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

Plan fail results in health and safety conviction
Deliver the health and safety work you promise, or there may be legal consequences – as a health and safety consultancy recently learnt! Earlier this year, WorkSafe prosecuted Safe Business Solution...
25.10.2024 Posted in Employment & Health & Safety
Contract stock edit e
Rent reviews
As a tenant or landlord under a commercial lease, your business will be affected by rent reviews during the life of your lease.  Therefore, it is essential that you understand the most common types o...
24.10.2024 Posted in Property
Serious misconduct – how serious does the conduct have to be?
What is serious misconduct, and when and how can an employer bring an employee’s employment to an end on these grounds?
23.10.2024 Posted in Employment
iStock  Construction dpi
“More than an opinion”: criminal liability arising from PS4 producer statements under the Building Act 2004
In Solicitor-General’s Reference (No 1 of 2022) from CRI-2021-463-55 ([2022] NZHC 556) [2024] NZCA 514 the Court of Appeal was asked to consider the following question: Was the Court correct to find...
15.10.2024 Posted in Construction & Disputes
Close call on contribution: Beca decision confirms 10-year longstop does not bar contribution claims
In a 3-2 split decision, the Supreme Court in Beca Carter Hollings & Ferner Ltd v Wellington City Council [2024] NZSC 117 confirmed that contribution claims are not barred by the Building Act 2004...
11.10.2024 Posted in Construction & Disputes & Insurance
Business man document
Addressing directors’ personal safety
The Companies Act 1993 (CA93) currently requires all company directors to make their residential addresses available as a matter of public record.  However, in recent times, incidents of stalking and...
Wielding the Secateurs: The High Court’s Pruning of Potentially Disruptive Decisions
Every now and then courts have to self-correct to prevent errant off-shoots of legal reasoning advancing into the law.  In the decision, IAG New Zealand Ltd v Degen [2024] NZHC 397, the High Court t...
19.09.2024 Posted in Insurance
SEND AN ENQUIRY
Send us an enquiry

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