Foreign Direct Investment and the National Interest: A Way Forward

The federal government’s effective rejection of BHP Billiton’s bid for Saskatchewan’s Potash Corporation in 2010 was seen as a flashpoint in the recent evolution of the Investment Canada Act (ICA), which many hoped would lead to greater clarity in the rules of the game for foreign direct investment (FDI). But uncertainty persists, and in the wake of the CNOOC/Nexen and Petronas/Progress Energy deals with the introduction of provisions such as "exceptional" circumstances, new questions have been raised. While the federal government has undertaken measures to address specific gaps in the ICA, it has done so without conducting a more general reassessment of the overall policy regime.

What is Canada's national interest with respect to FDI? Is there a need for further policy reform in light of the patterns and flows of changes in international capital, trade and investment? Where do we stand in relation to other global competitors for investment?

In this study, Dany Assaf and Rory McGillis examine these issues and assess how transparent, clear and coherent the ICA is compared with the foreign investment regimes of 11 other countries.

Media

Bill C-60 introduces more uncertainty on foreign takeovers
Financial Post, May 22, 2013

Foreign investment rules: Still lost in the fog? op-ed by Dany Assaf
iPolitics, May 9, 2013

Industry frets over proposal on state-owned enterprises
The Globe and Mail, May 6, 2013

If foreign investors follow the rules, doors should open, op-ed by Dany Assaf
The Globe and Mail, April 19, 2013

Another look at Canada's foreign investment rules
BNN (video), April 19, 2013

Ottawa urged to revamp foreign investment rules
The Globe and Mail, April 18, 2013

Les règles doivent être clarifiées
Le Journal de Montréal, April 18, 2013