Talk:Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States

Untitled
Reported Tuesday Feb 21, 2006 10:44 p.m. ET http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/060221/japan_buying_westinghouse.html?.v=1 -- “Japan’s Toshiba electronics company will purchase U.S. nuclear power company Westinghouse Electric Co. from British Nuclear Fuels PLC for US$5.4 billion (euro4.5 billion) British Nuclear Fuels paid $1 billion when it bought the company in 1999. As a Japanese acquisition, it needs approval from the Committee on Foreign Investments in the U.S. The U.S. government would have preferred to see Westinghouse go to General Electric Co., which bid unsuccessfully against Toshiba.”

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060310080155/http://cbs4denver.com/national/topstories_story_053102937.html to http://cbs4denver.com/national/topstories_story_053102937.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 09:30, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060325064442/https://www.treas.gov/offices/international-affairs/exon-florio/ to http://www.treas.gov/offices/international-affairs/exon-florio/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090125000401/http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/RL33388_20080408.pdf to http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/RL33388_20080408.pdf
 * Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/news/2010/10-211.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090806235641/http://www.treas.gov/offices/international-affairs/cfius/docs/Covered-Transactions_2006-2008.pdf to http://www.treas.gov/offices/international-affairs/cfius/docs/Covered-Transactions_2006-2008.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:52, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

CFIUS's 2015 approval of AVIC's acquisition
Here's my suggestion for how to improve the article.

"In August 2019, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley has called on the Treasury Department to investigate CFIUS's 2015 approval of AVIC's acquisition of a U.S. automotive supplier Henniges. China's state-owned aerospace and defense company AVIC was reportedly involved in stealing sensitive data regarding the Joint Strike Fighter program and later incorporated the stolen data into China’s Chengdu J-20 and Shenyang FC-31 fighters."

User:SPECIFICO disagrees. SPECIFICO's edit summary: "poorly sourced undue blp smear. Use talk." -- Tobby72 (talk) 13:23, 25 September 2019 (UTC)


 * My experience is that anytime a politician publishes an open letter it's primarily a media stunt. It's been a month and the only news is that Grassley has gotten a classified briefing from some government officials. I'd lean towards WP:109PAPERS but I guess you could add AVIC to Notable cases. Grassley hasn't made any comments about the structure or effects of CFIUS though so it wouldn't fit under the opinions section. --Mathnerd314159 (talk) 19:26, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

CFIUS's Chinese counterpart ?
The People's Republic of China has an equivalent to the US CFIUS. Its name (in English) is "Joint Inter-Ministerial Security Review Committee". Is anyone willing to create two new articles ; one in Chinese, one in English ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vincent Parizeau (talk • contribs) 02:22, 27 May 2022 (UTC)