Practice question
An otherwise eligible foreign private investor seeks a qualifying above-fifty-percent critical-infrastructure holding. Its country permits Philippine nationals the same capital investment value in a qualifying economic activity, proved by proper documents, though not majority equity in that activity. An objector invokes only the absence of majority-equity permission. Which is best?
- The separate same-value route in IRR45(b)(ii) must also be assessed; absence of the other route alone is not conclusive.
- The IRR recognizes only a majority-equity route.
- The documents automatically remove every unrelated ownership restriction.
- Only the investor's personal friendship with the seller matters.
- The reciprocity requirement disappears whenever the foreign country limits equity.
Legal references
- RA 11659, amending CA146, public-utility definition and national-security safeguards: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/2/94539
- Signed March 20, 2023 implementing rules of RA11659, Sections 5-7 and 32-45: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/2/97017
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.