This isn't our run-of-the-mill "We'll be buying our panels and cells and silicon from China." We've been pointing that out for a couple years. This latest takes the concept to a whole new level.
From Elliott Management-backed (Paul Singer) Washington Free Beacon, December 6:
DOE Touts $200M Grant to Lithium Battery Company as Boon to American-Made Clean Energy. The Company Operates Primarily From China.
Microvast also under scrutiny for shielding its books from auditors
President Joe Biden's Department of Energy is touting a grant to a lithium battery company as a move that would help herald the shift to green energy and ensure the United States is cultivating domestic sources of energy. It did not say, however, that the Texas company receiving the grant operates primarily from China and is under scrutiny from American financial regulators.
The DOE announced in October that it would give the $200 million award to Microvast Holdings to build a battery separator facility in Tennessee, using funding from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. At the time, Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm said the grant would "supercharge the private sector to ensure our clean energy future is American-made."
While the DOE described Microvast as a "majority U.S.-owned company, traded on NASDAQ" and "headquartered in Stafford, Texas," financial records show the company operates primarily out of China. Microvast itself says the Chinese government "exerts substantial influence over the manner in which we must conduct our business activities and may intervene, at any time and with no notice." The company was also recently added to a Securities and Exchange Commission watchlist of Chinese companies that are on track to be delisted from NASDAQ for failing to comply with U.S. auditing requirements.
The DOE award demonstrates the challenges posed by the green energy transition sought by Democrats and the Biden administration and raises questions about the vaunted $1.2 billion Bipartisan Infrastructure Law funding. That bill was meant to boost U.S. battery companies and strengthen the domestic clean energy supply chain, which has been highly dependent on China. The grant is also drawing calls for additional oversight from Congress. The infrastructure law, as written by lawmakers, states that the DOE should avoid funding projects that "use battery material supplied by or originating from a foreign entity of concern," which includes companies "subject to the jurisdiction or direction" of China.
Sen. Marco Rubio (R., Fla.) told the Washington Free Beacon that the Biden administration "has a lot of explaining to do."
"Giving hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars to a company whose operations are based in China that refuses to comply with American securities rules is crazy," said Rubio. "What's more, any new technology developed in this partnership is almost certainly going to benefit China given Microvast's operations there. It is just another example of the Biden administration not understanding the threat posed by the Chinese Communist Party."
Former DOE officials said the funding was highly concerning and is likely to set off alarms with legislators.
"The Biden appointees knew from the outset that because of China's aggressiveness in infiltrating U.S. energy and high-tech companies they were going to need to be extra vigilant about where these [infrastructure] funds went," one former DOE official told the Free Beacon. "A simple Google search shows enough of a relationship between China and the shell company they're using to access U.S. taxpayer funds to raise questions."
"Now Congress, [the Government Accountability Office], or someone needs to be asking what information did the applicant provide about their relationship with China, how far up does that relationship go," the official said.
The DOE did not respond to a request for comment.
In its 2021 annual SEC report, Microvast describes itself as a "holding company" that conducts its business "principally through our subsidiary in China."....
....MUCH MORE
As we've said regarding a different Chinese-backed company:
The first thing that has to be understood is that the Chinese government/Communist Party claims universal jurisdiction for its laws, i.e. believes all Chinese citizens and corporations, anywhere in the world, are bound by Chinese law:
How to Respond To China's Claim That The New Hong Kong Security Law Applies To Actions Everywhere In The World
The second thing to understand is the plain language of the National Security Law (and the cybersecurity law and the NGO law):
The National Security Law.
Here via China Law Translate:
There is not a lot of wiggle room in Article 7
Article 7: All organizations and citizens shall support, assist, and cooperate with national intelligence efforts in accordance with law, and shall protect national intelligence work secrets they are aware of.All means all, including foreign companies operating in China.
The State protects individuals and organizations that support, assist, and cooperate with national intelligence efforts.
Ditto articles 14:
Article 14: National intelligence work institutions lawfully carrying out intelligence efforts may request that relevant organs, organizations, and citizens provide necessary support, assistance, and cooperation.And 16:
Article 16: When national intelligence work institutions staff lawfully perform their tasks in accordance with relevant national provisions, with approvals and upon the presentation of relevant identification, they may enter relevant restricted areas and venues; may learn from and question relevant institutions, organizations, and individuals; and may read or collect relevant files, materials or items.And The Cybersecurity Law and the Foreign NGO Law (2016) and the Counter-espionage Law (2014) are all worded vaguely enough that the laws can mean whatever the Party and the authorities want them to mean.
