基础设施是指为社会生产和居民生活提供公共服务的物质工程设施，是用于保证国家或地区社会经济活动正常进行的公共服务系统，涉及包括社会赖以生存发展的公路、铁路、机场、通讯、水电煤气、教育、体育、文化等社会事业。在中国，这些基础设施项目通常通过以下三种途径实施，分别为地方政府自行投资建设、地方政府通过设立融资平台进行融资及建设、以及地方政府通过与社会资本方合作（PPP）进行建设。
早期受到国有企业对外投资审批制度的限制，地方政府不得不通过财政资金投资基础设施建设。此后，伴随着2004年国家投资体制改革取消国有企业投资审批限制，脱离财政资金限制的地方政府融资平台公司如雨后春笋般生长壮大，以土地质押为杠杆，撬动银行融资来进行基础设施投资建设，并以土地升值带来的土地出让收入来偿还融资，实现基础设施建设大踏步式前进。
由政府让渡其建设、运营基础设施的权利至社会资本方,“以时间换空间”，通过提高公共设施及服务质量和效率的PPP模式，在缺失顶层立法规范，但又迅猛发展的五年里，项目逐渐产生了固定回报承诺、回购安排、明股实债等由地方政府承担过度支出责任，进而形成隐性债务的情形，严重背离了PPP项目“提质增效”的初衷。
在建设期施工利润逐渐干涸、绩效考核与政府付费挂钩日趋严格、运营成本因建设内容调整而攀升、融资渠道受金融监管政策阻碍等不利因素影响下，社会资本方股东或出于将难以实现的运营责任转手、或出于回收投资收益等诸多考虑，纷纷倾向于选择将既有的存量基础设施项目对外转让，实现明哲保身地退出，这也为大型运营类企业进行基础设施项目收购提供了契机。
通过收购基础设施项目已落地的项目公司，可以最大程度上减少基础设施项目繁琐的前期准备及采购阶段而直接进入项目运营期，并充分发挥自身的资金优势、运营优势，保障项目运营期内的服务质量，同时，可通过同业并购实现业务规模壮大或打造多元化综合平台。
不同于通常的并购项目，存量基础设施项目并购的特殊性在于其交易模式通常为股权收购而不涉及资产收购。根据《企业会计准则解释第2号》的规定，BOT（建设－经营－转让）业务所建造基础设施不作为项目公司的固定资产。项目资产的所有权通常由政府方持有，项目公司仅持有合作期内的项目资产占有、使用、收益权，无法进行资产转让。
此外，存量基础设施项目的经营权或特许经营权通常由政府方授予项目公司，股权收购方式将不影响项目公司已经取得的特许经营权。
针对基础设施项目进行合规性尽职调查，是存量基础设施项目并购的核心要素。若项目公司所建设、运营的基础设施项目存在瑕疵或重大法律风险，则将直接导致并购项目的失败。因此，合规性核查工作应重点关注各个部委及项目所在地政府陆续发出的文件指导要求，确保项目合规运作，最大程度上避免未来出库风险及政府付费风险。
项目审查应重点关注：
- 项目应已严格履行审批、核准、备案手续，并通过“两评一案”（物有所值评价，财政承受能力论证，初步实施方案）等前期审查审批程序；
- 项目应已列入财政部PPP综合信息平台管理库；
- 已进入运营期的项目应已将政府支付责任明确纳入年度财政预算及中长期财政规划；
- 项目应不存在政府方或政府方出资代表向社会资本回购投资本金、承诺固定回报或保障最低收益、签订阴阳合同，或由政府方或政府方出资代表为项目融资提供各种形式的担保、还款承诺，以及由政府方实际兜底项目投资建设运营风险的违规情形；
- 应关注已签订的债务合同的债务余额、债务到期日、关于股权转让的特别限制、提前还款的特殊约定等内容。
基础设施建设为中国经济发展的基础，其运作质量须得到充足的保障,而非由部分社会资本方赚取施工利润后便转手倒卖，放任项目未来长达二三十年的运营责任。存量基础设施项目并购将传统股权并购项目与基础设施项目相结合，在操作难度上既需要考虑股权并购中涉及的目标公司尽职调查、股权交割、价款支付等事项，同时，更需要关注作为承载基础设施项目而设立的目标公司，以及其操作的基础设施项目的合规性，这无疑对承办律师提出了更高的核查要求，需要律师具备金融、财税、工程建设、对行业的了解等较为全面的综合能力。
原文刊载于《商法》杂志2019年第5期，请查看。
M&A of existing infrastructure projects
Infrastructure refers to the physical engineering facilities that provide public services for societal production and resident living. It is a public service system that ensures the normal societal and economic activities of a country or region, relating to social undertakings on which the society depends for maintenance and development, including roads, railways, airports, communications, utilities (water, electricity and gas) education, sports and culture, etc.
In China, these infrastructure projects are usually implemented in three ways: (1) local governments construct on their own investment; (2) local governments set up platform companies for financing and construction; and (3) the public-private partnership (PPP) model.
In earlier days of development, restricted by the foreign investment approval system imposed on state-owned enterprises (SOEs), local governments had to invest in infrastructure construction through fiscal funds.
With the elimination of investment restrictions imposed on SOEs after the state investment system reform in 2004, financing platform companies backed by local governments mushroomed, using land pledges as leverage and drawing on bank financing for infrastructure investment and construction. Meanwhile, the financing cost was repaid with the land sales margin brought about by the appreciation of the land price, thus making great strides in infrastructure construction.
During the five-year period of absence of top-level legislative norms, as well as rapid development of the economy, by relying on the PPP model, where the government transfers its right to build and operate infrastructure, the projects gradually yielded fixed return commitments, then formed repurchase programmes, and issued debts in the guise of equities. These were all borne by local governments, whose over-spending had become debt that seriously deviated from the original intention of PPP projects, which was to improve quality and efficiency.
Under the influence of unfavourable factors such as diminishing construction profit during the construction period, ever more stringent performance appraisals tied to government payments, rising operating costs due to the adjustment of construction, and financing channels hindered by financial regulatory policies, the social capital shareholders, out of operational considerations such as changing hands on unachievable profits or recovering their investment returns, tended to choose to transfer existing infrastructure projects and exited, for safety’s sake. This in turn has provided opportunities for large-scale operating enterprises to acquire infrastructure projects.
Through the acquisition of the special purpose vehicle (SPV), which the infrastructure projects implemented, the tedious preparatory and procurement phase of the infrastructure project could be minimized and the project operation period could be entered directly, and give full play to the SPV’s own capital and operational advantages to ensure service quality during the project operation period. At the same time, it can achieve larger business scale or build a diversified comprehensive platform through peer-to-peer mergers and acquisitions (M&A).
Unlike the usual M&A projects, what is special about the M&A of existing infrastructure projects is that their trading model is usually equity acquisition and does not involve asset acquisition. According to the provisions of the No. 2 Interpretation of Accounting Standards for Business Enterprises, infrastructure built by the BOT (build-operate-transfer) model shall not be accounted as a fixed asset of the SPV. The ownership of the project assets is usually held by the government.
The SPV only holds the possession, use and income rights of the project assets during the co-operation period, and shall not transfer the assets. In addition, the operation rights or concession rights of the existing infrastructure projects are usually granted by the government to the SPV, and the equity acquisition method will not affect the concession rights already acquired by the SPV.
Due diligence checks on compliance of infrastructure projects are key to the M&A of existing infrastructure projects. If there are flaws or major legal risks in the infrastructure projects constructed and operated by the SPV, it may directly lead to the failure of the M&A projects. Therefore, the compliance team should pay close attention to the guidance papers issued by the regulating authorities and ministries to ensure the compliance of the project, and avoid risks of being cleaned out in the future and in government payments.
The project review should focus on: - Strict implementation of the procedures for examination, approval and filing, passing the preliminary review and approval procedures such as “two evaluations and one plan” (value-for-money assessment, financial affordability demonstration, preliminary implementation plan);
2. Inclusion in the PPP Integrated Information Platform Management Library of the Ministry of Finance;
3. Projects that have entered the operational period should have explicitly included government payment responsibilities into the annual budget and medium-to-long term fiscal planning;
4. No government or government-funded representatives to repurchase investment capital from social capital, promise fixed returns or guarantee minimum income, sign inconsistent twin-contracts, or provide various forms of guarantees for project financing and repayments. Nor should the government cover all the risks in the investment; and
5. The debt balance of the signed debt contract, debt maturity date, special restrictions on equity transfer, special agreement on early repayment, etc.
Infrastructure construction is the foundation of China’s economic development, and its operational quality must be adequately guaranteed, rather than extracting construction profits and then reselling the project via some social capital and indulging the operation responsibility of a project for as long as 20 or 30 years in the future.
M&A of existing infrastructure projects combines the traditional equity M&A with infrastructure projects. In terms of operational difficulty, it is necessary to consider the target company’s due diligence, equity delivery, price payment and other matters involved in equity M&A.
At the same time, more attention needs to be paid to the target companies set up as hosting infrastructure projects, and the compliance of the infrastructure projects it operates, which undoubtedly put forward higher verification requirements for lawyers, and require lawyers to have comprehensive ability in finance, fiscal and taxation, engineering construction and an understanding of industries.
Original source: CBLJ Issue 5, 2019. Please click “Read more” for further information.