美國通過立法嚴(yán)格要求政府部門采購本國產(chǎn)品，并對采購他國產(chǎn)品設(shè)置歧視性條款。例如，《購買美國產(chǎn)品法案》規(guī)定，美國聯(lián)邦政府機(jī)構(gòu)僅能采購在美國生產(chǎn)的加工最終產(chǎn)品以及在美國開采或生產(chǎn)的未加工品?！睹绹ǖ洹芬?guī)定，針對申請聯(lián)邦政府或州政府資助的公共交通項目，必須使用美國國產(chǎn)的鐵、鋼和制成品?！掇r(nóng)業(yè)、農(nóng)村發(fā)展、食品和藥品管理及相關(guān)機(jī)構(gòu)撥款法案》規(guī)定，撥款資金不得為學(xué)校午餐、兒童成人關(guān)照食品、兒童夏日食品服務(wù)、學(xué)校早餐等項目購買從中國進(jìn)口的生的或加工過的家禽產(chǎn)品?！秶朗跈?quán)法案》以國家安全為由，規(guī)定禁止聯(lián)邦政府采購中國企業(yè)提供的通訊設(shè)備和服務(wù)。

The US, by way of legislation, sets strict requirements on its government departments to “buy American” and imposes discriminatory terms on purchasing foreign products. For example, the Buy American Act stipulates that US federal agencies can only acquire manufactured products made in America and unmanufactured articles that have been mined or produced in America.  According to the Code of Laws of the United States of America, an application for a public transport project receiving federal or state funding can be granted only if the steel, iron and manufactured goods used in the project are produced in the US.  According to the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, none of the funds made available by this Act may be used to procure raw or processed poultry products imported into the US from China for use in the school lunch program, the Child and Adult Care Food Program, the Summer Food Service Program for Children or the school breakfast program.  The National Defense Authorization Act prohibits the federal government from procuring telecommunications equipment and services provided by Chinese companies on the grounds of national security. 

　?。ǘE用“國家安全審查”，阻礙中國企業(yè)在美正常投資活動

　　美國是全球范圍內(nèi)最早對外國投資實施安全審查的國家。1975年，美國專門成立外國投資委員會，負(fù)責(zé)監(jiān)測外國投資對美國的影響。1988年，美國通過《?？松?弗洛里奧修正案》，對《1950年國防生產(chǎn)法》進(jìn)行了修正，授權(quán)美國總統(tǒng)及其指派者對外資并購進(jìn)行審查?！?007年外商投資與國家安全法案》擴(kuò)充了外國投資委員會，擴(kuò)大其安全審查范圍。從半個多世紀(jì)的立法過程看，美國對外國投資實施安全審查的主線就是收緊法規(guī)政策，擴(kuò)大監(jiān)管隊伍和審查范圍，近期特別針對中國強化了審查和限制。

2. Abuse of “National Security Review” as a way to obstruct the normal investment activities of Chinese companies in the US

The US is the first in the world to conduct security reviews on foreign investment. In 1975, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) was established for the specific purpose of monitoring the impact of foreign investment in the US. In 1988, the Exon-Florio Amendment revised the 1950 Defense Production Act by mandating the US President and people with the authority to review foreign takeovers. The Foreign Investment and National Security Act of 2007 expanded CFIUS and broadened its scope of review.  The legislation process in the US over the past 50 years shows that the US security review of foreign investment has mainly been characterized by tighter laws, regulations and policies, expanded regulatory teams and scope of reviews, and more recently, intensified screening and restrictions vis-à-vis China.

　 在外商投資安全審查實踐中，美國“國家安全審查”的依據(jù)模糊不清，審查力度不斷加大。根據(jù)美國外國投資委員會的歷年外資安全審查報告，2005-2008年審查外國投資交易案例468起，其中需要進(jìn)入調(diào)查階段的案例37起，占比僅8%。但自2008年美國財政部發(fā)布《外國人合并、收購和接管規(guī)制：最終規(guī)則》以后，2009-2015年期間審查的770起案例中，需要進(jìn)入調(diào)查階段的達(dá)到310起，占比陡然提高到40%。尤其是在最新披露的2015年數(shù)據(jù)中，這一比例進(jìn)一步提高到46%，處于較高水平（圖8）。

　　圖表：圖8：美國外國投資委員會審查案例和進(jìn)入調(diào)查階段案例統(tǒng)計 新華社發(fā)

In practice, the US “national security review” is often based on flimsy evidence and is becoming increasingly stringent. According to CFIUS annual reports to Congress,  the Committee reviewed 468 foreign investment transactions from 2005 to 2008, only 37 of which (8 percent) entered the stage of investigation. However, since the Department of the Treasury issued the Regulations Pertaining to Mergers, Acquisitions, and Takeovers by Foreign Persons in 2008, among the 770 cases reviewed between 2009 and 2015, 310 cases – 40 percent of the total – passed on to the stage of investigation, which represents a noticeably sharp rise. In particular, the latest data released in 2015 shows this percentage climbing to an even higher level of 46 percent (Chart 8). 

Chart 8 Statistics on Cases Reviewed and Investigated by CFIUS