Let's be real here, a European company wouldn't even have been allowed to buy a Chinese company in China and have the level of control as in this case in the first place.
Greed. When China was becoming manufacturing powerhouse, it was incredibly cheap, and Chinese government seemed extremely willing to play ball by making sure there was no government caused slowdowns. This obviously worked until it didn't but even now, it's so expensive to change, corporations are screaming about their quarterly stock price and US being so financialized, US in a real gordian knot.
I never understood this, I believe very strongly in the free market, but only where there is a free market. Of course you can let the free market run free up to the border of e.g. the US but surely it won't solve international trade since many countries do not have a free market. Unless we agree some international rules such that the boundary of the free market "sandbox" becomes the earths borders.
It's why I also think it is possible to hold a pro-free-market pro-tariff position simultaneously without contradiction. Tariffs could be used to "level set" manipulation from foreign governments and make the incoming goods behave as if they were not manipulated (thus also reducing the incentive to manipulate in the first place).
Not sure this is how tariffs are being used in reality.
You are 100% correct. Free Trade hasn't been disproven, only the inane notion that one should pursue unreciproval free trade with a countries that perform mercantalism against them.
The consumer isn't everything, the worker does matter just as much.
There seems to be some sort of general belief that everyone acts at least roughly in good faith. And sure, there are hiccups, but things will work out fine in the long run as the world moves towards peace, liberty, and freedom.
It would be nice if that was the case. Personally I think it has all the well-intentioned naïvety of a 14-year old "why can't we just abolish the military?!" pacifist.
Greed sure, but also optics. In the US at least, we love to condemn China for being "communist" and not a real democracy. Remember, for the US, communist has been the number one enemy for a long time. Obviously, we can't do what they do.
But we do what they do, and China isn't even communist.
China isn't communist because they have many free markets sectors of their economy and many private institutions.
People just don't know what communism is. Calling yourself the communist party doesn't magically make you communist. You have to do communism, which they no longer do.
It's a very simple test. Can I own assets, such as a factory? If the answer is yes, you're not communist. China isn't communist.
Having your mode of production focus on people and not profit. Having a dictatorship of the proletariat is the most important thing.
The end of private property is an eventual goal but it’s not close to the primary issue in 2025. The actual fight is against imperialists and global capitalists. Private property can be a tool in that fight. Being revisionist like China still makes you a communist/Marxist.
In China, most locally manufactured brands seem to vanish after roughly two decades — whether in clothing, food, daily necessities, automobiles, or electronics.
Yet, global brands such as Coca-Cola, Nike, Adidas, P&G, Unilever, Colgate, Mercedes-Benz, BMW, Audi (collectively known as “BBA” in China), and even Nokia, dominate the market;
Interestingly, many European companies were eventually overtaken by their American counterparts — Nokia for example.
We’re not even talking about computers and smartphones—when it comes to these sectors, the U.S. simply won’t allow anyone else to take the lead. The market is dominated almost entirely by just a few platforms: Windows, macOS, iOS, and Android.
European companies have had massive investments in China for decades now.
Many people in the West have no idea what's going on in China. Western brands and investments are all over the place. Half the cars on the streets used to be European or American (and that has only recently changed, due to the rise of EVs).
Yet Europeans and Americans often complain, "Why can't Western companies operate in China?" Excuse me?
The question was, emphasis mine: "which firms in China are controlled by European entities?"
Western brands have investments, but are required by law to have a local partner, that learns the trade and eventually copies the product:
China bars foreign companies from participating on their own in many industries, but in some of those industries foreign companies can participate only by forming a joint venture with a Chinese partner. [..] Partnering with a Chinese business can be tricky for various reasons, so understanding to what you are agreeing is absolutely critical. This is especially true because the Chinese law, the Chinese government, and the Chinese courts will be heavily biased in favor of your joint venture partner in any dispute between your company and your China joint venture partner’s company. - https://harris-sliwoski.com/chinalawblog/china-joint-venture...
> Half the cars on the streets used to be European or American
And more than half the phones in Europe or America are Asian - what's your point?
That’s a common misconception, but it's factually incorrect. European companies can, and do, acquire and control companies in China.
The legal framework and the reality on the ground show a very different picture.
1. The Law Explicitly Allows It:
China's Foreign Investment Law (effective since Jan 1, 2020) clearly states that foreign investors are permitted to acquire the shares, equity, or other similar interests of domestic Chinese enterprises.
2. The "Negative List" System:
China uses a "Negative List" model. This means any industry not on the list is fully open to foreign investment, often up to 100% ownership. This list has been shrinking every year, opening up more sectors. For instance, all restrictions in the manufacturing sector were removed. While there are still restrictions in very specific strategic areas (like news media or rare earth mining), this is not a blanket ban by any means.
3. Real-World Examples of European-Controlled Companies in China:
You don't have to search hard to find major Chinese operations controlled by European firms. Here are just a few high-profile examples:
Automotive: German automaker BMW raised its stake in its Chinese joint venture, BMW Brilliance Automotive, to 75%. This is a landmark case of a European company taking majority control of a major automotive manufacturer in China. Similarly, Volkswagen owns a 75% stake in its EV-focused Volkswagen Anhui venture.
Chemicals: Germany’s BASF is building a massive new Verbund site in Guangdong. It's a €10 billion project that is 100% owned and operated by BASF.
Retail & Consumer Goods: All IKEA (Sweden) stores in China are operated by its wholly-owned subsidiary. French beauty giant L'Oréal and luxury groups like LVMH and Kering all operate through wholly foreign-owned enterprises in China.
Finance: German insurer Allianz established Allianz (China) Insurance Holding, the very first 100% foreign-owned insurance holding company in the country.
So, the idea that a European company "wouldn't be allowed" to buy a Chinese company is a myth. While the process involves regulations (just like any country), it is legally possible and happens frequently across many industries.
I stand corrected. China has recently opened up (wisely only recently, protecting its native industries until they are able to compete globally). Yet the fact remains it is fiercely protective (as it should be. If only EU and US followed its example), and pursues an explicit, government-supported policy of taking over first local, then global markets:
And China also makes sure to appear open, using subtle instead of blunt tools, and concealing its influence operations - mister DeH40, with a 19 month old account, zero favorites or submissions, and a total of two comments, both in defense of China.
Glad you can admit you were wrong. But defending your mistake with a biased report from 2017 is a weak move.
That data isn't just outdated, it's irrelevant. China's entire foreign investment law was rewritten in 2020. You're arguing against a reality that no longer exists.
And "Made in China 2025"? It's an industrial policy, like the US CHIPS Act or Germany's Industrie 4.0. It's only a sinister "takeover plan" when China does it?
Finally, drop the personal attacks. Attacking my account instead of the argument is a classic sign of a weak position. I'm not a state-sponsored bot, just a regular Chinese citizen who is tired of seeing these old myths spread around.
> And more than half the phones in Europe or America are Asian - what's your point?
Actually, the US banned the most successful Chinese phone company the second it started gaining market share. At the time, it was the largest phone brand in Europe.
But my point is that European and American companies can and do invest and do business in China, on a massive scale.
There are many companies which the Chinese government could target in retaliation. In China foreign companies are usually minority partners in some ventures with some Chinese company.
