What's new

Treasurer Scott Morrison blocks the sale of S Kidman and Co to a Chinese company

jhungary

MILITARY PROFESSIONAL
Joined
Oct 24, 2012
Messages
19,295
Reaction score
387
Country
China
Location
Australia
http://www.news.com.au/finance/busi...y/news-story/0662f97d8d7692366aff8f331f0b0242

TREASURER Scott Morrison has kyboshed the $371 million sale of Australia’s largest private landholder, S Kidman and Co, to a Chinese company.

“I have today informed the investor that my preliminary view of the proposal that has been put to me is contrary to the national interest,” he told reporters in Canberra.

Mr Morrison blocked the sale of Kidman for a second time, after he decided to reject a Chinese-led offer in November last year.

Back then, issues were raised around the size of the landholding which includes 10 cattle stations on 101,000sq km.

The close location of Kidman’s Anna Creek station to the Woomera weapons testing range in South Australia was also cited as a concern.

S. Kidman & Co Ltd is Australia’s largest private property and one of the nation’s biggest beef producers with a herd of 185,000 cattle. The company has pastoral leases covering 101,000 square kilometres in three states and the Northern Territory. Kidman cattle stations produce grass-fed beef for export to Japan, the USA and South East Asia.

The Kidman portfolio is the largest private land holding in Australia covering about 1.3 per cent of the nation’s total land area, and 2.5 per cent of its agricultural land.

Even after the excision of Anna Creek and The Peake properties, Kidman would still be Australia’s largest private land owner and hold over one per cent total land area, and two per cent of agricultural land.

9f8f4f71f572c67bf33ab1f6f05d718b

Austalia’s biggest meat producers, S Kidman & Co Ltd, loading cattle at the Helen Springs Station, one of the company’s 13 farms.Source:Supplied

“My preliminary view of the proposal that has been put to me is contrary to the national interest,” Mr Morrison said of the 80 per cent interest in Kidman Dakang wants to acquire.

in-art-countdown-icon-128x128x3s.gif

–– ADVERTISEMENT ––
upload_2016-6-26_12-26-30.gif



in-art-soundanimation-icon-41x48.gif

Nor had a revised sale proposal satisfied his concerns.

The size and significance of the portfolio, combined with the impact the decision may have on broader Australian support for foreign investment in agriculture, must also to be taken into account in this case, the treasurer said.

“Australia welcomes foreign investment, however we must be confident that this investment is not contrary to the national interest.”

But Mr Morrison has left the door open to approving the sale of S Kidman and Co after consideration of an external and independent review of the sale process.

While the review found the sale process followed a satisfactory commercial practice that offered opportunity to Australian parties to make an offer, it also found there was significant domestic interest in Kidman.

“I have concerns that the form in which the Kidman portfolio has been offered as a single aggregated asset, has rendered it difficult for Australian bidders to be able to make a competitive bid,” Mr Morrison said.

“The size of the asset makes it difficult for any single Australian group to acquire the entire operation.”

Mr Morrison has given Dakang Australia Holdings Pty Ltd until next Tuesday to respond to his concerns.
 
.
Turns out the Kidman Station is not going to be sold to the Chinese
 
. .
Can they do it as per laws?

They can, and they did.

The Law say all Chinese investment above 15 millions have to put thru the FIRB and the Federal Government have the final say to veto the sale and goes above State Government.

For any deal under 15 million, FIRB can still make judgement if that particular deal have any security related concern to come with.

In this case, the FIRB have blocked the deal twice (First time in Nov 2015 and now) and I don't think the Chinese is getting a third chance.........Usually they don't.

Bear in mind, the FIRB have a different set of rule to Allied Countries such as US, UK or Canada, which the threshold gone up to 1 billions dollar
 
.
They can, and they did.

The Law say all Chinese investment above 15 millions have to put thru the FIRB and the Federal Government have the final say to veto the sale and goes above State Government.

For any deal under 15 million, FIRB can still make judgement if that particular deal have any security related concern to come with.

In this case, the FIRB have blocked the deal twice (First time in Nov 2015 and now) and I don't think the Chinese is getting a third chance.........Usually they don't.

Bear in mind, the FIRB have a different set of rule to Allied Countries such as US, UK or Canada, which the threshold gone up to 1 billions dollar
Seems discriminatory but it is their country. I don't if there is any forum or agreement where the issue can be raised but I guess China can slap some restrictions on Australia in retaliation.
 
. .
As a Chinese, how do you feel about that?

As an Australian

I feel the deal itself is a bit greedy, have the deal does not include the Woomera Protected Area and if the Chinese bidder want to follow the FIRB suggestion of selling down in 5 years like the one with Cubbie that deal will have passed.

Problem is, even after the first rejection and suggestion have been given, the Chinese Consortium basically submit the same deal to the government. Well, same result from last time would then be expected.

As a Chinese

It doesn't matter, business opportunities everywhere, if it's not here in Australia, then I will find someone or some country that suit my term. I mean business is business, I want to do business in my way, if that does not suit Australia, they have the right to reject it, as much as I have my way to invest that same money to anyone or any country.


Seems discriminatory but it is their country. I don't if there is any forum or agreement where the issue can be raised but I guess China can slap some restrictions on Australia in retaliation.

Well, I don't think that's discriminatory, it's about deals, we have deals with the US, Canada and the UK, they have the same concession to Aussie company (Like the E Class visa in the US, or the Tax break for investment in Canada) hence we gave them back some concession for their investment.

China did not make any concession to us, the investment condition is the same and I did not see why and how the Australian Government would offer concession unilaterally when the Chinese offered us nothing......
 
. . .
wow. Thats like 5 Israels.

lol, that's actually less than 2% of total Australian Land.........

We are the 6th biggest country after Russia, Canada, China, US and Brazil. Consider this. Australia is twice the size of India, yet we are 1/50 of the population size........Israel is actually 3 times smaller than Tasmania.....the smallest state of Australia.....
 
.
lol, that's actually less than 2% of total Australian Land.........

We are the 6th biggest country after Russia, Canada, China, US and Brazil. Consider this. Australia is twice the size of India, yet we are 1/50 of the population size........Israel is actually 3 times smaller than Tasmania.....the smallest state of Australia.....
Right. But this is privately held property.
Man what I could do if I had 101000 sq. km lying around

latest


royal-flush-waterslide.jpg


maxresdefault.jpg
 
.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom