her particular interests is in the enforcement of arbitral awards.

In addition to representation in contentious matters, she uses her disputes experience to support clients at the transaction and pre‑action stages, working with companies and funds to identify, understand and mitigate personal and corporate liabilities and risks.

Read more about Dorothy Murray
Show more Show less
Photo of Joshua M. Newville Joshua M. Newville

Joshua M. Newville is a partner in the Litigation Department in New York and a member of Proskauer’s White Collar Defense & Investigations Group and the Asset Management Litigation team.

Josh handles securities litigation, enforcement and regulatory matters, representing corporations and senior executives…

Joshua M. Newville is a partner in the Litigation Department in New York and a member of Proskauer’s White Collar Defense & Investigations Group and the Asset Management Litigation team.

Josh handles securities litigation, enforcement and regulatory matters, representing corporations and senior executives in civil and criminal investigations. In addition, Josh advises registered investment advisers and private fund managers on regulatory compliance, SEC exams and related risks.

Read more about Joshua M. Newville
Show more Show less
Photo of Todd J. Ohlms Todd J. Ohlms

Todd J. Ohlms is as a partner in the Litigation department and a member of the Asset Management Litigation Group. Todd has represented clients in business-critical litigation matters for over 25 years, and has tried several cases to verdict before juries and the…

Todd J. Ohlms is as a partner in the Litigation department and a member of the Asset Management Litigation Group. Todd has represented clients in business-critical litigation matters for over 25 years, and has tried several cases to verdict before juries and the bench. He has also participated in numerous arbitration proceedings, including counseling clients regarding disputes subject to international arbitration agreements.

Todd is often retained by private equity firms to counsel them and their portfolio companies on a wide range of matters and is frequently chosen to serve as outside general counsel to their portfolio companies. He also represents family offices in disputes related to their operating companies where sensitive and complex relationships often play as large a role in determining the result as the actual legal theories at issue.

Read more about Todd J. Ohlms
Show more Show less
Photo of Robert Pommer Robert Pommer

Robert W. Pommer III is a partner in the Litigation Department and a member of Proskauer’s Securities Litigation, White Collar Defense & Investigations groups and the Asset Management Litigation team.

Bob’s practice focuses on a broad range of securities-related enforcement and compliance issues.

Robert W. Pommer III is a partner in the Litigation Department and a member of Proskauer’s Securities Litigation, White Collar Defense & Investigations groups and the Asset Management Litigation team.

Bob’s practice focuses on a broad range of securities-related enforcement and compliance issues. He represents private fund managers, financial institutions, public companies, and their senior executives in enforcement investigations and litigation conducted by the SEC, the U.S. Department of Justice, and other governmental entities and financial services regulators. He also conducts internal investigations and counsels investment advisers and public companies on regulatory compliance, corporate governance and other SEC-related issues.

Prior to his career in private practice, Bob served as Assistant Chief Litigation Counsel in the SEC’s Division of Enforcement for nine years. While there, he investigated and litigated several high-profile cases involving complex financial fraud and audit failures. Bob also worked on enforcement actions involving insider trading, investment adviser and broker-dealer issues, market manipulation and other violations of the federal securities laws.

Read more about Robert Pommer
Show more Show less
Photo of Seetha Ramachandran Seetha Ramachandran

Seetha Ramachandran is a partner in the Litigation Department.

She is a leading expert in anti-money laundering (AML), Bank Secrecy Act, economic sanctions and asset forfeiture matters. She represents banks, broker dealers, hedge funds, private equity funds, online payment companies, and individual executives…

Seetha Ramachandran is a partner in the Litigation Department.

She is a leading expert in anti-money laundering (AML), Bank Secrecy Act, economic sanctions and asset forfeiture matters. She represents banks, broker dealers, hedge funds, private equity funds, online payment companies, and individual executives and officers, in high stakes and sensitive matters. Her practice focuses on white collar and regulatory enforcement defense, internal investigations, and compliance counseling. In addition to her subject matter expertise, Seetha is an experienced trial and appellate lawyer, having conducted 10 criminal jury trials, argued 10 appeals before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, and handled ancillary civil proceedings in forfeiture cases.

Read more about Seetha Ramachandran
Show more Show less
Photo of Jonathan M. Weiss Jonathan M. Weiss

Jonathan Weiss is a partner in the Litigation Department. Jonathan represents both plaintiffs and defendants in a wide range of high-stakes litigation, including antitrust, class action, financial services, securities and other complex commercial litigation. Jonathan has won multiple noteworthy jury verdicts, including the…

Jonathan Weiss is a partner in the Litigation Department. Jonathan represents both plaintiffs and defendants in a wide range of high-stakes litigation, including antitrust, class action, financial services, securities and other complex commercial litigation. Jonathan has won multiple noteworthy jury verdicts, including the fourth largest jury award in the history of the State of Arizona (over $110 million), and has significant appellate experience briefing and arguing appeals in both state and federal courts across the nation.

Jonathan has been recognized as a “Rising Star” by Southern California Super Lawyers every year since 2011, and was recognized by Legal 500 U.S. in their 2015 leading lawyers in appellate litigation edition, noting his “incredibly dedicated” advocacy on behalf of his clients. Jonathan has also spent considerable time on pro bono matters, for which he has been honored by Public Counsel among other organizations.

In addition to his busy practice, Jonathan has taught courses on Ninth Circuit appellate advocacy throughout Southern California and has lectured at several universities nationally, including Harvard Law School, UCLA Law School, the University of Illinois and the University of Pittsburgh. Jonathan is also a member of the Pacific Council on International Policy.

Read more about Jonathan M. Weiss
Show more Show less
Photo of Mary Wilks Mary Wilks

Mary Wilks is an antitrust partner in the Corporate Department and a member of our Private Equity Transactions and Mergers & Acquisitions Groups.

Mary advises on a broad range of EU and UK competition law issues, including multijurisdictional mergers, behavioral investigations, complex supply…

Mary Wilks is an antitrust partner in the Corporate Department and a member of our Private Equity Transactions and Mergers & Acquisitions Groups.

Mary advises on a broad range of EU and UK competition law issues, including multijurisdictional mergers, behavioral investigations, complex supply and distribution arrangements, and foreign investment controls including, notably, the UK’s newly adopted National Security and Investment Act. She advises clients on the competition aspects of transactions including M&A, equity investments, consortium transactions and secondaries.

Mary works across all sectors, with particular experience in consumer products, healthcare, TMT and financial services.

Mary regularly counsels clients on their engagement with the Competition and Markets Authority, the European Commission, and other prominent international enforcement agencies and regulatory authorities.

Mary Wilks has a reputation as an “excellent lawyer” who “plays a leading role on a range of high-profile cases.” According to sources, “She is always fully on top of the detail but also able to pull out the most important points for the case.”

Prior to joining Proskauer, Mary was a counsel in the antitrust, competition and trade department at another leading law firm in London.

Read more about Mary Wilks
Show more Show less
Photo of William D. Dalsen William D. Dalsen

Will Dalsen is an associate in the Litigation Department, practicing in the Patent Law, Intellectual Property, and Asset Management Litigation Groups.

Will practices in the area of complex intellectual property disputes, with a primary focus on patent infringement matters. He has litigated several…

Will Dalsen is an associate in the Litigation Department, practicing in the Patent Law, Intellectual Property, and Asset Management Litigation Groups.

Will practices in the area of complex intellectual property disputes, with a primary focus on patent infringement matters. He has litigated several high-profile patent infringement cases for some of the world’s leading technology companies, including Panasonic, Philips, Sony, Mitsubishi and Zenith Electronics.

His practice also includes complex commercial and securities litigation matters, in particular those involving private equity, venture capital and hedge funds. He has represented public and private corporations in contractual disputes, business tort cases, and government investigations. In addition, he advises funds, fund sponsors, investment advisers, and institutional and individual investors.

Read more about William D. Dalsen
Show more Show less
Photo of Adam L. Deming Adam L. Deming

Adam Deming is an associate in the Litigation Department.

Read more about Adam L. Deming
Photo of Adam Farbiarz Adam Farbiarz

Adam Farbiarz is an associate in the Litigation Department.

Adam’s practice encompasses a wide range of complex commercial litigation and dispute resolution. He represents clients in corporate governance, securities, and M&A-related disputes. Adam has also litigated a number of highly technical contract performance…

Adam Farbiarz is an associate in the Litigation Department.

Adam’s practice encompasses a wide range of complex commercial litigation and dispute resolution. He represents clients in corporate governance, securities, and M&A-related disputes. Adam has also litigated a number of highly technical contract performance issues, including claims pertaining to the execution of a major construction project in Afghanistan, and the faulty implementation of a firmwide software build at a Fortune 200 company.

Before joining Proskauer, Adam founded and led a food service tech startup that continues to work with hundreds of restaurants in the New York City area and beyond.

Read more about Adam Farbiarz
Show more Show less
Photo of Hena M. Vora Hena M. Vora

Hena M. Vora is an associate in the Litigation Department and a member of the Asset Management Litigation practice. Her practice encompasses a range of complex civil and commercial litigation matters, including securities litigation and partnership disputes.

Hena has experience with various stages…

Hena M. Vora is an associate in the Litigation Department and a member of the Asset Management Litigation practice. Her practice encompasses a range of complex civil and commercial litigation matters, including securities litigation and partnership disputes.

Hena has experience with various stages of litigation, including pitching clients, coordinating discovery, drafting dispositive motions and trial memoranda, and preparing witnesses for depositions and trial. She also has experience conducting highly sensitive and confidential internal investigations.

Hena maintains an active pro bono practice and has been awarded for creating a partnership between Proskauer’s Boston office and Minds Matter Boston, through which she helps high school students from low-income backgrounds achieve college readiness and success.

Hena earned her J.D. from Emory University School of Law, where she received the Pro Bono Publico honor and a Transactional Law Certificate. In addition, she was a national competitor on the Moot Court Society and served as president of Emory’s South Asian Law Students Association. While at Emory, Hena served as judicial intern for Judge Denny Chin at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

Read more about Hena M. Vora
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Financial
  • Blog:
    The Capital Commitment
  • Organization:
    Proskauer Rose LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

LexBlog logo
Copyright © 2025, LexBlog. All Rights Reserved.
Legal content Portal by LexBlog LexBlog Logo