CHINA INVESTMENTS AND OPERATIONS |
|
ADVANTAGES OF
HONG KONG HOLDING STRUCTURE
TAX PREFERENCES IN CHINA PRC
Structuring of foreign direct investments and operations in the
People’s Republic of China (“PRC”) can be made more
tax-efficient and flexible through a presence in the PRC's Hong
Kong Special Administrative Region ("SAR"). The PRC continues to
reform its complex regulation of foreign investments and
activities, and the Hong Kong SAR continues to adjust its
less-regulated economy in order to maximize its attractiveness
as a PRC gateway.
Cooperation between the PRC central and SAR governments has
included, in recent years, a closer economic partnership
agreement and will include, starting in early 2007, a
preferential cross-border tax arrangement.
CROSS-BORDER TAX PREFERENCES
Hong Kong's newest attraction, as a location to hold investments
and to support operations in the PRC, is that its residents who
receive income from the PRC Mainland will soon enjoy relatively
low rates of PRC withholding income tax, under the recently
expanded Arrangement for Avoidance of Double Taxation and
Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with Respect to Taxes on Income,
signed on August 21, 2006 and to become effective (for Hong Kong
residents) from April 1, 2007 (which is the start of the Hong
Kong fiscal year).
A "resident of Hong Kong" entitled to benefit from this
arrangement includes "a company … if incorporated outside the
Hong Kong SAR, being normally managed or controlled in the Hong
Kong SAR”. The “arrangement” follows the structure and wording
of the "agreements" (treaties) entered into by the PRC with many
countries. In comparison with them, the Hong Kong arrangement
provides for lower tax rates.
These lower rates will become increasingly valuable when the PRC
rolls out its long-awaited tax reform, which is likely to
increase the standard (non-treaty) rate of many types of tax.
A preferential withholding income tax rate limit of 7% will be
enjoyed by Hong Kong residents on interest and royalties, and a
rate of 5% enjoyed on dividends received from their PRC
subsidiaries and, in some cases, from other PRC payers. For
interest income, the new 7% rate compares with a typical 10%
rate specified for most recipients covered by tax treaties. For
royalty income, the new 7% rate compares with a typical 10% rate
specified for most types of royalty to recipients covered by tax
treaties. (For both royalty and interest income, where there is
no tax treaty or tax arrangement, the rate currently specified
by PRC policy is 10%, but a higher rate of up to 20% is likely
in the future.) Dividend income (from a subsidiary owned 25% or
more by the recipient) will be taxed at only 5%, in comparison
with the more typical 10% rate specified under tax treaties.
(For dividend income, even where there is no tax treaty or tax
arrangement, PRC policy currently exempts foreign-invested
enterprise ("FIE")-paid dividends from any tax, but a rate of up
to 20% is likely in the future.)
Capital gains on the sale of a PRC company are treated
differently, with a preferential zero withholding income tax
rate applying only to portfolio investors who before the sale
hold less than 25% of the company (which does not hold assets
substantially consisting of real estate), according to the
apparent intended meaning of the tax arrangement. (For capital
gains, where there is no tax treaty or tax arrangement, the rate
currently specified by PRC policy is 10%, but a higher rate of
up to 20% is likely in the future.)
For direct investors holding 25% or more of a PRC subsidiary,
this lack of any preferential rate is not onerous. They can
avoid PRC capital gains tax by selling ownership only in
offshore companies (which themselves own PRC subsidiaries)
rather than selling direct ownership in PRC subsidiaries. Tax
planning of this type is a traditional reason for establishing
an offshore holding company to hold each PRC direct investment
that might later be sold. But there are other benefits to using
this type of holding structure, for it can help address certain
constraints, costs and risks, which are summarized below.
[ Top ]
PRC ENTITIES – CATEGORIES & TRENDS
A wholly foreign owned enterprise (“WFOE” or “WOFE”) has become
the most popular type of presence in the PRC for foreign
companies in recent years, supplanting foreign representative
offices (“RO’s”) for provision of services related to sales and
sourcing, and outnumbering Sino-foreign joint ventures ("JVs")
for manufacturing and provision of other services. WFOE’s and
JVs have both long been categorized as "foreign-invested
enterprises" ("FIE’s") and covered by a different set of laws
and regulations than those governing domestic-invested
enterprises. Recently, however, most types of FIE’s, now being
referred to as "foreign-invested companies", have been brought
under many of the same laws and regulations that govern
domestic-invested companies.
EARLY STAGE PRC PRESENCE – RO vs. WFOE
Until recently, many foreign companies established their initial
non-manufacturing PRC presence in the form of a RO, mainly in
order to avoid committing capital. But the alternative of
establishing a WFOE (recently enjoying much lower minimum
capital requirements) has gradually become more attractive. A
RO's parent is liable for all of the RO’s obligations, in
contrast with the limited liability resulting from establishment
of a WFOE or another type of FIE. Although an income tax
exemption is available in theory for a variety of RO’s, in
practice very few of them qualify. Establishment of RO’s has
become easier in recent years, but their compliance with
changing tax rules has entailed higher administrative costs and
tax liability.
Permitted activities for a typical RO continue to be limited to
“non-direct business activities”.
These activities are not comprehensively defined but are
understood, in theory, to mean business liaisons, product
introductions, market studies, technical exchanges and, in
practice, to include product sourcing, quality control and
marketing. After-sale service is not formally permitted but has
long been tolerated.
Expatriate personnel can be employed directly by a RO, but
employment of a PRC resident national by a RO is only permitted
on an indirect basis through an authorized labor service company
(commonly referred to as a “FESCO”, the acronym of the original
state-owned labor service company). The FESCO acts as the formal
employer, with responsibility for maintaining personnel files.
The FESCO also usually handles withholding of individual income
tax and benefit plan contributions. The FESCO’s fees for these
activities are often cost-effective for a small RO that wishes
to avoid responsibility for administering employee tax and
benefits, but these fees can become a substantial expense when
the number of RO employees grows larger.
An FIE is not subject to these restrictions. Establishment of an
FIE to sell only self-made (or "self-processed") products, or
“technical consulting” or similar services, can be approved by
the local government, while provincial-level approval is
required to engage in “commercial activities” (reselling of
purchased products), including wholesaling, retailing,
franchising and sales/commission agency.
[ Top ]
FIE ENTERPRISE INCOME TAX
FIE’s are subject to PRC Foreign Enterprise Income Tax on
profits (net after deduction of operating expenses), calculated
at a standard rate of 33%. Lower rates of 15% and 24% are
available in a certain number of special zones, and local
governments in many other locations routinely promise to match
the lower rates through various types of rebates – which may be
subject to eventual cancellation and/or penalties as central
government authorities attempt to crack down on unauthorized
local incentives. A "production-oriented" (mainly manufacturing
or technology-related) FIE normally qualifies for a five-year
income tax holiday, consisting of an exemption for the first two
years, and a fifty-percent reduction for the next three years,
beginning with the FIE's first profitable year. an FIE’s losses
in one year can be carried forward for five years to offset
revenues and thereby to reduce taxable profits in future years.
TAX EFFICIENT SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT
The structuring of supply chains must take account of
differences between Value-added Tax ("VAT") and Business Tax
("BT"). VAT is normally levied at 17% of the difference between
goods sales price and cost of inputs (on which VAT has been
invoiced and paid). BT is normally levied at 5% of gross
revenue, mainly for services but also for certain asset
transfers that are not covered by VAT. Total VAT on a product
normally is the same regardless of how many times ownership
changes hands in a domestic supply chain. In contrast, BT
accumulates with each transaction, thereby increasing the
aggregate tax burden of a supply chain that includes service
fee-based outsourcing or subcontracting.
Cross-border supply chains involve planning for Customs import
duty (which is levied not only on goods prices but also on
certain related royalties – other than for computer software)
and export VAT refund (which has recently been reduced on
certain product categories).
FIE CAPITAL AND DEBT RESTRICTIONS
Up to 70% of an FIE's registered capital has recently been
permitted to be contributed in the form of non-cash items such
as equipment, intellectual property, other intangible assets or
technical services. Foreign investors considering contribution
of non-cash items must be attentive to the tax consequences in
other jurisdictions. For example, if a contributor is subject to
U.S. income tax, a taxable gain will often be deemed to result
from the contribution. In contrast, Hong Kong normally does not
tax gains from the sale or contribution of assets.
Investors normally benefit from keeping capital contributions as
low as possible while funding an FIE with as much debt as
possible, in order to retain maximum flexibility in returning
cash to investors. Registered capital cannot (except with
special approval based on strict criteria) be withdrawn from
most types of FIE until the FIE is liquidated. This means that
an FIE will eventually be left holding excess cash unless it
periodically purchases additional capital assets with a value at
least equaling the depreciation of its existing assets. This
restriction on capital return is not a problem for investors
that are satisfied for their FIE to invest its excess cash in
other companies, because restrictions on the percentage of an
FIE's asset value that it is permitted to use for this purpose
have recently been removed.
FIE debt-equity ratio restrictions, along with the meanings of
the related terms “total investment” and “registered capital”,
are somewhat confusing. The related regulations are written in
an indirect manner that makes it difficult for an investor to
answer the basic question: “After investment of a certain amount
into an FIE, what amount will the FIE be permitted to borrow?”
The answer depends on a sliding (and partially overlapping)
scale of maximum ratios.
Examples at key threshold levels are set out in the following
table (all figures in US Dollars):
FIE's approved
Registered capital |
FIE's maximum
approvable total investment |
FIE's resulting
maximum debt limit |
$200,000 |
$285,714 |
$85,714 |
$2,100,000 |
$4,200,000 |
$2,100,000 |
$5,000,000 |
$12,500,000 |
$7,500,000 |
$12,000,000 |
$36,000,000 |
$24,000,000 |
The above limits' applications to foreign guaranties, short-term
debts, and medium to long term debts were all changed or
clarified from 2003 through 2005.
Implementation was initially uneven, but enforcement is
continuing to strengthen. Foreign guaranties securing domestic
debts do not count against an FIE's foreign debt limit until the
domestic debt is actually paid off under the foreign guarantee
(although several early-2005 government documents set out a
different approach, they were subsequently cancelled). An FIE's
current "balance" of short term (one year or less) foreign debts
is counted against the foreign debt limit. Also counted is the
"cumulative" amount of medium to long term foreign debts. The
effect of this "cumulative" approach is to permanently reduce
the FIE's foreign debt limit by the amount of any medium to long
term foreign debt principal repayments. To avoid this reduction,
the simplest approach is to set a term of one year or less for
all foreign debts. Upon expiry of this term, repayment can
normally be omitted in favor of renewal or other disposition.
[ Top ]
FIE SHAREHOLDER RELATIONS & EXIT
Investors' relations among themselves and exit from an FIE are
subject to various constraints, costs and risks. Transfer of FIE
equity requires government approval – raising questions about
the enforceability of buyout agreements among investors.
Allocation of FIE voting power, dividend distribution and
capital return must normally correspond to the value of each
investor's capital contribution. Liquidation of an FIE is
subject to relatively nontransparent procedures, which do not
ensure that foreign investors will recoup a proportionate share
of the full value of the FIE’s business.
HONG KONG PRESENCE IN SUPPORT OF PRC OPERATIONS
The longstanding attraction of a Hong Kong presence, even before
the recent preferential tax arrangement was announced, is that
such a presence can assist to address the above PRC structuring
constraints, costs and risks. The forms available for a Hong
Kong presence are introduced below.
HONG KONG BRANCH OR REPRESENTATIVE OFFICE
Within 30 days of establishing a place of business in Hong Kong,
a foreign company, like a Hong Kong company or an individual,
must register its presence with the Hong Kong tax authorities. A
presence may be considered a branch office, with liability for
tax on Hong Kong-source profits. If Hong Kong-based personnel
will handle only communications, purchasing, and/or limited
administration and management of non-Hong Kong activities, then
the company's Hong Kong presence will be considered a RO, which
has no Hong Kong tax liability. Neither a branch nor a RO are
separate entities from its parent, and neither of them will
limit the liability of its parent. To limit the parent’s
liability, it is necessary to establish a Hong Kong company.
HONG KONG’S NARROW TAX NET
AUDITS AND FILINGS
A company conducting business in Hong Kong, whether through a RO
or a branch or as a Hong Kong company, is liable for tax at a
flat rate set in recent years at 17.5%, which applies only to
profits from the carrying on of a business in Hong Kong, and in
general does not apply to interest, dividends, or capital gains.
A Hong Kong company, like a PRC FIE, must appoint a
locally-qualified accounting firm to audit its annual accounts.
Unlike a PRC FIE, a Hong Kong company must appoint a secretary
with responsibility for maintaining the company’s records and
making government filings.
HONG KONG EMPLOYMENT
Employment issues are simpler in Hong Kong than in the PRC.
Employers are not normally responsible to withhold employees'
taxes. Employment contracts can be negotiated freely, although
certain rights relating to maternity, disability and severance
cannot be waived, and the enforceability of noncompetition
covenants is subject to scrutiny under common law principles.
Hong Kong’s mandatory provident fund pension system, which
requires employers to establish accounts and make contributions,
is less complex than the PRC social welfare system. Salaries are
higher in Hong Kong, reflecting its higher cost of living and
its separation from the vast PRC labor market, although that
difference is narrowing.
FLEXIBILITY OF HONG KONG COMPANIES
A Hong Kong company (or other offshore-incorporated company
resident in Hong Kong) permits great flexibility in structuring
relations among investors, employees and lenders, including
issuing different classes of shares, bonds, warrants (options)
and other rights to convert one type of equity or debt to
another. As is the case with a PRC FIE, a Hong Kong company may
not freely reduce its share capital, but recent changes have
made this substantially easier for a private Hong Kong company.
This issue is less important in Hong Kong because a Hong Kong
company’s share capital may initially be set as low as desired
and its funding may be arranged almost entirely in the form of
shareholder loans and/or other debt.
Exit from a Hong Kong company is largely unregulated and
negotiable between shareholders. Transfer of shares in a private
Hong Kong company, as in a PRC FIE, is subject to the consent,
and typically also to pre-emption rights, of other shareholders.
But no government approval is required in Hong Kong, and all
shareholders can enter into enforceable agreements to implement
transfers upon satisfaction of pre-agreed conditions. Public
offering, listing, and trading of shares are subject to much
fewer conditions than in the PRC.
CEPA PRIVILEGES FOR HK COMPANIES
Under the China-Hong Kong Closer Economic Partnership Agreement
(“CEPA”), which was originally signed in 2003, expanded in 2004,
and broadened again in 2005 and 2006, "Hong Kong service
suppliers" (defined more strictly than the tax arrangement
defines "Hong Kong residents") continue to enjoy a variety of
PRC market access privileges. Preferences include import duty,
reduced geographical, financial and ownership restrictions,
lower entry thresholds for smaller players, more opportunities
for Hong Kong service professionals, and a right for individual
Hong Kong permanent residents to set up individually owned
retail stores in Guangdong Province.
CONCLUSION
PRC business regulations are changing, mainly in the direction
of deregulation, but they continue to be complex and to limit
the flexibility of companies’ financial structuring and tax
planning. Hong Kong continues to provide potential solutions,
and its attractiveness has been further increased by recent
cross-border tax preferences. Foreign companies should expect
more changes in both jurisdictions, creating occasional new
risks along with new opportunities.
[ Top ]
---
KEY COMPARISONS
CHINA TAX TREATIES AND
HONG KONG TAX ARRANGEMENT
Notes
1. The withholding tax rate is 10% but, for royalties paid for
the rental of industrial, commercial, or scientific equipment,
the rate is applied to only 70% of the royalties paid. Thus an
effective rate will be 7% for such royalties.
2. The withholding tax rate is 10% but, for royalties paid for
the use of, or the right to use, industrial, commercial, or
scientific equipment, the rate is applied to only 60% of the
royalties paid. Thus an effective rate will be 6% for such
royalties.
3. 10% if less than 25% of the dividend-paying China Company is
owned by the recipient.
4. Except for the sale of shares in a China company that holds
assets substantially consisting of real estate.
5. Except for the sale of shares in a China company that holds
assets substantially consisting of real estate. Also, China and
Mauritius signed income tax treaty protocol on September 5, 2006
to also exclude from this zero rate the sale of shares in a
China company owned 25 percent or more by the seller.
6. A protocol similar to that between China and Mauritius may
eventually restrict the scope of this zero rate.
7. Except that a zero rate would apply if (a) less than 25% of
the China company in which shares are sold is owned by the
seller, and (b) the China company does not hold assets
substantially consisting of real estate.
HONG KONG OBTAINS PREFERENTIAL STATUS WITH CHINA
IN NEW FREE TRADE AGREEMENT
Ever since the United Kingdom returned sovereignty over Hong
Kong to the People's Republic of China (PRC) on July 1, 1997,
Hong Kong has been seeking to redefine itself. Over the previous
30 years, it had benefited first from a strong manufacturing
base (long since migrated over the border to China); then from
its excellence as a center for finance, shipping and freight
(for which it is still well known); and more recently as a
center for management and knowledge-based services.
However, the territory has a reputation as a costly place to do
business, and it faces significant regional competition
(primarily from neighboring Shenzhen, across the border with
China, and Shanghai but also from Singapore, Taiwan, and Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia.)
The recent economic problems caused by SARS, which hit Hong Kong
when it was showing only weak signs of recovery from a long
period of economic malaise, would seem to have dealt a body-blow
to the region's prospects.
However, Hong Kong received a shot in the arm with the signing
on June 29, 2003, of its Closer Economic Partnership Arrangement
("CEPA") with the PRC. This is the first free trade agreement to
be signed by either the PRC or Hong Kong under World Trade
Organization (WTO) procedures.
[ Top ]
WHAT ADVANTAGES DOES CEPA BRING TO HONG KONG’S
SERVICE SECTOR CEPA.
Provides for liberalization of Hong Kong's access to PRC markets
across 17 sectors, starting January 1, 2004
Grants advantages to Hong Kong enterprises that differ between
the 17 sectors but that respond to very real barriers to entry
complained about by lobbyists for the sectors. The advantages
consist of a combination of the following:
Faster access to the PRC market than allowed by the PRC's main
WTO Agreements
Additional services opened up, beyond the PRC's WTO commitments
Exemption from foreign investment restrictions
Reduced entry requirements
Greater parity of treatment for Hong Kong professionals
alongside their PRC counterparts
No anti-dumping measures to be used by either side against the
other
Clearly, many domestic Hong Kong enterprises stand to benefit
from CEPA. Although companies in Hong Kong already are adept at
pursuing trading opportunities in and with the PRC, the earlier
dates for greater market access will help them capitalize
further on their first mover advantage. For industries where
CEPA liberalization will be greater than PRC's WTO commitments
ever will be, Hong Kong's market players will be better-placed
than anyone outside the PRC to sell their products and expertise
into the PRC.
However, Hong Kong's biggest benefit from CEPA may have little
to do with its effect on pre-existing Hong Kong enterprises, as
explained below.
ADVANTAGES FOR THOSE SELLING GOODS INTO CHINA
Zero import tariffs will apply from January 1, 2004, to 273
categories of products "Made in Hong Kong" and exported into the
PRC. This will replace existing tariffs that can be as high as
35 percent.
Light industries that were not economically viable in past years
if established in Hong Kong may find that their business case
re-written by CEPA, allowing them to resume operations in Hong
Kong. In addition, once established in Hong Kong, they will
benefit from better protection of intellectual property rights
and the branding advantage associated with "Made in Hong Kong."
ADVANTAGES TO COMPANIES OUTSIDE HONG KONG
Hong Kong historically has played the role of entrepot,
providing trade routes into the once-closed China market. That
role in recent years has been at best diluted and at worst
significantly marginalized by the PRC's emergence as a more open
trading nation and by the services offered by PRC's cost
effective "windows" to the world along its eastern seaboard.
Until CEPA, it seemed that Hong Kong was destined to play on a
level playing field and that Hong Kong necessarily would
participate in a much smaller proportion of China trade, with
the only consolation being the greater overall amount of China
trade being conducted.
CEPA, though, reinserts Hong Kong into the China trade equation
for a high proportion of overseas investors. This is because
CEPA adopts a particularly liberal definition of "Hong Kong
Company." This is no accident or mistake. Henry Tang, Hong
Kong's Financial Secretary, has stressed that questions of
ownership, shareholder structure, ethnicity or nationality are
of no relevance to qualification as a "Hong Kong company." So,
overseas investors can avoid compliance with WTO timetables and
entry barriers if they can qualify as a "Hong Kong company." At
the same time, they may pay Hong Kong profits tax at the
straightforward rate of 17.5 percent rather than the much
higher, and more complex, rates charged in the PRC.
Subject to eventual wording of CEPA terms, there is excitement
that goods finished in Hong Kong may attract "Made in Hong Kong"
status, which will allow taxation at the low Hong Kong rates
rather than PRC rates, and, with CEPA, avoid PRC tariffs upon
export into the PRC. This could make Hong Kong a staging post
for re-imports of semi-completed products originating in the PRC.
These possibilities have ensured that Chinese, especially from
the neighboring Pearl River Delta, are as enthusiastic about
CEPA as are Hong Kong business people.
[ Top ]
OVERSEAS BUSINESSES THAT COULD BENEFIT
FROM
STRUCTURING CHINA TRADE OR INVESTMENT
THROUGH A HONG KONG COMPANY
Construction and Related Engineering Services
Hong Kong-invested construction and related engineering services
will have the following competitive advantages when doing
business in the PRC compared with other overseas companies:
Under the new PRC Foreign Investor Construction Enterprises
scheme (Ministry of Construction Decrees 113 and 114),
foreign-invested construction enterprises must obtain a
Construction Skills Qualification Certificate ("SQC"). SQC’s are
granted based on the contractor's track record of projects
undertaken in the PRC. CEPA will make it easier for Hong Kong
construction companies to obtain SQC’s compared with other
foreign companies because PRC authorities now will take into
account Hong Kong company projects in Hong Kong when considering
SQC’s. For overseas companies, only PRC experience will be
considered. (However, requirements in Decrees 113 and 114
regarding the minimum number of managerial and technical staff
that a construction enterprise must have in the PRC have not
been relaxed for Hong Kong companies.)
Under Decree 113, there are restrictions on the types of
projects that a wholly foreign owned construction enterprise can
undertake. For example, it can bid only on projects for which 50
percent or more of the project funding is from foreign sources.
These restrictions are lifted for wholly Hong Kong-invested
construction companies. Hong Kong construction companies will be
able to undertake all Chinese-foreign joint construction
projects.
CEPA permits Hong Kong-invested enterprises that have obtained
construction quality certification to bid for construction
projects in all parts of the PRC. However, it is not entirely
clear whether this will be of significant practical value.
Current indications are that when actually undertaking
construction projects, Hong Kong-invested enterprises still will
be subject to the same qualification and licensing requirements
as other overseas companies.
CEPA also has re-confirmed that:
Hong Kong consultancy firms are permitted to set up wholly-owned
enterprises in the PRC. The Ministry of Construction has
indicated that this generally is limited to consultancy firms
primarily involved in design work.
Hong Kong-invested construction enterprises may partner with PRC
construction enterprises to jointly bid for PRC construction
projects that are technically difficult for PRC construction
enterprises to undertake on their own.
Hong Kong companies are permitted to wholly acquire construction
enterprises in the PRC.
Real Estate
Through wholly-owned operations, Hong Kong companies are
permitted to engage in activities relating to self-owned or
leased properties for high-standard real estate projects.
Through wholly-owned operations, Hong Kong companies are
permitted to provide real estate services on a fee or contract
basis in the PRC.
Retail
Hong Kong retailers are permitted to establish wholly-owned
retail commercial enterprises in the PRC. The entry requirements
are reduced as follows:
Items |
WTO Level |
CEPA Level |
Minimum average annual
sales value (previous 3 years) |
US$2 billion |
US$100 million |
Minimum assets in Year 1 |
US$200 million |
US$10 million |
Minimum registered capital |
|
|
General |
RMB50 million |
RMB10 million |
Central and Western Region of PRC |
RMB30 million |
RMB6 million |
It would seem to be possible for an overseas retail company to
open outlets in Chinese cities under the name of its Hong Kong
subsidiary. Hong Kong enterprises are permitted to engage in
franchising on a wholly-owned basis in the PRC.
Distribution
Hong Kong enterprises are permitted to supply distribution
services in the PRC on a wholly-owned basis and to set up
wholly-owned external trading companies one year ahead of
China's WTO timetable. Entry requirements for Hong Kong
enterprises wishing to set up a wholesale commercial enterprise
are reduced as follows:
Items |
WTO Level |
CEPA Level |
Minimum average annual
sales value (previous 3 years) |
US$2.5 billion |
US$30 million |
Minimum assets in Year 1 |
US$300 million |
US$10 million |
Minimum registered capital |
|
|
General |
RMB80 million |
RMB50 million |
Central and Western Region of PRC |
RMB60 million |
RMB30 million |
Logistics
Hong Kong companies are permitted to set up wholly-owned
enterprises the PRC to provide logistics services and related
consultancy services for ordinary road freight and to engage in
management and operation of logistics services through
electronic means.
Other Favored Sectors
CEPA provides benefits to the following other business and
service sectors:
-Management consulting services
-Storage and warehousing services
-Convention services
-Tourism services
-Advertising services
-Audiovisual services
-Accounting services
-Legal services
-Medical / dental services
-Banking
-Freight forwarding agency services
-Securities and insurance
-Transport services
What Should Be Done Now?
Foreign companies investing in, manufacturing in, exporting from
or selling services into the PRC should re-evaluate their
current arrangements and strategy now.
Hong Kong and the PRC are working hard to deliver fully worded
CEPA rules in time for the liberalization on January 1, 2004.
While much will depend on the words used (their clarity and
whether there is any dilution of either side's commitments),
this is not a time to wait and see.
Given that much of the advantage offered by CEPA is by way of
abridgement of the WTO timetable, the Hong Kong government is
encouraging Hong Kong enterprises to galvanize themselves into
action to maximize the benefits offered. This applies equally to
overseas investors that find advantage under CEPA.
To the extent that CEPA provides considerable reduction in
capital and turnover requirements, CEPA may have the effect (for
both Hong Kong and overseas investors) of providing a route into
the PRC that would not otherwise exist.
Overseas enterprises without an existing presence in Hong Kong
may believe requirements for a track record of substantive
operations in Hong Kong for three years negates the abridgement
of the WTO timetable offered by CEPA. Such organizations might
benefit from acquiring a suitable Hong Kong enterprise that
meets the criteria of a "Hong Kong company." There are likely to
be synergies between "Hong Kong companies" and overseas
investors with the capital and expertise to make a success of a
CEPA enterprise.
[ Return ] [ Top
]
|