Foreign Investment in U.S. Real Estate
In their Transactional Real Estate column, Peter Fisch and Mitchell Berg discuss issues and potential complications when advising U.S. clients in transactions with a foreign counterparty when dealing with a foreign investment in the U.S. real estate market.
September 13, 2017 at 05:35 AM
12 minute read
Foreign investment in the U.S. real estate market has grown dramatically in recent years. Reports indicate that in 2016 alone, foreign investment surpassed $20 billion, with offshore buyers accounting for 43 percent of the 50 largest U.S. commercial real estate transactions.1 Advising a U.S. client in a transaction with a foreign counterparty requires familiarity with certain issues and potential complications. In particular, U.S. clients need to be aware of issues relating to (i) the ability to enforce judgments of U.S. courts against foreign counterparties; (ii) so-called “know your customer” diligence requirements as they are applied to foreign counterparties; (iii) foreign capital export controls; (iv) potential Committee of Foreign Investment in the U.S. (CFIUS) review; and (v) registering transactions with the Department of Commerce's Bureau of Economic Analysis.2
Enforcing Judgments Abroad
In a transaction with a domestic counterparty, the ability to enforce a judgment against that counterparty is rarely an issue. With a foreign counterparty, enforcing a U.S. judgment is not a given. As a result, lenders often refuse to consider foreign guarantors unless those guarantors have significant U.S. assets. While a guaranty (or joint venture agreement or other agreement with a foreign counterparty) may be drafted to provide that the foreign counterparty (i) consents to U.S. court jurisdiction, (ii) appoints someone within the court's jurisdiction to accept service of process, and (iii) accepts the preferred choice of law, none of these contractual provisions will matter if a judgment relating to the agreement cannot be enforced against the counterparty's assets. Absent the ability to enforce the judgment abroad, the foreign counterparty is only at risk to the extent of its investment.
In the absence of treaties or conventions, countries are under no obligation to recognize or enforce foreign judgments, though the prevailing trend is toward greater recognition.3 While countries have entered into bilateral treaties4 and regional frameworks,5 efforts toward a widely adopted global enforcement convention have not been successful.6 The United States is not party to any bilateral, regional or global treaty or convention ensuring foreign enforcement of U.S. court judgments,7 leaving U.S. counterparties to rely on the laws of foreign jurisdictions for such enforcement. Countries differ greatly in their treatment of U.S. judgments. Some, such as the Netherlands, are highly restrictive, while others, such as Turkey and France, take a more liberal approach to enforcement.8
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
Trending Stories
- 1First Lawsuit Filed Alleging Contraceptive Depo-Provera Caused Brain Tumor
- 2BD Settles Thousands of Bard Hernia Mesh Lawsuits
- 3The Law Firm Disrupted: For Big Law Names, Shorter is Sweeter
- 4The Growing Tension—And Opportunity—in Big Law Nonequity Tiers
- 5The 'Biden Effect' on Senior Attorneys: Should I Stay or Should I Go?
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250