Connect with us

Finance

Nasdaq wants Chinese companies to pay $25 million per U.S. IPO

Published

on

The Nasdaq Marketsite is seen during morning trading on April 7, 2025 in New York City. 

Michael M. Santiago | Getty Images

BEIJING — The Nasdaq stock exchange in the U.S. is planning to make it harder for small Chinese companies to list in New York, after a flood of tiny initial public offerings.

As part of proposed changes, companies operating primarily in China will need to pay at least $25 million from their public offering, Nasdaq said late Wednesday local time.

The move comes as tensions between the U.S. and China simmer, and as the Nasdaq faces broader financial market issues.

“It will be more difficult for small Chinese companies to go IPO [on the] Nasdaq under the new rule,” said Winston Ma, adjunct professor at NYU School of Law. “The new rule reacts to some IPO cases of ‘pump and dump’ due to small float size.”

There have been been few large Chinese IPOs in the U.S. since the fallout around ride-hailing company Didi’s New York listing in 2021. But in 2024, 35 small China-based companies listed in New York, roughly twice the 17 U.S.-based microcap listings, Renaissance Capital said in December.

Microcaps typically refer to stocks with market capitalizations of between $50 million and $300 million, meaning the companies raised only a few million in the initial public offering. A $25 million fee would wipe out much of the money raised in a small IPO.

The rule change is “a positive,” said Gary Dvorchak, managing director at Blueshirt Group, whose business includes advising Chinese companies on IPOs. “I think it’s going to instill more confidence that the companies are listing are doing it for legitimate reasons and there’s less likely to be games being played with the stock and it really protects the companies as well.”

Nasdaq Private Market CEO Tom Callahan shares his bull case for private markets

Nasdaq noted the Chinese listings pose greater risk to U.S. investors due to U.S. inability to take legal action “against entities and individuals involved in potentially manipulative trading activities in these securities.”

“Further, the Exchange has observed that Chinese companies listing on Nasdaq in connection with an IPO with an offering size below $25 million have a higher rate of compliance concerns,” Nasdaq said.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission needs to formally approve Nasdaq’s proposal. Companies already in the IPO process would then have 30 days to complete the process under prior rules, Nasdaq said, while all subsequent listings would have to comply with the changes.

The New York Stock Exchange, which typically only handles far larger IPOs, did not immediately respond to a request for comment outside of U.S. business hours. The SEC and China’s Securities Regulatory Commission did not immediately respond either.

Tensions on the boil?

The Nasdaq’s listing payment requirement is “another example of the multitude of ways in which conducting business, trade and investment relations between the two countries is growing more complex and difficult,” said Stephen Olson, a visiting senior fellow at the ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute.

In fact, the New York exchange’s rule change came on the heels of Beijing’s announcement late Wednesday that it would slap new punitive tariffs on some U.S. optical fiber producers, effective Thursday.

“China is saying: we are prepared to fight fire with fire,” Olson said. “The trade truce is just a temporary band-aid. It could collapse at any time.”

China’s Ministry of Commerce cited a six-month investigation that found that some U.S. exporters had skirted China’s anti-dumping levies by selling a modified version of the optical fiber.

New York-headquartered optical fiber producer Corning now faces a 37.9% duty on the product’s exports to China, OFS Fitel 33.3% and Draka Communications Americas 78.2%.

For its overall business, Corning counted China as its largest source of revenue outside the U.S., contributing 32% of its total sales revenue in 2024, according to the company earnings report.

The company and the U.S. Commerce Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

China has a deficit of $57 million in optical fiber trade with the U.S. in the first seven months this year, according to the official customs figures.

That imbalance may have given Beijing the “technical pretext to act,” said Tianchen Xu, senior economist at Economist Intelligence Unit, noting that the items that China imports from the U.S. are largely more advanced and thus more expensive per item.

“The exchange of fire [between the U.S. and China] will continue in many ways,” Xu predicts, which might derail plans for a meeting between the two countries’ presidents.

The decision came a day after Washington revoked Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s authorization to ship key chipmaking equipment and technology to its manufacturing plant in China, the latest move to curb Beijing’s semiconductor advances.

China’s optical fiber tariff “signals displeasure” on recent U.S. moves to restrict Beijing’s access to advanced chips and participation in the undersea cable supply chain, said Alfredo Montufar-Helu, managing director at advisory firm GreenPoint.

But the tariff is “also targeted and restrained enough to avoid shattering months of trade negotiations. And it also serves as a reminder that China’s leverage extends beyond rare earths,” Montufar-Helu said.

Years of growing of scrutiny

While China has sought to encourage domestic financial development, it has also been keen to control capital outflows, including stock offerings overseas. New policies in the last three years have required Chinese companies to get the securities regulator’s approval for overseas listings, especially if their business has a large domestic user base.

Stateside, Nasdaq’s move marks a big step in what’s been growing regulatory scrutiny on tiny Chinese IPOs over the last several years.

Underwriters for IPOs with market capitalizations below $600 million saw their average commission triple over four years to 12% in 2020, the Hong Kong stock exchange and local securities regulator said in a joint statement back in May 2021.

Then in November 2022, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority in the U.S. warned investors about “significant unusual price increases on the day of or shortly after the IPOs of certain small-cap issuers, most of which involve issuers with operations in other countries.” The notice mentioned China in particular.

FINRA added it “has concerns” about how foreign nationals have opened accounts at U.S. broker-dealers to invest in IPOs and then placed “manipulative orders and trades to inflate aftermarket prices.”

In a FINRA podcast dated Nov. 12, 2024, Peter Gonzalez of the special investigations unit said the “ramp and dump” schemes have evolved — now occurring weeks or months after the IPO, instead of only a few days.

Weekly analysis and insights from Asia’s largest economy in your inbox
Subscribe now

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Finance

Treasury Bond Volatility Forces Bessent to Double Debt Buyback Size as Yields Swing

Published

on

Bessent

A turbulent week in the U.S. Treasury market prompted the Treasury Department to sharply increase the size of its long-term debt buyback program, as bond prices fell even while equity markets pushed toward record highs. The divergence has drawn attention from fixed-income strategists who see it as a signal of underlying investor unease about federal borrowing levels.

What Happened This Week

U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told CNBC on Thursday, August 20, 2026, that the Treasury had doubled the size of its long-term debt buyback operations, moving from roughly $2 billion to at least $4 billion per operation. Bessent indicated the figure could climb further, saying “we’re going to increase the size of the buyback,” and noted the accelerated pace could exceed the announced $4 billion threshold per issue.

Buybacks allow the Treasury to repurchase outstanding government bonds directly from the market, which can help support prices and dampen yield volatility during periods of stress. The expanded program came as stocks staged a late-week recovery: the S&P 500 and Russell 2000 both advanced on Friday, August 21, even as Treasuries logged mild losses, according to Bloomberg market data.

Why Bond and Equity Markets Are Diverging

Capital.com senior market analyst Daniela Hathorn described the week’s dynamic as markets “ending the week on a softer tone after the relative calm of early August was disrupted by renewed pressure in global bond markets, another rise in oil prices, and growing uncertainty around the Federal Reserve’s next move.” She noted that higher long-term borrowing costs are increasingly challenging elevated equity valuations, even as U.S. equities pull back modestly from record highs.

This divergence — equities near record levels while bonds sell off  is unusual and reflects two different sets of investor concerns. Equity investors have remained focused on corporate earnings strength, particularly from large technology companies ahead of Nvidia’s closely watched August 26 earnings report. Bond investors, by contrast, are more directly exposed to concerns about the scale of federal borrowing, highlighted this week by the national debt crossing the $40 trillion threshold for the first time.

The Fed and Treasury “Working in Opposite Directions”

Wilmington Trust senior bond portfolio manager Wil Stith told Yahoo Finance that current conditions reflect “the Fed and the Treasury basically working in sort of opposite directions,” adding that the imbalance will likely require the Federal Reserve  which he described as having “the larger sandbox”  to adjust the federal funds rate rather than relying on Treasury market interventions alone to manage yields.

Notably, the bond market’s reaction to the Treasury’s buyback expansion was relatively muted; strategists described the move as being largely absorbed without a major rally, suggesting the underlying pressure on yields stems from factors, such as inflation persistence and debt sustainability concerns, that a buyback program alone cannot resolve.

What Comes Next

Markets are now looking to two major events in the days ahead: Nvidia’s earnings report on Wednesday, August 26, and the Federal Reserve’s Jackson Hole Economic Symposium, running August 27-29. This will be the first Jackson Hole gathering under new Fed Chair Kevin Warsh, whose public communication style and policy signals remain less established than his predecessors’, according to market commentary from Regards of Wall Street.

For investors, the key metrics to watch are the size and frequency of future Treasury buyback operations, movements in the 10-year Treasury yield, and any policy signals from Warsh’s keynote address. Continued yield volatility alongside record equity valuations would suggest the market imbalance identified this week has not yet been resolved.

 

Continue Reading

Finance

Cross-Border Settlement Innovation and Real-Time Payment Architecture

Published

on

The global banking system is undergoing a comprehensive modernization of cross-border payment infrastructure. Driven by real-time settlement networks, open banking APIs, and interoperable messaging standards, financial institutions and multinational corporations are eliminating multi-day delays and reducing transaction costs associated with legacy international wire transfers.

Transition to Real-Time Gross Settlement Networks
Historically, international business-to-business (B2B) payments relied on complex correspondent banking relationships involving intermediary fees and processing delays. In 2026, the widespread adoption of ISO 20022 messaging protocols alongside interconnected Real-Time Gross Settlement (RTGS) systems allows direct, end-to-end processing of cross-border transfers.

Commercial banks are providing corporate clients with continuous, 24/7 payment clearing capabilities. Real-time transaction confirmation and automated FX rate locking allow international businesses to settle cross-border trade obligations within minutes, significantly reducing counterparty risk.

Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) Interoperability
Wholesale Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) pilot initiatives are reaching operational maturity across several key financial centers. Collaborative multi-CBDC platforms enable participating central banks and commercial institutions to settle foreign exchange and international trade transactions directly on shared distributed ledgers.

These wholesale digital currency networks eliminate traditional clearinghouse delays and minimize foreign exchange slippage. Enterprise treasury departments benefit from enhanced liquidity management, as cross-border cash balances can be deployed and repatriated instantaneously.

Corporate Treasury Transformation
For enterprise treasurers, instant cross-border settlement transforms cash management strategies:
– Working Capital Optimization: Reduced transaction float allows companies to lower precautionary cash reserves and optimize short-term liquidity investments.
– Automated Reconciliation: Enriched data formats embedded in ISO 20022 payment messages streamline automated general ledger posting and invoice matching.
– Reduced Processing Overhead: Account-to-account (A2A) real-time clearing bypasses costly intermediary correspondent banking fees.

Strategic Financial Priorities
1. Upgrade Treasury Systems: Ensure internal core enterprise software supports real-time ISO 20022 payment messaging standards.
2. Leverage Instant Clearing Rails: Utilize direct payment networks to lower cross-border transaction fees and eliminate settlement delays.
3. Evaluate Multi-Currency Liquidity: Modernize liquidity management frameworks to capitalize on 24/7 real-time settlement capabilities.

Continue Reading

Finance

Private Credit Expansion and Regulatory Oversight in 2026 Capital Markets

Published

on

The global private credit market has solidified its role as a fundamental pillar of enterprise finance, expanding rapidly across middle-market lending, asset-backed finance, and infrastructure financing. As non-bank financial institutions capture a larger share of corporate debt origination, global regulatory bodies are increasing oversight to evaluate market transparency and systemic risk interconnections.

Growth Drivers in Direct Lending
Direct lending platforms have continued to attract substantial institutional allocations from pension funds, sovereign wealth entities, and insurance companies seeking attractive risk-adjusted yields. Private debt funds offer corporate borrowers customized financing structures, faster execution timelines, and confidentiality compared to syndicated loan markets.

In 2026, private credit managers are increasingly financing larger corporate transactions, providing multi-billion-dollar credit facilities for buyout deals and corporate restructurings. The flexibility of private debt contracts—featuring unitranche pricing and tailored covenant packages—has made direct lending the preferred capital source for middle-market enterprise sponsors.

Regulatory Scrutiny and Systemic Risk Assessment
The rapid growth of non-bank intermediation has drawn heightened scrutiny from financial regulators in North America and Europe. Because private debt agreements are negotiated privately without public exchange disclosures, central banks are evaluating potential vulnerabilities related to asset valuation consistency and fund liquidity profiles.

Regulatory agencies are introducing guidelines aimed at improving reporting standards for private investment vehicles managing institutional assets. Key focus areas include monitoring leverage ratios within private credit funds and evaluating indirect credit exposures between commercial banking institutions and private debt funds.

Navigating Elevated Refinancing Costs
With benchmark interest rates remaining elevated, private debt borrowers face higher debt service obligations on floating-rate credit facilities. Financial advisory firms report an increase in proactive liability management strategies, including payment-in-kind (PIK) interest options, equity infusions from sponsors, and covenant modifications.

Private credit managers with deep operational capabilities are actively working alongside portfolio companies to optimize working capital and maintain cash flow coverage ratios during periods of higher borrowing costs.

Key Financial Takeaways
1. Mainstream Asset Class: Private credit has expanded beyond niche alternative asset status into a core corporate finance solution.
2. Enhanced Transparency Standards: Regulatory frameworks are evolving toward greater disclosure requirements for private debt managers.
3. Proactive Risk Management: Lenders and sponsors must prioritize debt sustainability and active portfolio monitoring amid high benchmark rates.

Continue Reading

Trending