27.11.2019

New National Interest Test Proposed for New Zealand’s Overseas Investment Rules

The New Zealand Government has recently announced yet more proposed changes to New Zealand’s overseas investment rules to be introduced early next year.

The key proposed change is the introduction of a new “national interest” test which will apply to the sale of infrastructure of a certain scale.   

The Associate Minister of Finance, David Parker, noted that under the current Overseas Investment Act, the sale of strategic assets such as ports, airports, telecommunications infrastructure, electricity and other critical infrastructure are not assessed through a national interest lens.  Mr Parker stated “We are introducing a number of new powers, consistent with global best practice, to protect New Zealanders’ best interests in such important – often monopoly – assets”.  Mr Parker said the threshold for considering infrastructure sales would be $500m if the buyer was Australian, $200m from a CPTPP country and $100m from other countries.  Although no specific details regarding the elements of the new national interest test have been released, Parker advised that the national interest test is likely to be similar to that of Australia, being “… a broad discretion for the Government to reach into those transactions when it wants to and decline to approve it where we think it’s not in the interest of the country.”  In our view, it will be important that there is sufficient certainty so as to not deter foreign investment in New Zealand assets due to a lack of clarity.

Other changes include a “call in” power, with no investment threshold, for the proposed sale of New Zealand’s most strategically important assets.  This is likely to include companies developing military technology, other direct suppliers to New Zealand’s defence and security agencies and (potentially) certain key media assets.  The Government will be able to stop investments that pose a significant risk to national security or public order. It was noted that these powers are unlikely to be regularly used and would only be used where necessary for protecting New Zealand.  A further change would apply to the purchase of water bottling plants on sensitive land. Specifically, a new test which considers the impact on water quality and sustainability of a water botting enterprise where applications are made by overseas buyers to purchase such assets. 

There are also changes proposed to the enforcement powers under the Overseas Investment Act.  The maximum fine for non-compliance with the Act is currently NZ$300,000.  It is proposed that this is increased to NZ$500,000 for individuals and NZ$10m for corporates.  This illustrates the current Government’s tough stance on breaches of the Overseas Investment Act.

The Government has advised that a Bill implementing the above changes will be introduced in early 2020.  These proposed changes follow the reforms made last year which effectively banned overseas buyers (other than Australian or Singaporean citizens and permanent residents) from buying residential homes in New Zealand.

 

Do you need expert legal advice?
Contact the expert team at Hesketh Henry.
Kerry
Media contact - Kerry Browne
Please contact Kerry with any media enquiries and with any questions related to marketing or sponsorships on +64 9 375 8747 or via email.

Related Articles / Insights & Opinion

construction meeting e
Referring to Other Documents and When to Bring Proceedings: The High Court Provides Useful Guidance in Issuing and Relying on Payment Schedules
The High Court has provided useful guidance for contractors in issuing and assessing payment schedules under the Construction Contracts Act 2002 (CCA) in its recent decisions in Chillex Services Ltd v...
10.07.2025 Posted in Construction
Rewriting the Risk: Lessons from John Sisk & Son Ltd v Capital & Centric (Rose) Ltd [2025] EWHC 594 (TCC)
A recent decision by the English High Court, John Sisk & Son Ltd v Capital & Centric (Rose) Ltd [2025] EWHC 594 (TCC), considered the interpretation of a risk allocation provision under a besp...
09.07.2025 Posted in Construction & Disputes
Can Contractors Terminate for Repeated Late Payment? Key Lessons from Providence v Hexagon
The decision of the English Court of Appeal in Providence Building Services Ltd v Hexagon Housing Association Ltd [2024] EWCA Civ 962 provides important guidance on a contractor’s termination right...
09.07.2025 Posted in Construction & Disputes
Property
Make Your Premises Good Again
With all the time, effort and cost that goes into taking on a new lease of commercial premises, what happens when it comes time to move on can seem unimportant. It is not surprising, then that make-go...
25.06.2025 Posted in Property
Flooded car
Flooding due to overland flow paths and damaged drainage
Persistent heavy rainfall across the country often results in damage to property due to flooding caused by overland flow paths and defective drainage.  But who is responsible for the cost of the dama...
17.06.2025 Posted in Climate Change & Property
Understanding Indirect Privacy Notification: What you need to know
The Privacy Amendment Bill (the Bill), if passed into law, will require agencies to notify individuals when their personal information is collected from a source other than the individual themselves, ...
16.06.2025 Posted in Corporate & Commercial & Employment
iStock  Succession Plan medium
Family Ties: Intra-Family Succession and Exit Planning
As the second instalment in a series of articles looking at the generational wealth transition and its impacts on business succession in New Zealand, Ben Hickson (partner, Corporate & Commercial...
16.06.2025 Posted in Corporate & Commercial & Private Wealth
SEND AN ENQUIRY
Send us an enquiry

For expert legal advice, please complete the form below or call us on (09) 375 8700.