Hongli Group, Inc. (HLP) Risk Analysis

We have relied and expect to continue to rely on the Contractual Arrangements with the VIE to consolidate the financial results of the PRC operating entities. We do not have an equity ownership in, direct foreign investment in, or control of, through such ownership or investment, the VIE. If we had direct ownership of the VIE, we would be able to exercise our rights as a shareholder to effect changes in the board of directors of the VIE, which in turn could implement changes, subject to any applicable fiduciary obligations, at the management and operational level. However, under the current Contractual Arrangements, we rely on the performance by the VIE and its shareholders of their obligations under the contracts to consolidate financial results of the VIE. The shareholders of the VIE may not act in the best interests of our company or may not perform their obligations under these contracts. Such risks exist throughout the period in which we intend to consolidate the financial results of the PRC operating entities through the Contractual Arrangements with the VIE. Although we have the right to replace any shareholder of the VIE under the Contractual Arrangements, if any shareholder of the VIE is uncooperative or any dispute relating to these contracts remains unresolved, we will have to enforce our rights under these contracts through the operations of PRC laws and arbitration, litigation and other legal proceedings and therefore will be subject to uncertainties in the PRC legal system. See "Item 3. Key Information-D. Risk Factors - Uncertainties with respect to the PRC legal system could have a material adverse effect on us." Therefore, we do not have an equity ownership in, direct foreign investment in, or control of, through such ownership or investment, the VIE.

If the VIE or its shareholders fail to perform their respective obligations under the Contractual Arrangements, we may have to incur substantial costs and expend additional resources to enforce such arrangements. We may also have to rely on legal remedies under PRC laws, including seeking specific performance or injunctive relief, and claiming damages, which we cannot assure you will be effective under PRC laws. For example, if the shareholders of the VIE were to refuse to transfer their equity interest in the VIE to us or our designee if we exercise the purchase option pursuant to these Contractual Arrangements, or if they were otherwise to act in bad faith toward us, then we may have to take legal action to compel them to perform their contractual obligations. All the agreements under our Contractual Arrangements are governed by PRC laws and provide for the resolution of disputes through arbitration in China. Accordingly, these contracts would be interpreted in accordance with PRC laws and any disputes would be resolved in accordance with PRC legal procedures. The legal system in the PRC is not as well established as in some other jurisdictions, such as in the United States. As a result, uncertainties in the PRC legal system could limit our ability to enforce these Contractual Arrangements. Meanwhile, there are some regulations that are unfavorable to the PRC operating entities. There are also very few precedents and little formal guidance as to how Contractual Arrangements in the context of a consolidated variable interest entity should be interpreted or enforced under PRC laws and there remain significant uncertainties regarding the ultimate outcome of such arbitration should legal action become necessary. In addition, under PRC laws, rulings by arbitrators are final and parties cannot appeal arbitration results in court unless such rulings are revoked or determined unenforceable by a competent court. If the losing parties fail to carry out the arbitration awards within a prescribed time limit, the prevailing parties may only enforce the arbitration awards in PRC courts through arbitration award recognition proceedings, which would require additional expenses and delay. In the event that we are unable to enforce these Contractual Arrangements, or if we suffer significant delay or other obstacles in the process of enforcing these Contractual Arrangements, we may not be able to consolidate the financial results of the PRC operating entities, and our results of operation may be negatively affected. See "Item 3. Key Information-D. Risk Factors - Risks Related to Our Corporate Structure - Uncertainties in the interpretation and enforcement of Chinese laws and regulations could limit the legal protections available to us."

We are an offshore holding company incorporated in the Cayman Islands. As a holding company with no material operations of our own, we consolidate financial results of the PRC operating entities through Contractual Arrangements with Hongli Shandong and its subsidiaries. We have relied and expect to continue to rely on the Contractual Arrangements with the PRC operating entities, to operate our business. If the PRC government determines that the Contractual Arrangements constituting part of the VIE structure do not comply with PRC regulations, or if these regulations change or are interpreted differently in the future, it would likely result in a material change in our operations and our Ordinary Shares may decline in value or become worthless if we are unable to consolidate the financial results of the PRC operating entities.

The shareholders of the VIE are currently controlling shareholders of us with 76.83% equity interest. The shareholders of the VIE are Mr. Jie Liu, the Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of Hongli Cayman, who holds 30% of the equity interest, Mr. Yuanqing Liu, who holds 40% of the equity interest, and Ms. Ronglan Sun, who holds 30% of the equity interest, respectively, of the VIE. These three shareholders of the VIE are also the shareholders of Hongli Development, which owns 76.83% equity interest in Hongli Cayman. Mr. Yuangqing Liu is the initial founder of the Hongli Shandong and the father of Mr. Jie Liu, and Ms. Ronglan Sun is the spouse of Mr. Yuangqing Liu and the mother of Mr. Jie Liu. Mr. Yuangqing Liu and Ms. Ronglan Sun have granted their proxy to Mr. Jie Liu to vote their shares in Hongli Development for all corporate transactions requiring shareholders' approval, and Mr. Jie Liu as such may be deemed to have sole voting and investment discretion with respect to the Ordinary Shares held by Hongli Development. However, we expect their holding be diluted as a result of any potential equity financing that we may contemplate, thus they may have actual or potential conflicts of interest with us. These shareholders may breach, or refuse to renew, the existing Contractual Arrangements we have with them, which may have a material and adverse effect on our ability to effectively consolidate financial results of the PRC operating entities. We cannot assure you that when conflicts of interest arise any or all of these shareholders will act in the best interests of our company or such conflicts will be resolved in our favor. If we cannot resolve any conflict of interest or dispute between us and these shareholders, we would have to rely on legal proceedings, which could result in disruption of our business and subject us to substantial uncertainty as to the outcome of any such legal proceedings.

Under PRC law, legal documents for corporate transactions, including agreements and contracts that our business relies on, are executed using the chop or seal of the signing entity or with the signature of a legal representative whose designation is registered and filed with the relevant local branch of the State Administration for Market Regulation ("SAMR"), formerly known as the State Administration for Industry and Commerce. We generally execute legal documents by affixing chops or seals, rather than having the designated legal representatives sign the documents. We use two major types of chops: corporate chops and finance chops. Chops are seals or stamps used by a PRC company to legally authorize documents, often in place of a signature. We use corporate chops generally for documents to be submitted to government agencies, such as applications for changing business scope, directors or company name, and for legal letters. We use finance chops generally for making and collecting payments, including issuing invoices. Use of corporate chops must be approved by department manager and office of the president, and use of finance chops must be approved by our finance department. The chops of our subsidiary and consolidated VIE are generally held by the relevant entities so that documents can be executed locally. Although we usually utilize chops to execute contracts, the registered legal representatives of our subsidiary and consolidated VIE have the apparent authority to enter into contracts on behalf of such entities without chops, unless such contracts set forth otherwise. In order to maintain the physical security of our chops, we generally have them stored in secured locations accessible only to the designated key employees of the office of the president or finance departments. Our designated legal representatives generally do not have access to the chops. Although we have approval procedures in place and monitor our key employees, including the designated legal representatives of our subsidiary and consolidated VIE, the procedures may not be sufficient to prevent all instances of abuse or negligence. There is a risk that our key employees or designated legal representatives could abuse their authority, for example, by binding our subsidiary and consolidated VIE with contracts against our interests, as we would be obligated to honor these contracts if the other contracting party acts in good faith in reliance on the apparent authority of our chops or signatures of our legal representatives. If any designated legal representative obtains control of the chop in an effort to obtain control over the relevant entity, we would need to have a shareholder or board resolution to designate a new legal representative to take legal action to seek the return of the chop, apply for a new chop with the relevant authorities, or otherwise seek legal remedies for the legal representative's misconduct. If any of the designated legal representatives obtains and misuses or misappropriates our chops and seals or other controlling intangible assets for whatever reason, we could experience disruption to our normal business operations. We may have to take corporate or legal action, which could involve significant time and resources to resolve the matter, while distracting management from our operations, and our business operations may be materially and adversely affected.

Our directors and officers beneficially own a majority of the voting power of our outstanding Ordinary Shares. Under the Rule 4350(c) of the Nasdaq Capital Market, a company of which more than 50% of the voting power is held by an individual, group or another company is a "controlled company" and may elect not to comply with certain corporate governance requirements, including the requirement that a majority of our directors be independent, as defined in the Nasdaq Capital Market Rules, and the requirement that our compensation and nominating and corporate governance committees consist entirely of independent directors. Although we do not intend to rely on the "controlled company" exemption under the Nasdaq listing rules, we could elect to rely on this exemption in the future. If we elect to rely on the "controlled company" exemption, a majority of the members of our board of directors might not be independent directors and our nominating and corporate governance and compensation committees might not consist entirely of independent directors. Accordingly, during any time while we remain a controlled company relying on the exemption and during any transition period following a time when we are no longer a controlled company, you would not have the same protections afforded to shareholders of companies that are subject to all of the Nasdaq Capital Market corporate governance requirements. Our status as a controlled company could cause our Ordinary Shares to look less attractive to certain investors or otherwise harm our trading price.

In April 2012, President Obama signed into law the JOBS Act. We are classified as an "emerging growth company" under the JOBS Act. For as long as we are an emerging growth company, which may be up to five full fiscal years of the closing of the initial offering, unlike other public companies, we will not be required to, among other things, (i) provide an auditor's attestation report on management's assessment of the effectiveness of our system of internal control over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, (ii) comply with any new requirements adopted by the PCAOB requiring mandatory audit firm rotation or a supplement to the auditor's report in which the auditor would be required to provide additional information about the audit and the financial statements of the issuer, (iii) provide certain disclosure regarding executive compensation required of larger public companies or (iv) hold nonbinding advisory votes on executive compensation. We will remain an emerging growth company for up to five years, although we will lose that status sooner if we have more than $1.235 billion of revenues in a fiscal year, have more than $700 million in market value of our Ordinary Shares held by non-affiliates, or issue more than $1.0 billion of non-convertible debt over a three-year period. To the extent that we rely on any of the exemptions available to emerging growth companies, you will receive less information about our executive compensation and internal control over financial reporting than issuers that are not emerging growth companies. If some investors find our Ordinary Shares to be less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our Ordinary Shares and our share price may be more volatile.

We are an "emerging growth company" within the meaning of the Securities Act, as modified by the JOBS Act. Section 102(b)(1) of the JOBS Act exempts emerging growth companies from being required to comply with new or revised financial accounting standards until private companies (that is, those that have not had a Securities Act registration statement declared effective or do not have a class of securities registered under the Exchange Act) are required to comply with the new or revised financial accounting standards. The JOBS Act provides that a company can elect to opt out of the extended transition period and comply with the requirements that apply to non-emerging growth companies but any such an election to opt out is irrevocable. We have elected not to opt out of such extended transition period, which means that when a standard is issued or revised and it has different application dates for public or private companies, we, as an emerging growth company, can adopt the new or revised standard at the time private companies adopt the new or revised standard. This will make comparison of our financial statements with another public company which is neither an emerging growth company nor an emerging growth company which has opted out of using the extended transition period difficult or impossible because of the potential differences in accounting standards used.

The Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act, or the HFCA Act, was enacted on December 18, 2020. The HFCA Act states if the SEC determines that a company has filed audit reports issued by a registered public accounting firm that has not been subject to inspection by the PCAOB for three consecutive years beginning in 2021, the SEC shall prohibit such ordinary shares from being traded on a national securities exchange or in the over the counter trading market in the U.S. On March 24, 2021, the SEC adopted interim final rules relating to the implementation of certain disclosure and documentation requirements of the HFCA Act. A company will be required to comply with these rules if the SEC identifies it as having a "non-inspection" year under a process to be subsequently established by the SEC. The SEC is assessing how to implement other requirements of the HFCA Act, including the listing and trading prohibition requirements described above. Furthermore, on June 22, 2021, the U.S. Senate passed the Accelerating Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act ("AHFCAA"), which, if signed into law, would amend the HFCA Act and require the SEC to prohibit an issuer's securities from trading on any U.S. stock exchanges if its auditor is not subject to PCAOB inspections for two consecutive years instead of three consecutive years, and thus reduce the time before our securities may be prohibited from trading or delisted. On September 22, 2021, the PCAOB adopted a final rule implementing the HFCA Act, which provides a framework for the PCAOB to use when determining, as contemplated under the HFCA Act, whether the PCAOB is unable to inspect or investigate completely registered public accounting firms located in a foreign jurisdiction because of a position taken by one or more authorities in that jurisdiction. On December 16, 2021, the PCAOB issued a Determination Report which found that the PCAOB is unable to inspect or investigate completely registered public accounting firms headquartered in: (1) mainland China, and (2) Hong Kong. Our auditor, RBSM LLP, is an independent registered public accounting firm with the PCAOB, and as an auditor of publicly traded companies in the U.S., is subject to laws in the U.S. pursuant to which the PCAOB conducts regular inspections to assess its compliance with the applicable professional standards. Our auditor is headquartered in New York, NY, and has been inspected by the PCAOB on a regular basis. The PCAOB currently has access to inspect the working papers of our auditor. Our auditor is not identified in the PCAOB's Determination Report. On December 15, 2022, the PCAOB determined that the PCAOB was able to secure complete access to inspect and investigate registered public accounting firms headquartered in mainland China and Hong Kong and voted to vacate its previous determinations to the contrary. However, whether the PCAOB will continue to be able to satisfactorily conduct inspections of PCAOB-registered public accounting firms headquartered in mainland China and Hong Kong is subject to uncertainty and depends on a number of factors out of our, and our auditor's, control. The PCAOB is continuing to demand complete access in mainland China and Hong Kong moving forward and is already making plans to resume regular inspections in early 2023 and beyond, as well as to continue pursuing ongoing investigations and initiate new investigations as needed. The PCAOB has indicated that it will act immediately to consider the need to issue new determinations with the HFCA Act if needed and does not have to wait another year to reassess its determinations. However, the recent developments would add uncertainties to our offering and we cannot assure you whether Nasdaq or regulatory authorities would apply additional and more stringent criteria to us after considering the effectiveness of our auditor's audit procedures and quality control procedures, adequacy of personnel and training, or sufficiency of resources, geographic reach or experience as it relates to the audit of our financial statements. The SEC may propose additional rules or guidance that could impact us if our auditor is not subject to PCAOB inspection. For example, on August 6, 2020, the President's Working Group on Financial Markets, or the PWG, issued the Report on Protecting United States Investors from Significant Risks from Chinese Companies to the then President of the United States. This report recommended the SEC implement five recommendations to address companies from jurisdictions that do not provide the PCAOB with sufficient access to fulfil its statutory mandate. Some of the concepts of these recommendations were implemented with the enactment of the HFCA Act. However, some of the recommendations were more stringent than the HFCA Act. For example, if a company's auditor was not subject to PCAOB inspection, the report recommended that the transition period before a company would be delisted would end on January 1, 2022. The SEC has announced that the SEC staff is preparing a consolidated proposal for the rules regarding the implementation of the HFCA Act and to address the recommendations in the PWG report. It is unclear when the SEC will complete its rulemaking and when such rules will become effective and what, if any, of the PWG recommendations will be adopted. The implications of this possible regulation in addition to the requirements of the HFCA Act are uncertain. Such uncertainty could cause the market price of our ordinary shares to be materially and adversely affected, and our securities could be delisted or prohibited from being traded on the national securities exchange earlier than would be required by the HFCA Act. Moreover, on December 29, 2022, the Consolidated Appropriations Act was signed into law by President Biden. The Consolidated Appropriations Act contained, among other things, an identical provision to the AHFCAA, which reduces the number of consecutive non-inspection years required for triggering the prohibitions under the HFCA Act from three years to two. If our Ordinary Shares are unable to be listed on another securities exchange by then, such a delisting would substantially impair your ability to sell or purchase our Ordinary Shares when you wish to do so, and the risk and uncertainty associated with a potential delisting would have a negative impact on the price of our Ordinary Shares.

On April 21, 2020, SEC Chairman Jay Clayton and PCAOB Chairman William D. Duhnke III, along with other senior SEC staff, released a joint statement highlighting the risks associated with investing in companies based in or have substantial operations in emerging markets including China. The joint statement emphasized the risks associated with lack of access for the PCAOB to inspect auditors and audit work papers in China and higher risks of fraud in emerging markets. On May 18, 2020, Nasdaq filed three proposals with the SEC to (i) apply minimum offering size requirement for companies primarily operating in "Restrictive Market", (ii) adopt a new requirement relating to the qualification of management or board of director for Restrictive Market companies, and (iii) apply additional and more stringent criteria to an applicant or listed company based on the qualifications of the company's auditors. On May 20, 2020, the U.S. Senate passed the HFCA Act requiring a foreign company to certify it is not owned or controlled by a foreign government if the PCAOB is unable to audit specified reports because the company uses a foreign auditor not subject to PCAOB inspection. If the PCAOB is unable to inspect the company's auditors for three consecutive years, the issuer's securities are prohibited to trade on a national exchange. On December 2, 2020, the U.S. House of Representatives approved the HFCA Act. On December 18, 2020, the HFCA Act was signed into law. On March 24, 2021, the SEC announced that it had adopted interim final amendments to implement congressionally mandated submission and disclosure requirements of the Act. The interim final amendments will apply to registrants that the SEC identifies as having filed an annual report on Forms 10-K, 20-F, 40-F or N-CSR with an audit report issued by a registered public accounting firm that is located in a foreign jurisdiction and that the PCAOB has determined it is unable to inspect or investigate completely because of a position taken by an authority in that jurisdiction. The SEC will implement a process for identifying such a registrant and any such identified registrant will be required to submit documentation to the SEC establishing that it is not owned or controlled by a governmental entity in that foreign jurisdiction, and will also require disclosure in the registrant's annual report regarding the audit arrangements of, and governmental influence on, such a registrant. Furthermore, the HFCA Act, which requires that the PCAOB be permitted to inspect the issuer's public accounting firm within three years, may result in the delisting of our Company in the future if the PCAOB is unable to inspect our accounting firm at such future time. In addition, on June 22, 2021, the U.S. Senate passed the AHFCAA, which, if signed into law, would amend the HFCA Act and require the SEC to prohibit an issuer's securities from trading on any U.S. stock exchanges if its auditor is not subject to PCAOB inspections for two consecutive years instead of three consecutive years. On November 5, 2021, the SEC approved the PCAOB's Rule 6100, Board Determinations Under HFCA Act. Rule 6100 provides a framework for the PCAOB to use when determining, as contemplated under the HFCA Act, whether it is unable to inspect or investigate completely registered public accounting firms located in a foreign jurisdiction because of a position taken by one or more authorities in that jurisdiction. On December 2, 2021, the SEC issued amendments to finalize rules implementing the submission and disclosure requirements in the HFCA Act. The rules apply to registrants that the SEC identifies as having filed an annual report with an audit report issued by a registered public accounting firm that is located in a foreign jurisdiction and that PCAOB is unable to inspect or investigate completely because of a position taken by an authority in foreign jurisdictions. On December 16, 2021, the PCAOB issued a Determination Report which found that the PCAOB is unable to inspect or investigate completely registered public accounting firms headquartered in: (1) mainland China, and (2) Hong Kong. On August 26, 2022, the CSRC, the Ministry of Finance of the PRC, and PCAOB signed a Statement of Protocol, or the Protocol, governing inspections and investigations of audit firms based in China and Hong Kong. Pursuant to the Protocol, the PCAOB has independent discretion to select any issuer audits for inspection or investigation and has the unfettered ability to transfer information to the SEC. The PCAOB was required to reassess these determinations by the end of 2022. Under the PCAOB's rules, a reassessment of a determination under the HFCA Act may result in the PCAOB reaffirming, modifying or vacating the determination. On December 15, 2022, the PCAOB determined that the PCAOB was able to secure complete access to inspect and investigate registered public accounting firms headquartered in mainland China and Hong Kong and voted to vacate its previous determinations to the contrary. However, whether the PCAOB will continue to be able to satisfactorily conduct inspections of PCAOB-registered public accounting firms headquartered in mainland China and Hong Kong is subject to uncertainty and depends on a number of factors out of our, and our auditor's, control. The PCAOB is continuing to demand complete access in mainland China and Hong Kong moving forward and is already making plans to resume regular inspections in early 2023 and beyond, as well as to continue pursuing ongoing investigations and initiate new investigations as needed. The PCAOB has indicated that it will act immediately to consider the need to issue new determinations with the HFCA Act if needed and does not have to wait another year to reassess its determinations. On December 29, 2022, the Consolidated Appropriations Act was signed into law by President Biden. The Consolidated Appropriations Act contained, among other things, an identical provision to the AHFCAA, which reduces the number of consecutive non-inspection years required for triggering the prohibitions under the HFCA Act from three years to two. The lack of access to the PCAOB inspection in China could prevent the PCAOB from fully evaluating audits and quality control procedures of the auditors based in China. As a result, the investors may be deprived of the benefits of such PCAOB inspections. The inability of the PCAOB to conduct inspections of auditors in China makes it more difficult to evaluate the effectiveness of these accounting firms' audit procedures or quality control procedures as compared to auditors outside of China that are subject to the PCAOB inspections, which could cause existing and potential investors in our stock to lose confidence in our audit procedures and reported financial information and the quality of our financial statements. Our auditor, RBSM LLP, is an independent registered public accounting firm with the PCAOB, and as an auditor of publicly traded companies in the U.S., is subject to laws in the U.S. pursuant to which the PCAOB conducts regular inspections to assess its compliance with the applicable professional standards. Our auditor is headquartered in New York, NY, and has been inspected by the PCAOB on a regular basis. The PCAOB currently has access to inspect the working papers of our auditor. Our auditor is not identified in the PCAOB's Determination Report. However, the above recent developments may have added uncertainties to our ability to continue to list on Nasdaq or to offer our securities and we cannot assure you whether Nasdaq or regulatory authorities would apply additional and more stringent criteria to us since we are an emerging growth company and substantial all of our operations are conducting in China.

We are an exempted company with limited liability incorporated under the laws of the Cayman Islands. Our corporate affairs are governed by our amended and restated memorandum and articles of association, as amended, the Companies Act (Revised) of the Cayman Islands, which we refer to as the Companies Act below, and the common law of the Cayman Islands. The rights of shareholders to take actions against the directors, actions by minority shareholders and the fiduciary responsibilities of our directors to us under Cayman Islands law are to a large extent governed by the common law of the Cayman Islands. The common law of the Cayman Islands is derived in part from comparatively limited judicial precedent in the Cayman Islands as well as from the common law of England, the decisions of whose courts are of persuasive authority, but are not binding, on a court in the Cayman Islands. The rights of our shareholders and the fiduciary responsibilities of our directors under Cayman Islands law are not as clearly established as they would be under statutes or judicial precedent in some jurisdictions in the U.S. In particular, the Cayman Islands has a less developed body of securities laws than the U.S. Some U.S. states, such as Delaware, have more fully developed and judicially interpreted bodies of corporate law than the Cayman Islands. In addition, Cayman Islands companies may not have standing to initiate a shareholder derivative action in a federal court of the U.S. Shareholders of Cayman Islands exempted companies like us have no general rights under Cayman Islands law to inspect corporate records or to obtain copies of lists of shareholders of these companies (other than copies of our amended and restated memorandum and articles of association and register of mortgages and charges, and any special resolutions passed by our shareholders). Under Cayman Islands law, the names of our current directors can be obtained from a search conducted at the Registrar of Companies. Our directors have discretion under our amended and restated memorandum and articles of association to determine whether or not, and under what conditions, our corporate records may be inspected by our shareholders, but are not obliged to make them available to our shareholders. This may make it more difficult for you to obtain the information needed to establish any facts necessary for a shareholder motion or to solicit proxies from other shareholders in connection with a proxy contest. As a company incorporated in the Cayman Islands, we are permitted to adopt certain home country practices in relation to corporate governance matters that differ significantly from the Nasdaq corporate governance requirements; these practices may afford less protection to shareholders than they otherwise would under rules and regulations applicable to U.S. domestic issuers. As a result of all of the above, our public shareholders may have more difficulties in protecting their interests in the face of actions taken by management, members of the board of directors or controlling shareholders than they would as public shareholders of a company incorporated in the U.S.

Nasdaq Listing Rules require listed companies to have, among other things, a majority of its board members be independent. As a foreign private issuer, however, we are permitted to, and we may follow home country practice in lieu of the above requirements, or we may choose to comply with the above requirement within one year of listing. The corporate governance practice in our home country, the Cayman Islands, does not require a majority of our board to consist of independent directors. Thus, although a director must act in the best interests of the Company, it is possible that fewer board members will be exercising independent judgment and the level of board oversight on the management of our company may decrease as a result. In addition, the Nasdaq Listing Rules also require U.S. domestic issuers to have a compensation committee, a nominating/corporate governance committee composed entirely of independent directors, and an audit committee with a minimum of three members. We, as a foreign private issuer, are not subject to these requirements. The Nasdaq Listing Rules may require shareholder approval for certain corporate matters, such as requiring that shareholders be given the opportunity to vote on all equity compensation plans and material revisions to those plans, certain ordinary share issuances. We intend to comply with the requirements of Nasdaq Listing Rules in determining whether shareholder approval is required on such matters and to appoint a nominating and corporate governance committee. However, we may consider following home country practice in lieu of the requirements under Nasdaq Listing Rules with respect to certain corporate governance standards which may afford less protection to investors.

Nasdaq Listing Rule 5101 provides Nasdaq with broad discretionary authority over the initial and continued listing of securities on Nasdaq and Nasdaq may use such discretion to deny initial listing, apply additional or more stringent criteria for the initial or continued listing of particular securities, or suspend or delist particular securities based on any event, condition, or circumstance that exists or occurs that makes initial or continued listing of the securities on Nasdaq inadvisable or unwarranted in the opinion of Nasdaq, even though the securities meet all enumerated criteria for initial or continued listing on Nasdaq. In addition, Nasdaq has used its discretion to deny initial or continued listing or to apply additional and more stringent criteria in the instances, including but not limited to: (i) where the company engaged an auditor that has not been subject to an inspection by the PCAOB, an auditor that PCAOB cannot inspect, or an auditor that has not demonstrated sufficient resources, geographic reach, or experience to adequately perform the company's audit; (ii) where the company planned a small public offering, which would result in insiders holding a large portion of the company's listed securities. Nasdaq was concerned that the offering size was insufficient to establish the company's initial valuation, and there would not be sufficient liquidity to support a public market for the company; and (iii) where the company did not demonstrate sufficient nexus to the U.S. capital market, including having no U.S. shareholders, operations, or members of the board of directors or management. Our public offering will be relatively small and the insiders of our Company will hold a large portion of the company's listed securities. Nasdaq might apply the additional and more stringent criteria for our initial and continued listing, which might cause delay or even denial of our listing application.

Even though our securities are listed on the Nasdaq Capital Market, we cannot assure you that our securities will continue to be listed on the Nasdaq Capital Market after the initial offering. In addition, following the initial offering, in order to maintain our listing on the Nasdaq Capital Market, we will be required to comply with certain rules of Nasdaq Capital Market, including those regarding minimum shareholders' equity, minimum share price and certain corporate governance requirements. Even if we have initially met the listing requirements and other applicable rules of the Nasdaq Capital Market, we may not be able to continue to satisfy these requirements and applicable rules. If we are unable to satisfy the Nasdaq Capital Market criteria for maintaining our listing, our securities could be subject to delisting. If the Nasdaq Capital Market subsequently delists our securities from trading, we could face significant consequences, including: - a limited availability for market quotations for our securities;- reduced liquidity with respect to our securities;- a determination that our Ordinary Share is a "penny stock," which will require brokers trading in our Ordinary Share to adhere to more stringent rules and possibly result in a reduced level of trading activity in the secondary trading market for our Ordinary Share;- limited amount of news and analyst coverage; and - a decreased ability to issue additional securities or obtain additional financing in the future.

The public offering price for our Ordinary Shares will be determined through negotiations between the underwriters and us and may vary from the market price of our Ordinary Shares following our public offering. If you purchase our Ordinary Shares in our public offering, you may not be able to resell those shares at or above the public offering price. We cannot assure you that the public offering price of our Ordinary Shares, or the market price following our public offering, will equal or exceed prices in privately negotiated transactions of our shares that have occurred from time to time prior to our public offering. The market price of our Ordinary Shares may fluctuate significantly in response to numerous factors, many of which are beyond our control, including: - actual or anticipated fluctuations in our revenue and other operating results;- the financial projections we may provide to the public, any changes in these projections or our failure to meet these projections;- actions of securities analysts who initiate or maintain coverage of us, changes in financial estimates by any securities analysts who follow our company, or our failure to meet these estimates or the expectations of investors;- announcements by us or our competitors of significant services or features, technical innovations, acquisitions, strategic partnerships, joint ventures, or capital commitments;- price and volume fluctuations in the overall stock market, including as a result of trends in the economy as a whole;- lawsuits threatened or filed against us; and - other events or factors, including those resulting from war or incidents of terrorism, or responses to these events. In addition, the stock markets have experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that have affected and continue to affect the market prices of equity securities of many companies. Stock prices of many companies have fluctuated in a manner unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of those companies. In the past, shareholders have filed securities class action litigation following periods of market volatility. If we were to become involved in securities litigation, it could subject us to substantial costs, divert resources and the attention of management from our business, and adversely affect our business.

Recently, there have been instances of extreme stock price run-ups followed by rapid price declines and strong stock price volatility with a number of recent initial public offerings, especially among companies with relatively smaller public floats. As a relatively small-capitalization company with relatively small public float, we may experience greater stock price volatility, extreme price run-ups, lower trading volume and less liquidity than large-capitalization companies. In particular, our Ordinary Shares may be subject to rapid and substantial price volatility, low volumes of trades and large spreads in bid and ask prices. Such volatility, including any stock-run up, may be unrelated to our actual or expected operating performance, financial condition or prospects, making it difficult for prospective investors to assess the rapidly changing value of our Ordinary Shares. In addition, if the trading volumes of our Ordinary Shares are low, persons buying or selling in relatively small quantities may easily influence prices of our Ordinary Shares. This low volume of trades could also cause the price of our Ordinary Shares to fluctuate greatly, with large percentage changes in price occurring in any trading day session. Holders of our Ordinary Shares may also not be able to readily liquidate their investment or may be forced to sell at depressed prices due to low volume trading. Broad market fluctuations and general economic and political conditions may also adversely affect the market price of our Ordinary Shares. As a result of this volatility, investors may experience losses on their investment in our Ordinary Shares. A decline in the market price of our Ordinary Shares also could adversely affect our ability to issue additional shares of Ordinary Shares or other securities and our ability to obtain additional financing in the future. No assurance can be given that an active market in our Ordinary Shares will develop or be sustained. If an active market does not develop, holders of our Ordinary Shares may be unable to readily sell the shares they hold or may not be able to sell their shares at all.

Prior to the initial offering, there has been no public market for our ordinary shares. Although we have received the approval letter from Nasdaq to list our Ordinary Shares on the NASDAQ Capital Market, an active trading market for our ordinary shares may not develop or be sustained following the initial offering. You may not be able to sell your shares at the market price, if at all, if trading in our shares is not active. The public offering price was determined by negotiations between us and the underwriters based upon a number of factors. The public offering price may not be indicative of prices that will prevail in the trading market.