I mentioned this over at the Crapper, but I'm of the opinion that if AVZ or shareholders get a whiff that the Chinese are trying to obtain a board seat or any other dodgy tactics with their greater than 10%, everyone would be banging down FIRB's door to investigate and get them back under the threshold. I don't think it matters how they do it, from where they do it or what entity they use if domestically registered, bottom line is that a foreign entity will have greater than 10% in an Australian listed entity. Just have to prove to FIRB and connect the dots to establish the links. And when talking about critical minerals like Lithium, Australian Govt would act like they did previously, possibly with USA whispering in their ear.
Also, if the above is unsuccessful and shareholders find out the one of the Board Directors is a Zijin (or other chinese entity) rep that has come on through dodgy means, how many shareholders would try and gather 5% to call an EGM to remove this Director via 249D. I'm sure 75% of votes would be obtained to oust this person. Maybe this way just replaces one Chinese Director with another, but do it a few times and they will get the picture. All imo.
I've posted what below on the crapper, but probably should just have posted here instead, anyway -
There's a couple of things which may need to be brought into the equation , May depend on how fragile Chinese / Australian relationships are. Huayou managed to get a board seat with a placement at over 10% . There's also a number of companies on the ASX with directors placed from Chinese companies who have over 10% stakes.
Yibin 11.2% route got blocked due to it being 'contrary to national interest' , this was a drawn out affair particularly so, as the 10% directors rule is generally not one that is used to trip Chinese investment ; its the 19.9% rule which they are more concerned about ; you invest in Australia @>10%, you're entitled to have a board seat ... control needs to be watchdogged and that 19.9% or approach to that number is what gets the FIRB phone begins to glow red.
FIRBs reasoning was that it was 'contrary to national interest' was a bit shallow ; many assumed that it was because it created competition for Australian lithium miners or other ( although pretty sure bans can be flicked out like confetti to prevent competition) ; the 11.2% was just reduced to 9% and we got on with things
Ask yourself , give me two reasons why would it be contrary to national interest....both answers would be debatable imo
BUT, the Chinese whom would have been in discussion with FIRB throughout this episode gave a bit more detail -
The reason the Chinese were apparently given - Chinese never intended to bring back product to Australia for Processing (see below) ; a bit odd in itself considering the project is in DRC https://hotcrapper.com.au/images/smilies/rolleyes.png , possible some sort of
'we've gotta say something' sort of response, This was during a time when China were ping ponging trade santions at each other , i reckon this was a pretty bullshite and weak excuse , once which Yibin / AVZ had to wear as it was a stamped decision by FIRB .
Now , what have we seen announced out of the DRC over the last few months...? DRC ban on exportation of raw materials, this is mainly to do with Cobalt / Copper , but also DRC want to process battery metals in Haut-Katanga
FIRB cant use that 'contrary to national interest' / (because chinese wont export back materials for processing in Australia) again IMO, its basically a DRC goverment decision around mining operations beyond raw exploitation and FIRB cant tell another country how they must run their mining sector or that they must export product back to Australia because an Australian mining company is part of Dathcom .
Personally I reckon Chinese would now secure a board seat by climbing over that 10% just by taking up shares alone , I don't think FIRB could do much about it ...but who knows , there maybe another ridiculous excuse out there