Suchergebnisse

Japanese interest in Hainan stemmed from the desire to emulate the success which they had achieved in Taiwan in an area further south which could offer a full range of tropical products for theuse of the Japanese economy. The naval importance of Hainan was also recognized, because it could dominate the South China Sea from the excellent harbour of San-ya (Samah) Bay, and there were indications that the island was rich in minerals. The development of official Japanese interest in the island was largely the work of the governor-general's office in Taiwan. Thus in 1918 and 1919 an official from Taiwan called Kaku () was sent to Hainan to observe conditions under the title of special sales office head. In the 1920's the Taiwan government sponsored conferences o the South China Japanese consuls to discuss plans for the area, and in 1935 a conference was held production in the tropics, to coordinate research on the economy, production possibilities and culture of the tropical part of China.Meanwhile Chinese government interest in Hainan began to be aroused in the 1930's, culminating in the visit of T.V. Soong, one of the highest ministers of e Kuintang government, in 1936. Thereafter a rail route a west of the island was surveyed but no furthe progress was made. Private businessmen in the 1930's began to develop rubber plantations to join those set up with overseas Chinese capital in the 1910's,and there was a sharp rise in the area planted to sugar in 1936 as the price of sugar rose. Hence when war broke out between China and Japa,the possibilities for the development were just beginning to be explored.1

In this article, we discuss the way offshore financial centres are used by the multi-subsidiary, multi-jurisdictional group structure known as the 'multinational enterprise' to arbitrage between social geographies of political jurisdictions. We define arbitrage as the use of corporate legal entities located in diverse jurisdictions to arbitrate a third country's rules and regulations. Using a new method to categorize firm-level data from Van Dijk's Orbis, we operationalize the notion of arbitrage to systematically detail and compare the structural sequencing choices firms are making, likely in part for reasons of arbitrage. We base our techniques on legal theory of the firm, acknowledging the underpinning of social technologies of law and accounting by which business enterprises are constructed and maintained. We conclude that two specific types of entities, 'standalones' versus 'in-betweeners', are qualitatively different from others in the activities they perform. We also highlight the existence of liability structures, or 'fuses', which typically take the form of a split ownership arrangement. Ultimately, we demonstrate that the position of a firm's subsidiary within the overall network ecology of that firm is as important as its jurisdictional registration location.