The article isn't hidden behind their pay wall. I'm confused...

The article isn't hidden behind their pay wall. I'm confused https://source.benchmarkminerals.com/article/role-of-private-overseas-chinese-companies-key-to-us-ev-tax-credits

But some guidance is still being interpreted and debated by the government itself and it is uncertain how it will be applied, Benchmark understands. Specifically, whether a foreign subsidiary of a private Chinese company, or even a subsidiary of a company with government links, would still be eligible.

Devil in the details

The department proposed to define a FEOC as a company that is “owned by, controlled by, or subject to the jurisdiction or direction of a government of a foreign country that is a covered nation.”

It is clear that 25+% control of a company by Chinese government entities makes that company non-compliant with the FEOC guidance and so that company cannot be used as a source of materials in the supply chain for tax credit eligible EVs in the US market.

These links include senior political figures and in the case of China, includes members of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference and current and former members of the Politburo. It also includes their family members.

“Essentially, what this guidance is looking to achieve is to cut out reliance on firms that are effectively controlled by a covered nation government,” Alex Becker, a policy analyst at Benchmark, said. “De-risking is the name of the game.”

However it is less clear in the case of a private Chinese company, or company with no government ownership. They could have an interest greater than 25% in a foreign company (and even up to 100% ownership), and theoretically be compliant with the FEOC guidance.

The guidance states that subsidiaries of FEOC “are not automatically considered to also be FEOCs solely based on their parent being a covered nation jurisdictional entity.”