China contract lawyersIn my previous post in this series (here), I described the five basic attitudes Chinese companies have regarding advanced equipment being sold into China. Given these attitudes, what should a foreign seller do? In this part 2 post I set out two of five tactics high value equipment sellers should follow when selling advanced (and therefore expensive) equipment into China. In part 3, I will wrap it up with the remaining three tactics.

1. Do not discount. The first mistake most Western companies make when selling their high end equipment to China is to discount its price. The usual explanation my clients give me for doing this is that “we will discount the first equipment sale and then make up for that discount on future sales.” Wrong.

If you offer a discount you are simply confirming the China side’s basic assumption that your price is too high and you will virtually never get the opportunity to make up for the discount. The Chinese side will do one of two things. Some buyers (especially state owned enterprises or SOEs) will treat the initial discounted items as “samples” they will distribute to other enterprises to be cloned in China. For other buyers, the discounted price will treated as a new floor price for the product. If additional purchases are discussed, the Chinese company will then ask for an additional discount against your already discounted price.

It is therefore critical you hold the line on price. You may perhaps offer a very small quantity discount for purchases of multiple units. You may even offer a small “customer loyalty” discount for return purchases. But never offer a major discount for the initial purchase. Hold the line and explain that your price is both fair and the same price you offer to everyone in the world, on the same terms. What reason is there to change this policy for China?

2. Get paid before you deliver. For companies that are successful in selling to China, this is the golden rule. There really is no alternative. In many countries, issues related to payment can be resolved through the use of carefully drafted letters of credit. Chinese buyers, however, will only use Chinese banks for their letters of credit and those banks will always favor their Chinese buyer customers, so the letter of credit approach will not work for China.

For Chinese companies planning to clone your equipment in China, paying you by installments fits perfectly into their plan. The standard approach works as follows. Set up a system with five installment payments. The equipment will be delivered and installed in stages, in accordance with the installments. Then, the Chinese company will delay payment from the very start and then use the payment delay (which it will usually blame on China’s capital controls or some tax issue) to push the foreign side to deliver more than is required for each installment. The Chinese company will then reluctantly make a payment or two, all the while extracting equipment, training and know-how. When the Chinese side thinks it has gained  “enough” from what you have already provided it, the payments stop. The common standard is to make two of five payments in exchange for 50% of the product and expertise. Our China lawyers warn our clients about this all the time and yet it just keeps happening.

Other Chinese companies will use installment payments to force you to discount. The Chinese side will negotiate for a series of installment payments with a major final installment to be paid after installation and approval by the Chinese side. This approach virtually never works well for the foreign seller as Chinese companies are expert at finding problems with the equipment. The Chinese side will raise these problems as excuses for continual payment delays and then use their own delays to seek an after the fact discount in price from you, while holding the installment payments as hostage to achieve this goal.

If the Chinese company is unable to secure its desired discount from you during the basic installment period, it simply will not make the final payment, achieving a 10% to 15% discount by that single refusal to pay. If the foreign side threatens to sue for that final payment, the Chinese side will trot out a list of problems with the product and its installation — normally problems the Chinese company itself caused. However, this will still be enough to convince the foreign side seller that it will need to mount a long and expensive legal battle to get that final payment and that doing so probably will not make sense.

It is important to note that these tactics by Chinese companies are not unusual. Your price is too high, so they do not see themselves as acting unethically; they are just leveling the playing field. I have spent about half of my life in China and I have heard this reasoning about once a month while there.

China lawyersDoes the Chinese company with which you are doing a deal have a United States subsidiary? Does this mere fact make you feel better about doing a deal with its China parent company? Why? Do you not realize that it is likely to be legally irrelevant?

The always excellent, always informative, Hague Law Blog (by Aaron Lukken) wrote about this in the context of service of process in its post, You can’t simply serve a U.S. subsidiary. Aaron starts out by discussing how you need a compelling reason to “pierce the corporate veil” of a subsidiary company to each through and assert claims against its corporate parent since “the whole purpose of a corporation is to be a separate entity, a separate being from its owners, shielding the owners from liability if they didn’t have a part in wrongdoing.”

A couple years ago I was retained as an expert on corporate veil piercing for a case in Korea. As part of my work on that case, I researched the current state of corporate veil piercing and since that time I’ve probably stated something like the following to fellow lawyers at least a dozen times: “You know how difficult it is to pierce a corporate veil, well it’s even more difficult than you think. It seems that courts are now pretty much uniformly of the view that everyone now understands that Limited Liability companies and corporations protect the owners of those entities and corporate veil piercing is now nearly impossible unless there has been real fraud somewhere along the way.” Or to put it in non-legal terms, it ain’t gonna happen.

And yet again and again really smart in-house lawyers seem to ignore this when doing deals with big Chinese companies with U.S. subsidiaries. I cannot even count the times where such a lawyer has told me that they are not terribly worried about being able to pursue the big Chinese company on the other side of their deal because “we can always go after them here in the United States.” Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Unless the U.S. subsidiary is a party to the contract or a guarantor on the contract, to go after that subsidiary you need to be able to pierce the corporate veil and that ain’t gonna happen. When I tell them this, they then talk about how they still can seize the Chinese companies ownership interest in that U.S. subsidiary as if that is no big deal. But the problem is that is a really big deal and any Chinese company worth its salt has structured its ownership of its U.S. subsidiary through various levels of Hong Kong and Cayman Island and Virgin Island companies. So yes, if you are willing to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars investigating the corporate trail and engaging in discovery on just this one issue, you might succeed. But really?

Our China lawyers see the result of this thinking with contracts between American and Chinese companies that call for disputes to be resolved in a U.S. court. At least once a month, one of our China attorneys will get a call or an email from a U.S. lawyer seeking our help in taking a U.S. judgment (usually a default judgment) to China to enforce. The thinking of the U.S. lawyer is that all we need do is go to a China court and ask it to convert the U.S. judgment into a Chinese judgment and then send out the Chinese equivalent of a sheriff to the Chinese company and start seizing its assets until it pays. As we have so often written, this will not work:

After we tell the American lawyers how difficult it is to collect on a U.S. judgment against a Chinese company (note that I say difficult and not impossible — it is possible to employ “other methods” to collect on such a judgment), they will sometimes explain that is okay because they can still go after the U.S. subsidiary of the Chinese company with which they have the contract. But as stated above, that is expensive and difficult and may or may not lead to a good result.

Aaron’s post focuses on how service of process on a foreign company’s U.S. subsidiary does not constitute service on the parent company and he uses Chrysler Motors as an example:

Take Chrysler, for example. When you sue Chrysler over a defective Jeep, you’re pretty solid in just serving the Michigan outfit. But if you allege liability on the part of the parent company, Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, N.V. (which we’ll just call FCA here– and I don’t mean the Fellowship of Christian Athletes), serving in Michigan ain’t gonna cut the mustard. You have to go abroad to get FCA on the hook. You can’t just hit Chrysler and assume that FCA is in the case, too.

The corporate veil doesn’t get pierced just because it hangs overseas.

Which means that if you want to serve Chrysler Automobiles N.V. you must do so in the Netherlands, where it is based. Again, it’s because the subsidiary is not the equivalent of the parent and vice-versa and as much as you may wish it otherwise, it ain’t. The same holds true for your China contract.

 

China intellectual property lawyersWhen our law firm started drafting manufacturing agreements on behalf of Western companies having their products made by Chinese manufacturers, we mostly dealt with simple items like socks, shoes, rubber duckies, etc. Those contracts were relatively fast and cheap and easy. The core of the contract was essentially something like this: “Your Chinese company will make rubber duckies out of these specific materials and with these additional specifications and you will deliver them to our facility in the United States or in Spain or in Australia within 45 days after we issue our purchase order.” Becuase these contracts were so routine and so simple, we virtually always always charged a flat fee for them.

Those days are mostly over for China, though these sorts of agreements are still relatively common for Vietnam, Cambodia, Thailand and Sri Lanka. These days the typical manufacturing agreement on which our China lawyers work is far more complicated because the products made in China are far more complicated. And with complicated products comes complicated intellectual property issues involving trade secrets, trademarks, copyrights and patents.

I called up an email this morning to review a China intellectual property issue on an existing matter. That first email led me to a couple more emails and today’s idea for a blog post. The below is a merger of three emails (further modified to remove any identifiers), which should be helpful to anyone looking to manufacture IP sensitive products in China, especially those that include software.

Oh, and for further incentive to get you to parse through the below email, go read China and The Internet of Things and How to Destroy Your Own Company to see what can happen if you fail to realize how critical intellectual property protections have become when having your products made in China.

 

We still need more clarification regarding the issue of ownership of the various technologies that will be going into your product.

Based on my review, there are four separate forms of technology embodied in this single product:

  1. The case or external shell.
  2. The internal mechanism: electrical/mechanical.
  3. The internal mechanism: firmware.
  4. The smartphone/computer application software.

Based on this, my questions are as follows:

1. For the external shell (Item 1):

a. Who will do the design? Who will prepare the actual CAD drawings for the mold? Who will fabricate the physical molds?

b. How and when will you pay for the molds to be made? Will you do this as part of a separate contract or will you fold this process into the manufacturing agreement?

c. Note that you will need to be clear that you own the shell design. If it will be done before/outside the manufacturing agreement, we will a clear document that provides for ownership and control. Note that if a third party does the mold (which is likely), there is a risk of the third party appropriating the design and selling it to someone else. However, for this specialized product, the risk is low.

2. For the application software (Item 4):

a. Who will create the application software? If it will be outsourced, you need to know. If it will be done in-house, will it be done by _________? You need to know.

b. Has a fee and timeline been determined for the software application? If so, what is it? If not, when will this be done?

c. What if the application software does not work? What if the application software does not have the “look and feel” you want? How will you work with the programmers to ensure all this is done how you want?

d. The fee, once determined, will be amortized against the purchase of the first 200 units. Does this mean the price of each of the first 200 units will be increased by 1/200 of the application software fee? What happens if you never buy more than 200 units? What happens if you end up buying only 100 units? You need to determine the fee to be sure this makes economic sense for you.

e. Will you own the application software copyright for the entire world? If so, we will need to specifically provide that the application software will be done as a “work for hire” and that your company will own the copyright on it. If you own the copyright, the Chinese side cannot sell the software to anyone else or use it for their own purposes. Will they agree to this? If the Chinese side is sophisticated, they will NOT provide you with the software copyright because they plan to reuse the core software for other projects. In fact, they may not even own the copyright to the core software. They may instead agree only to provide you with the rights to the “look and feel.”  Many U.S. buyers ignore these software issues, leading to many problems down the road. You may recall that the multi-billion dollar legal battle between Apple and Samsung is centered on these difficult “look and feel” issues.

3. For the electro-mechanical/firmware (Items 2 and 3).

It is not clear who will own and control this item because there is an internal contradiction in the description. On the one hand, the Chinese side says it will provide you with all data necessary for your company to patent and copyright items 2 and 3 in the U.S. (Note that firmware is protected by copyright, as are mask works and related). This means you would then own 100% of the rights to items 2 and 3 for the United States: permanently and forever, to the exclusion of everyone, including _________. This means you would not even be required to purchase the product from ________ because you could have it manufactured by anyone in any location where a conflicting patent and copyright has not been registered. It also means even if you do not secure a patent or copyright on this, you still have an exclusive and perpetual license to the technology for the U.S. This perpetual license would have essentially the same effect as a patent or copyright registration with respect to your relation to __________ and its attempts to license to any third parties in the future. The point here is that a patent is not revokable; once you have it, it is yours for the term. On the other hand, the Chinese side wants to have the right to allow other U.S. entities to make use of the technology to sell competing products in the United States if your company does not meet certain sales quotas. Under this approach, the Chinese side is providing you with essentially a limited license with these terms: a) the product must be purchased from _________ and no one else, b) your sales territory is limited to the United Sates, and c) your license terminates if you fail to meet the sales quota. This has in fact become the normal approach for sophisticated Chinese companies making products like yours.

The issue though is that these two approaches are contradictory. Only one can stand. So which one is it? As I have noted, the second option (limited license) is most common. However, that means your company’s product development would be placed on a very weak footing because your entire product line could be terminated if you fail to meet the sales quotas. This termination could come either from the license becoming non-exclusive, (allowing the Chinese side to license to and manufacture for other U.S. companies) or from the Chinese side terminating the agreement.

This issue goes to the core of your agreement and so it is crucial that we get clear on on this for the agreement. As noted, most Chinese manufacturers/designers will take the limited license approach instead of terminating the agreement. If this is their approach here, their offer to provide you information for a patent application is not consistent because a limited license and absolute ownership rights are contradictory.

4. There is an additional issue related to the rights of non-U.S. entities to sell into the U.S. market. This can only be resolved after we get answers to the questions above.

5. There is an additional issue concerning what to do if _________ is unable or unwilling to manufacture your product at an acceptable price, at acceptable quantities, with acceptable delivery dates and at an acceptable level of quality. If ________ owns the core technology and is merely providing you with a limited license you could find yourself “stuck” with bad pricing, bad quantities, bad delivery times and/or bad quality products. The normal remedy would be for us to state that if any of the above problems occur, you have the right to have your product made by some other manufacturer and that ________ will provide you with a license to the technology that will allow this. Though this is the normal remedy, many Chinese manufacturers strongly resist this, putting you in a difficult position. You have indicated that ____________ will be required to accept purchase orders that meet the price agreement. You have also provided for penalties for late delivery and for defect issues. Though this is not ideal, it may be the best you can do in your current bargaining position. So the key issue is whether you are required to purchase from __________ or not. If you are required to purchase exclusively from ___________, you will need to face the fact that you are in a very weak bargaining position on many critical business issues and ____________ can fairly easily make life difficult for you by forcing you to fail to meet the sales quotas that will then enable it to start working with U.S. company that competes with you.

Please advise on the above. After we get clear on these various issues, I can begin drafting the agreement. I realize these issues are difficult, but it it is best to take a clear position from the start. Please let me know if you have any questions or if you need any additional explanations.

China employer social insuranceChinese law mandates employers provide their employees certain mandatory benefits, including social insurance. China has five types of social insurance: pension, medical, unemployment, maternity and work-related injury insurance. The specific types of social insurance employers must provide and their contribution formulas vary depending on the employer’s location. Many foreign employers in China do not realize that failing to make full payments on required social insurance gives their employees the legal right to unilaterally terminate the employment agreement without providing any prior notice and then turn around and sue the employer for damages.

Just to make things more complicated for China’s employers, China has several forms of social insurance violations. You obviously violate the law if you don’t pay any social insurance at all, but the violations by foreign employers in China I most commonly see are more subtle and complicated than that. We see violations when employers fail to pay social insurance for the entire term of employment. This violation often happens when the employer thinks it need not pay social insurance during an employee’s probation period. We also see violations involving employers failing to pay for all five types of social insurance. And with rising wages in China, we have lately been seeing a rash of employer problems arising from paying social insurance based on a lower salary than is actually being paid, either because the employer failed to update the salary amount or because it intentionally reported a lower salary so as to reduce its employer contribution. These are the sorts of things we constantly look out for in our HR audits.

Employees may consent to the employer claiming a lower salary but that is irrelevant once caught or even once reported by the employee who consented. In a fairly recent case out of Jiangsu Province, the court reinstated the employer’s obligation to pay for all required types of social insurances at full rates the entire time. I am simplifying the facts for this post, but basically the employee’s monthly salary was higher than 7000 RMB, and the employer only contributed social insurance as though the salary had been 2200 RMB. The employee terminated the employment relationship and sued the employer for severance, arguing that he had been forced to leave his job because the employer failed to pay mandatory social insurance. The case went from labor arbitration, to trial, to appeal and then the employer petitioned for re-consideration by the Jiangsu Province High People’s Court. The employer lost every single step of the way (which really should have been no surprise to any experienced China employment lawyer, sorry!) and was required — among other things — to pay the employee for statutory severance.

Each step of the litigation process, the employer made the following three (futile) arguments. One, the employee never objected to the arrangement of the employer misstating the employee’s salary and therefore underpaid the employee’s social insurance. Two, because the employee never voiced any objection to the social insurance payment arrangement, the parties essentially agreed on a different base for social insurance payments. Three, the employer’s failure to contribute the full amount of social insurance was not the same thing as failing to make any contributions at all, so the employee was not entitled to statutory severance. The Jiangsu Province High People’s Court rejected all arguments and explicitly (and rightly) stated that the laws on social insurance are clear and the employer’s failure to contribute the full amounts based on the employee’s actual wages entitled the employee to terminate the employment contract and receive statutory severance pay from his employer.

To reiterate what is becoming a fairly regular theme of my China employment law posts, most China employment laws cannot be contracted away and an employee’s written consent does not change that. An employee’s written acknowledgement that he or she specifically asked for a particular employment arrangement also does not change that.

As a foreign company doing business in China, you are under a microscope and you will be treated differently than domestic Chinese companies. This means that you are both more likely to get caught on employer violations and more likely to get called out and treated harshly when caught. In our experience, if the labor authorities are not pursuing you for non-compliance, your employees almost certainly will either before or certainly after they leave. This brings me to another point. If your employee tells you she is leaving her employment and alleges she has been forced to quit because of employer wrongdoing (or even just provides inconsistent stories about why she is leaving), you should immediately work on resolving those problems (which is exactly what they are) before she takes you to court.

 

 

Doing business in ChinaOn March 30, China Law Blog’s own Dan Harris will be putting on a webinar on the legal aspects of doing business in China, with a focus on how to structure your Chinese operations and deals so as to protect your IP. This webinar is being put on by CommercialLawWebAdvisor, which describes it as follows:

Companies often cannot afford not to do business in China. Whether producing goods there or selling to the Chinese market, companies that engage in business with Chinese partners need up-to-date legal advice on how to protect their technology and other intellectual property (IP) interests from being counterfeited, pirated, or otherwise misappropriated. As IP theft is one of the top issues facing businesses operating in China, there are substantial risks companies must identify and address proactively to protect their valuable IP assets. Deals made in China can threaten IP rights not just in China, but in markets around the world. Understanding the Chinese IP landscape and how to manage the pertinent issues can go a long way to safeguarding your client’s valuable IP interests.

Please join Dan Harris as he explores the nuts and bolts of constructing a good business deal with a Chinese partner, what your agreements should include, and how to manage the Chinese IP rights framework to minimize your client’s IP-related risks.

WHAT YOU WILL LEARN
This webinar will cover:

  • How to choose a good Chinese partner
  • Identifying the IP assets that need protection
  • How to structure your deal
  • Drafting your deal papers
  • Drafting China employee contracts to protect your IP
  • IP registrations: What you should know about trademarks, patents, copyrights, and licensing agreements

YOUR CONFERENCE LEADER
Your conference leader for “Doing Business in China: Structuring Your Deal and Protecting Intellectual Property” is Dan Harris. Dan is an attorney with Harris Bricken, LLP, in Seattle. He is internationally regarded as a leading authority on legal matters related to doing business in China and in other emerging economies in Asia. Forbes Magazine, Business Week, Fortune Magazine, BBC News, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, The Economist, CNBC, The New York Times, and many other major media players have looked to him for his perspective on international law issues.

Dan writes and speaks extensively on Chinese law with a focus on protecting foreign businesses and his China Law Blog is regarded as one of the best law blogs on the web today. The ABA Journal recently named the China Law Blog to its Blawg Hall of Fame (a designation given to the top 20 law blogs of all time).

This session is recommended for corporate and in-house counsel and really for any attorney who advises companies or organizations on China and on China IP issues. It also is good for intellectual property attorneys looking to learn more about China IP law and what makes it so different from common law countries.. Find out more about costs and registration here and for a $35 discount use promo code cw17bc.

We hope to “see” you there.

China lawyersMany years ago, a very good client of mine in the international food brokerage business learned that one of its employees had set up a rival company and was using my client’s resources to generate business for that rival company. To grossly oversimplify, whenever this employee would find a particularly good deal on product, it would buy and then resell that product on behalf of its own company, not on its employer’s behalf. I lead with this to emphasize that this sort of thing can and does go on everywhere. It also gives me an opportunity to relive how much fun it is for us lawyers when a US company discovers an employee doing this sort of thing.

We also once had a client that sold $1500 consumer products and received a complaint email from one of its retailers claiming to have received more than $80,000 of product in less than stellar condition from “XYZ distributer.” This email alarmed our client as it had NO distributers and it had no record of any sales to this retailer. To make a long story short, the profit margins from selling millions of dollars of products that cost you nothing to make are astronomical.

This sort of thing — what some call a company within a company is very common in China. See this classic Financial Times story from many years ago. So common in fact that when our China lawyers have been involved in confronting employees that engaged in such conduct, their usual reaction is not one of “I’m really sorry, go ahead and fire me, but rather something more like the following:

  • You never told me I could not do this.
  • The employer rules and regulations do not prohibit this so I did it.
  • If you fire me, I will sue you for xyz.
  • If you fire me, I will report you for xyz.

We typically advice our clients not to confront China employees that have gone rogue without first making sure that they have good grounds for termination and that such a confrontation will not be putting the company at great risk. See China Employee Termination: Avoid These Mistakes.

What though can and should you do to prevent this sort of thing from happening to you in China?

  • Recognize that you cannot just turn over your China operations to any one person and essentially just walk away. Do not have a business in China unless you are prepared to operate it and monitor it.
  • Do not put too much trust into a small core of employees, shutting out the lines of communication to the other employees, and failing to engage in even basic monitoring of the business.
  • Listen to your China employees and talk with your China employees. It is a big deal for one Chinese employee to “rat” on another, but in most instances where we have come across “a company within a company situation” there has been at least one employee who has been hinting at problems and the foreign office has just shrugged them off. Oftentimes, the employee will have sought to convey information about the problem in the form of a question, such as “do you think it might make sense to have our books audited early this year” and then been “shot down” by a foreign office that does not press for why this question is being asked.
  • There are certain “tells” for which you should also be looking. Is there a small group of employees that seem to want to block other employees from receiving critical information or data? Are you seeing invoices or purchase orders that do not make sense? Does what is happening on the ground look or even feel very different from what the books say.

I could go on and on with how to prevent this sort of thing and there are tons of articles out there on this as well. I will instead simply conclude by saying that this sort of thing is far more likely to happen to the company that believes it cannot happen to them than to the company that believes vigilance is necessary.

Not trying to scare anyone here, but do be careful out there.

 

China entertainment lawyesSeveral stories came out this past week reporting on the recent failure of Chinese investments in Hollywood. Wanda’s highly publicized purchase of Dick Clark Productions, long rumored to be on the rocks, has fallen through for good, because Wanda paid only $25 million out of the $1 billion purchase price. Paramount’s deal with Huahua Media and Shanghai Film Group is foundering because Paramount hasn’t seen a red cent of the promised $1 billion. And more than a few people doubt whether Recon Holding’s $100 million deal to purchase 51% of Millenium Pictures will close.

Most – okay, all – of the lawyers who deal with China on a regular basis saw this coming from a mile away. Some context:

  1. Hollywood deals fall apart all the time. It’s the nature of the business, and hardly unique to Chinese-invested projects. But those deals have been getting more attention lately because so much of the money coming in is from China.
  1. Chinese investors have developed a not-completely-undeserved reputation as “tourist investors,” particularly when it comes to Hollywood: arriving with great fanfare, taking meetings with players across town, kicking the tires of every studio and production company that may be interested in Chinese investment (which is to say, every studio and production company in Hollywood), suggesting that a deal might be imminent … and then going back to China without agreeing to anything. See China Business Deals: What China Business Deal and China MOU. Like I Really Care.
  1. Because the Chinese yuan is a regulated currency, it’s always been difficult to get money out of China. We’ve been writing about this for a while, and in fact almost exactly one year ago I wrote a post in which I said, “Long story short, we can expect to see more US-China film deals fall through for lack of funding, and it won’t necessarily be the fault of the Chinese company.” Then my colleague Mathew Alderson wrote a three-part series of blog posts during the summer, followed by Dan Harris’ own five-part series in December. Chinese film companies are simply not free to do whatever they want with their own money; the government gets to decide.
  1. Chinese regulators are clamping down on any foreign investment deals, both because of the hundreds of billions of dollars leaving the country as capital flight, and because as a policy matter China wants to discourage “inefficient, uncreative Chinese companies that are simply achieving growth through acquisition.” Add to that increased scrutiny from U.S. politicians, and it’s not exactly Springtime for Renminbi.

Hollywood can bemoan the spigot being turned off, but there wasn’t nearly as much money coming in as was previously thought. It’s still not impossible to get money out of China, but you should say goodbye to buying sprees by Chinese companies snapping up Hollywood assets for no other reason than to convert their currency (cf: the scrapped sale of Voltage Pictures to Chinese metals company Anhui Xinke New Materials).

In light of the new reality, here are some tips on how everyone from studios to production companies to producers should proceed:

  1. Require the Chinese counterparty to pay a nontrivial amount of money upfront, and don’t begin performance until you receive it. If your contract doesn’t pass muster with Chinese regulators, you need to know as soon as possible. Your not receiving the upfront money is a really good sign that the deal itself will never work.
  1. If your deal is with a Chinese company with no presence in the U.S., don’t negotiate or draft it like a typical Hollywood deal. We review entertainment agreements all the time that are in English, governed by California law, and enforceable via arbitration or litigation in Los Angeles – and therefore virtually unenforceable against the Chinese party. You need an agreement written in Chinese, governed by Chinese law, and enforceable in Chinese courts. Do not fall into the trap of believing that because your counterpart Chinese company appears to have a tiny U.S. affiliate company that setting up your dispute for U.S. court resolution will work, because it almost certainly will not.
  1. Instead of fixating on money that your Chinese partner can transfer to the US to finance your slate of American films, start thinking about money that your Chinese partner can spend in China. Perhaps that means a shift toward co-productions in China. It might also mean more deals like the one for Resident Evil: The Final Chapter – ostensibly a buyout, but with profit participation for the production company.
  1. Consider forming a WFOE in China and having it becoming a profit center. China generally has no problem with WFOEs remitting money to their parent companies once all of the WFOE’s taxes have been paid.

It would be a mistake to assume this is just a temporary hiccup and that Chinese companies will be back investing huge amounts in Hollywood in a few months. China still has a ton of money, but for the foreseeable future, the money is staying in China.

China employment lawChina’s Ministry of Social Security and Human Resources, Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Department of Education recently jointly promulgated new rules for new graduates from foreign countries without working experiences. These rules apply to foreign graduates who obtained their master’s degree or higher education in China and to foreign graduates who received advanced degrees from a well-recognized foreign institution (whatever that means). Those who meet either of the above qualifications must then meet the following additional qualifications to be eligible for China employment:

  • have graduated within the past year
  • be over 18 years of age
  • have no criminal record
  • have good grades (no lower than 80 out of 100 or B/B+) and no record of infractions during school
  • be in good health
  • have a specified employer and a position relevant to the job candidate’s field(s) of study
  • hold a valid passport or any other valid travel document in lieu of a passport

In addition, the candidate’s proposed salary cannot be lower than the local average salary. This will be vigorously reviewed as part of the work permit application.

The prospective employer will need to apply for a work permit for the foreign recent graduate and the authorities will usually require all of the following:

  • the candidate’s resume
  • a proposed letter of intent regarding the employment. This letter of intent must also specify the expected salary.
  • a report specifying why employing this individual is necessary, including certification that the position was advertised to Chinese candidates for at least 30 days
  • a certificate of no criminal record
  • all relevant diplomas
  • a school-issued certificate confirming the potential foreign employee has no record of infractions at school
  • relevant school transcripts
  • a medical certificate showing good health
  • a recent photo (within the last 6 months)

Once approved, the foreign employee can get a China Z work visa. The initial term of employment cannot exceed one year, but employment can then be renewed for subsequent terms of up to five years. Applications will be subject to the applicable national/local quota.

It should go without saying (but since I am a lawyer I am not willing to risk that) that you as the employer should have in place for this new hire all of the usual safeguards you use (or should use) with any of your other China employees, be they foreign or Chinese. In other words, you should at minimum, enter into an employment contract with this new hire.

Local labor authorities are expected to come up with specific measures and local standards in implementing these new rules. Those local standards likely will determine whether this new employment category will become a big deal or rarely be used. I will report back on what I learn from compiling and submitting these applications on behalf of clients.

In the last week, from most recent to oldest, we wrote about the following:

1.  How Chinese companies steal your intellectual property.

2. How terminating your employees in China can come back and bite you.

3. How difficult it can be to figure out the capital requirements for your WFOE.

4. How complicated it can be drafting a China sales agency contract. This post not only started out with the following preamble: “With China getting more expensive and more difficult for foreign companies, and with many foreign companies choosing to leave China rather than risk getting caught for operating there illegally.”

5. How China companies will counterfeit your products.

6. How China is cracking down like never before on companies with “independent contractors” in China. This was I think our third or fourth post on this just this month as we just keep seeing the number of American companies getting caught for this increasing and the penalties become more onerous. We titled this article Doing Business in China with Deportation or Worse Hanging Over Your Head and we used the following picture with that post:

China WFOE lawyer

7. A Chinese Law Bibliography.

A psychologist would look at the above seven and quickly find that they all have one theme in common. China is a difficult, even dangerous place for foreign companies doing business there, seeking to do business there, or even doing business with Chinese companies. And your salvation comes from knowing and obeying the law and being able to use the law to your advantage. Hey, that’s what we do for a living: we are China attorneys and we help foreign companies gain an advantage over Chinese companies by using the law.

But I have to admit that this all can get a bit unrelenting and that there is more to life than gloom and doom. And hey, if you knew us, you would quickly learn that in real life we are some of the nicest most optimistic upbeat people  you could ever hope to meet. Truly.

And today I aim to show that with the following link to an amazing video on North Korea/South Korea relations by a true expert in the field. Now I could tell you that I am posting this video because the relations between North Korea and South Korea are in many ways a proxy for the relations between China and the United States, and then I could go on to discuss how the relations between these four countries might impact your business with China. But I won’t even try that. Instead, I will admit that I am posting this for one reason and one reason only. Because I found this to be one of the funniest things I’ve ever seen. Maybe it is because I have done many a TV (and radio) interview myself (too early in the morning or too late at night) in a room with the door closed and sometimes with one or both of my daughters making noise in the background, and always living in fear that one just might burst in while I am talking, as they so often used to do when I was on my cell phone talking to a client. Heck, at a certain age, they used to mimic me or try to get me to laugh while on those calls. So maybe I find the following video and article so incredibly funny simply because I can so relate to it. Be that as it may. No ulterior motives here. No China business scare tactics here. Just an attempt to get you to laugh and enjoy.

Watch the video first then read this article (please, please, please read the article, which analysis heightens the video and is almost as funny as the video itself) and then watch the video again. Then let us know what you think. I’m guessing many of you have already seen it, but enjoy it again; it does not get old.

Nobody panic, we will eventually return to our regularly scheduled programming. In the meantime though, have a great day. China attorneys

China IP LawyersOur China lawyers do the legal work on all sorts of transactions with China, ranging from relatively simply manufacturing contracts to purchase widgets to relatively complicated joint venture deals to technology licensing deals to mergers and acquisitions (involving both the purchasing of a Chinese company by a Western company to the purchasing of a Western company by a Chinese company). Nearly all of these deals have one thing in common: intellectual property. And on many (most?) of these deals, our lawyers will be far more skeptical of the intentions of the Chinese side than will our clients. We are perpetually concerned that the overriding goal of the Chinese side is to walk away with our client’s intellectual property without fairly compensating our client for that. That leads us to today’s question, which is one we are constantly asked in some form resembling the following: Do you really think XYZ Chinese company wants to steal our IP? To which the answer is pretty much invariably yes.

You can give all sorts of politically correct or politically incorrect answers as to why this is so, but it generally is. The answer I give is that Western companies want to steal your IP also, but because IP laws in the West are more developed and more likely to be enforced, their cost-benefit analysis is going to be different and so it will far less often make sense for them to try to steal your IP than it will for a Chinese company.

I was reminded of this ultra-common question today upon reading Mark Cohen’s always good China IPR Blog and his most recent post, entitled, Stealing IP from the Steel Sector. Mark’s post is about another article, Make the Foreign Serve China: How Foreign Science and Technology Helped China Dominate Global Metallurgical Industries, by Michael Komesaroff. Komesaroff nicely sums up China’s general thinking on IP with the following:

Chinese companies will infringe the proprietary technology of national champions as readily as they do to foreign competitors and the absence of an enforced intellectual property law accelerates diffusion of any new technology….with an endless supply of smart engineers and scientists, why pay for technology, something that you cannot touch, see, taste, or smell.

A reporter called me yesterday to check in on the “hot topic’ issues my firm’s China attorneys have been seeing lately. I told her of how my firm was getting a ton of matters involving Chinese companies claiming to want to invest in or buy out US technology companies, but in many instances, just using that claim as an excuse to “kick the tires” to see if there might be some way they can walk off our client’s technology for little to nothing. Just a more recent version of what Komesaroff describes in his article. For more on how Chinese companies have updated (but only slightly) their tactics of making off with Western IP and, more importantly, how to prevent that from happening to you, I urge you to check out the following.

Oh, and be careful out there.