President's Decision is Meaningful to Searchers Looking Overseas or Investing From Overseas

professional profile

January 09, 2026

by a professional from American University in Irvine, CA, USA

For anyone who is involved in international transactions, the recent Executive Order issued by President Trump requiring the divestiture of assets owned by Emcore and acquired by HieFo is very instructive. While Hiefo is a corporation formed in Delaware, it is considered to be owned and controlled by interests in the People's Republic of China. As such, the acquisition was required to be reviewed by CIFIUS, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, an agency of the United States, led by the Treasury Department, which is charged with the oversight of transactions that affect US strategic interests. The concern in the HieFo case involved Chinese control over chip and wafer technology deemed of strategic national importance, and the Executive Order requires a complete divestiture of the Emcore assets acquired by Hiefo within 180 days of its issuance. Particularly for searchers looking to acquire or invest in companies in the defense, security, infrastructure, AI or other sensitive technologies, this case is important in reminding us of the broad powers which CIFIUS has to block, and even unwind, transactions within its purview. If you are investing in a cross-border transaction in one of these (and potentially other) tech sectors, it is important to seek competent legal advice as to whether CFIUS approval may be required, and consider communicating with it ahead of agreement on the final transaction terms to avoid any potential issues if concerns are raised. Of course, this is different from any of the US regulations involving export controls and licenses, which is another area where searchers in this space need to be vigilant.
1
8
86
Replies
8
commentor profile
Reply by a professional
from Cornell University in Toronto, ON, Canada
Thanks ^redacted‌ - I've been a part of a sale that involved a Canadian business selling directly to the US army/navy/etc. This was definitely a concern that came up during the LOI stage from buyers. Ended up being sold to a Canadian buyer, but even then there were restrictions, notifications, and government security approvals that needed to be done in sync with the transaction, including foreign ownership %. Agree with ^redacted‌ that competent advice is required here, there are legal teams and consultants that specialize in this space and our buyer engaged a team to walk through the required process for them (it was confusing to say the least!). Can't comment directly on the EO though.
commentor profile
Reply by a searcher
from American University of Paris in Cuxhaven, Germany
Thanks for the tag ^redacted‌ My investor base is increasingly avoiding U.S.-based acquisitions as the political environment becomes more volatile, unreliable, and unpredictable, alongside a more aggressive posture toward other countries. In parallel, I’ve seen my private capital partners (family offices, PE, boutique banks) channel more capital into Europe, both for these reasons and due to the ever-weakening U.S. dollar. That, along with a 4,000% increase in Americans applying for visas and residency in European countries, paints a sobering picture. To quote Andrew Henderson from the Nomad Capitalist YouTube channel: "Go where they treat you best."
commentor profile
+6 more replies.
Join the discussion