中国企业憧憬赴美淘金

    康涅狄格州哈特福德三一学院（Trinity College）的经济学家文贯中表示，近年来中国私营企业纷纷走向海外也反映了国内商业环境的恶化，因为政府更青睐大型国企。2008、2009年金融危机肆虐时，中国政府高达5,860亿美元的经济刺激方案有很大一部分都流向了地方政府和国企，为它们提供了慷慨的税收减免以及优先获得土地和国有银行贷款等一系列优惠措施。私营企业面临着歧视以及来自国企的不公平竞争。

    因此，它们放眼别处，以寻求发展。中国人民大学（Renmin University）海外投资专家刘俊海（音译）表示，中国大多数私营企业都将美国列为首选海外投资地，因为美国具有“成熟透明的资本市场，独立完善的法律体系，先进的技术和高素质的工人。” 近年来的一些成功案例也强化了这一印象，比如联想（Lenovo）收购了IBM的个人电脑业务，中国大型工程机械制造商三一集团（SANY）在乔治亚州开设了一家工厂，等等。

文化冲突？

    中国对美直接投资已从2008年的12亿美元增至2011年的65亿美元。仅在加州，中国公司近年来就已收购了洛杉矶市中心的万豪酒店（Marriott Hotel）、洛杉矶环球影城的喜来登环球酒店（Sheraton Universal Hotel）以及新港海滩的Balboa Bay Club & Resort度假村酒店和Newport Beach Country Club酒店。此外，一位中国投资者还收购了位于加州河滨的房车公司MVP RV，向中国出口露营车。

    尽管如此，这些见诸于报端或不为公众所知的投资交易还只是中国对外直接投资总额中很小的一部分。对美投资只占中国对外直接投资总额的3-4%。中国近90%的对外投资仍流向亚洲、南美和非洲的项目。

    原因可能是因为对美投资也并非总是一帆风顺。固然，中国政府繁琐的审批审查程序限制了对美直接投资，但刘俊海表示，近来美国的“监管威慑”同样令人却步。2011年，美国外国投资委员会（Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States）以“国家安全”为由，阻止了多起中国国企的数宗大型并购，包括全球第二大移动电信基础设备商华为技术有限公司（Huawei Technologies）、中国鞍钢集团（the Chinese Anshan Iron and Steel Group）和中国航空巨头中航通用飞机有限责任公司（General Aircraft）。“这些有歧视之嫌的行为让国内企业望而却步，不论是国企还是私企”刘俊海补充称。

    纽约服装制造商Joe Zhang来自中国，20世纪80年代末在美国开设了自己的公司。他认为，私营企业相对而言更容易与监管部门打交道。他说：“私营企业的投资范围较小，收购目标限于服装、汽车、商住房地产、金融和家用电器等行业，这些都不太可能被美国国会否决。”

    James Wen, an economist at Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut, says the recent push by private enterprises also reflects tougher conditions in China, where the administration favors mega state-owned enterprises. At the height of the financial crisis in 2008 and 2009, the Chinese government allocated a lion's share of its $586 billion stimulus money to local governments and state enterprises, offering them generous tax breaks and preferred access to land and state bank loans. Private companies face discrimination and unfair competition from state enterprises.

    And so they looked elsewhere. Liu Junhai, an expert on overseas investment at the Beijing-based Renmin University, says most private companies in China put the U.S. as their top destination because of its "mature and transparent capital market, independent and comprehensive legal systems, advanced technology and high-quality workers." Recent successes by companies like Lenovo, which purchased IBM's PC division, and SANY, a large Chinese concrete machinery manufacturer that opened up a plant in Georgia, have reinforced the perception.

Culture clash?

    China's ODI in the U.S. has increased from $1.2 billion in 2008 to $6.5 billion in 2011. In California alone, Chinese companies have recently purchased the Marriott Hotel in downtown Los Angeles, the Sheraton Universal Hotel in Universal City, and the Balboa Bay Club & Resort and the Newport Beach Country Club in Newport Beach. Meanwhile, a Chinese investor has acquired the Riverside, California-based MVP RV to export recreational vehicles to China.

    Despite these reported or under-the-radar investments, the amount is still relatively small compared to China's overall ODI. Investment in the U.S. makes up just 3% to 4% of China's total ODI activities. Nearly 90% still goes to projects in Asia, South America and Africa.

    That may be because it's not always easy. While the Chinese government's cumbersome approval and review process has restricted the volume of investment in the U.S, the recent "regulatory scares" in the U.S. have not helped either, says Liu. In 2011, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States cited "national security" concerns when it blocked several major acquisitions by Chinese state-run enterprises Huawei Technologies, the world's second-largest supplier of mobile telecom infrastructure equipment, the Chinese Anshan Iron and Steel Group and China's aviation giant General Aircraft. "The seemingly discriminatory actions have deterred companies, both in the public and private sectors," adds Liu.

    Joe Zhang, a New York-based clothing manufacturer from China, who started his business in the U.S. in the late 1980s, believes private enterprises will have a relatively easier time with regulators. "The scope of private investment is smaller, and their targets are limited to industries such as clothing, automobiles, commercial and residential real estate, finance and home electronics, none of which is likely to be blocked by Congress," he says.