CLDC China Lending Corporation

RISK FACTORS

In conducting our business, we face many risks that may interfere with our business objectives. Some of these risks could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. In particular, we are subject to various risks resulting from changing economic, political, industry, business and financial conditions. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones we face. Additional risks and uncertainties not currently known to us or that we currently deem to be immaterial may also materially adversely affect our business operations.

Risks Factors Relating to the Company’s Business and Operations

The limited operating history of Feng Hui and the lack of an operating history of Ding Tai, Jing Kai and Ding Xin make it difficult to evaluate their business and prospects.

Feng Hui commenced operations in June 2009 and has a limited operating history. The Company has built a portfolio of an aggregate of approximately $1,153 million of direct loans to 1,931 borrowers from inception till December 31, 2016. For the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, the Company generated approximately $35.5 million and $28.2 million of revenue with $17.3 million and $14.1 million of net income, respectively. However the Company’s growth rate since 2009 may not be indicative of future performance. Jing Kai and Ding Xin were formed in the second quarter of 2015. Ding Tai was formed in the December of 2016. Jing Kai and Ding Tai have not commenced operations, and Ding Xin commenced operations in August 2015.

The Company may not be able to achieve similar results or grow at the same rate as the Company has in the past. It is also difficult to evaluate our prospects, as the Company may not have sufficient experience in addressing the risks to which companies operating in new and rapidly evolving markets such as the direct lending industry may be exposed. The Company will continue to encounter risks and difficulties that companies at a similar stage of development frequently experience, including the potential failure to:

If the Company is unable to address any or all of the foregoing risks, its business may be materially and adversely affected.

The Company’s current operations in China are geographically limited to Xinjiang Province.

In accordance with the PRC state and provincial laws and regulations with regard to direct lending companies, the Company is not allowed to make loans to businesses and individuals located outside of Xinjiang Province. The Company’s future growth opportunities will depend on the growth and stability of the economy in Xinjiang Province. A downturn in the economy of Xinjiang Province or the city of Urumqi or the implementation of provincial or local policies unfavorable to MSMEs may cause a decrease in the demand for the Company’s loans and may negatively affect borrowers’ ability to repay their loans on a timely basis, both of which could have a negative impact on the Company’s profitability and business.

Fears of terrorist and ethnic extremists attacks in Xinjiang Province could have a negative impact on the Company’s operations.

The Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region is the largest administrative division in China by land area, although it ranks 25 ^th by population. Its ethnic composition is on approximately 45.8% Uyghur, 40.5% Han, 6.5% Kazakh and 4.5% other. This has given rise to ethnic and other tensions both in Urumqi, the Capital City, and elsewhere in Xinjiang Province. Events such as terrorist and ethnic extremist attacks as well as riots and the resulting political instability, economy suspension and concerns over safety and security aspects of investment in Xinjiang Province or the fear of any of the foregoing have had, and could have in the future, a significant adverse impact on demand and pricing of the Company’s operations.

Changes in the interest rates and spread could have a negative impact on the Company’s revenues and results of operations.

The Company’s revenues primarily depend on interest income, which is the difference between interest the Company receives from loans they provide to customers and the interest the Company pays on their borrowings from other financial institutions (to the extent that we rely on debt financing, rather than equity). A narrowing interest rate spread could adversely affect our earnings and financial conditions. If the Company is not able to control its funding costs or adjust its lending interest rates in a timely manner, our interest margin will decline. Until August 2015, the interest rates the Company charged to borrowers was linked to the PBOC benchmark interest rate and the interest rate adopted by the commercial banks in the PRC. On August 6, 2015, the Supreme People’s Court of the PRC issued the Provisions on Several Issues Concerning Laws Applicable to Trials of Private Lending Cases (“the provisions”), which came into effect on September 1, 2015. The provisions provided that agreements between the lender and borrower on loans with interest rates below 24% per annum are valid and enforceable; as to loans with interest rates per annum between 24% and 36%, if the interest on the loans has already been paid to the lender, and such payment has not damaged the interest of the state, the community and any third parties, the courts will turn down the borrower’s request to demand the return of the interest payment; if the annual interest rate of a private loan is higher than 36%, the excess will not be enforced by the courts. While this generally has the effect of raising the maximum interest rate the Company may lend to borrowers, the provisions are a recent change in regulation and the Company may not be able to foresee all of the consequences of the provisions.

Ding Xin, Jing Kai and Feng Hui are separate legal entities, which have the ability to incur indebtedness on their own behalf, and such indebtedness could have an adverse effect on the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of their parent entity.

Ding Xin, Jing Kai and Feng Hui are all legal entities under control of the Company through ownership or contractual arrangement. While the Company intends to exercise control over any borrowings by each of these entities, under the laws of their respective jurisdictions of incorporation each entity has the ability to incur debts on its own behalf, subject to limitations under applicable law. According to regulations issued by the General Office of the People’s Government of Urumqi Municipality on June 9, 2009, Jing Kai and Feng Hui can only incur debts from up to two banking financial institutions and so long as the aggregate borrowings are less than 50% of applicable entity’s net capital. If Ding Xin, Jing Kai or Feng Hui are not able to repay their borrowings, according to People’s Republic of China Enterprise Bankruptcy law, such entity is deemed insolvent and creditors can file a petition with a PRC court for restructuring or liquidation under bankruptcy; the result of which could have a material adverse effect on Ding Xin, Jing Kai and Feng Hui’s results of operations, result in the Company losing its equity interest in Jing Kai or Ding Xin and result in the agreements and instruments, pursuant to which the Company, through its subsidiary Ding Xin, controls Feng Hui: Equity Pledge Agreement, Exclusive Business Cooperation Agreement, Exclusive Purchase Option Agreement and Power of Attorney (the “VIE Agreements”) being terminated.

As direct lending companies, the Company is subject to greater credit risks than larger lenders, which could adversely affect its results of operations.

There are inherent risks associated with our lending activities, including credit risk, which is the risk that borrowers may not repay the outstanding loans balances in its direct loan business. As direct lending companies, we extend credits to MSMEs, individual industrial and commercial households and individuals. These borrowers generally have fewer financial resources in terms of capital or borrowing capacity than larger entities and may have fewer financial resources to weather a downturn in the economy. Such borrowers may expose the Company to greater credit risks than lenders lending to larger, better-capitalized state-owned businesses with longer operating histories. Conditions such as inflation, economic downturn, local policy change, adjustment of industrial structure and other factors beyond our control may increase our credit risk more than such events would affect larger lenders. In addition, since we are only permitted to provide financial services to borrowers located in Xinjiang Province, our ability to geographically diversify the economic risks is currently limited by the local markets and economies. Also, decreases in local real estate value could adversely affect the values of the real property used as collateral in the direct loan business. Such adverse changes in the local economies may have a negative impact on the ability of borrowers to repay their loans and the value of its collateral and its results of operations and financial condition may be adversely affected.

Provision for loan losses may not be sufficient to absorb future losses or prevent a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, or results of operations.

The Company’s risk management procedures use historical information to estimate any potential losses based on the experience, judgment, and expectations regarding borrowers and the economic environment in which the Company and its borrowers operate. The provision for loan losses as of December 31, 2016 was established at a level believed to be reasonable by management to absorb probable losses inherent in the portfolio as of each balance sheet date in accordance with US GAAP. As of December 31, 2016, not only a general provision, but also specific provisions, were reflected in the provision. However, our loan loss reserves may not be sufficient to absorb future loan losses or prevent a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial condition, or results of operations.

The provision policy of the Company does not distinguish among loans by type of guarantee. In addition, the Company calculates the provision amount pursuant to U.S. GAAP as set forth below:

1. General Reserve — is based on total loan receivable balance and to be used to cover unidentified probable loan loss.

2. Special Reserve — is funds set aside covering losses due to risks related to a particular industry, company or type of loans. The reserve rate is decided based on management estimate of loan collectability. The loan portfolio did not include any loans outside of Xinjiang Province.

However, the Company’s loan loss reserves may not be sufficient to absorb future loan losses or prevent a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial condition, or results of operations.

While they do not directly impact the Company’s U.S. GAAP financial statements attached hereto, the Company is also subject to regulatory accounting requirements. Pursuant to the Temporary Regulation of Pilot Program of Microcredit Companies in Xinjiang Province issued by the General Office of Xinjiang Provincial Government in 2009, we should make sufficient reserve for the loan losses.

While the Company believes its management uses the best information available to make loan loss provision evaluations, adjustments to the provision may be necessary based on changes in economic and other conditions or changes in accounting guidance, which could negatively affect the Company’s results of operations and financial condition.

An increase to the provision for loan losses will cause the Company’s net income to decrease.

Our businesses are subject to fluctuations based on local economic conditions. These fluctuations are neither predictable nor within its control and may have a material adverse impact on its operations and financial condition. We may decide to increase our provision for loan losses in light of the lack of clarity in the applicable banking regulations with regard to direct lending companies. The regulatory authority may also require an increase in the provision for loan losses or the recognition of further loan charge-offs, based on judgments different from those of its management. Any increase in the provision for loan losses will result in a decrease in net income and may have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition and results of operations.

Feng Hui’s business is, and Jing Kai’s business will be, highly concentrated in one product. Accordingly, their future revenues and earnings are more susceptible to fluctuations than a more diversified company.

Feng Hui’s primary business activities include, and Jing Kai’s primary business activities will include, offering direct loans to customers. If the Company is unable to maintain and grow the operating revenues from this business or develop additional revenue streams, their future revenues and earnings are not likely to grow and could decline. Our lack of significant product and business diversification could inhibit the opportunities for the growth of our business, revenues and profits.

Competition in the direct lending industry is growing and could cause the Company to lose market share and revenues in the future.

We believe that the direct lending industry is an emerging market in China. We may face growing competition in the direct lending industry, and the Company believes that the direct lending industry is becoming more competitive as this industry matures and begins to consolidate. Feng Hui currently competes, and the Company will compete, with traditional financial institutions, other direct lending companies, other microfinance companies, including P2P lenders, and some cash-rich state-owned companies or individuals that lend to MSMEs. Some of these competitors have larger and more established borrower bases and substantially greater financial, marketing and other resources than we have. In addition, peer-to-peer lending platforms are rapidly growing in China and may provide highly competitive interest rates to customers due to lower overhead, and in some cases, lower required returns by the lenders. For example, large internet companies such as Tencent Holdings Ltd. and Alibaba Holding Ltd. have formed financial services affiliates such as online-only banks and P2P lending services which have been heavily capitalized and rapidly developed. As a result, the Company could lose market share and its revenues could decline, thereby adversely affecting our earnings and potential for growth.

The P2P lending market has been expanding rapidly in China. According to a report issued by www.wdzj.com , it is estimated that there are $67.7 billion in loans outstanding in China through P2P platforms as of the end of December 2015. The Company intends to be a new entrant into this field and will be competing with companies with greater resources and experience. The P2P experience to date in China has demonstrated that without a very disciplined approach this platform and the loans originated through its use can be fraught with risk. According to www.wangdaizhijia.com , nearly 26% of all P2P companies in China are platforms with default as of the end of December 2015. While the Company believes that it will be able to successfully compete in this area as a result of its proprietary risk management processes and tools, there is no assurance that it will be able to hire and retain the necessary employees and compete successfully. Furthermore, even though Feng Hui is the leading direct lender in Xinjiang Province measured by loan volume, P2P lenders may also compete for the same customers and they may have certain pricing advantages due to their lower overhead, which may result in reduced margins and increased competition for us.

The Company’s businesses will require highly qualified personnel, and if it is unable to hire or retain qualified personnel, then it may not be able to grow effectively.

The Company’s future success depends upon its ability to attract and retain highly qualified personnel. Establishment of the Jing Kai and Ding Xin businesses and expansion of the businesses of each operating company will require additional managers and employees with relevant industry experience, and its success will be highly dependent on its ability to attract and retain skilled management personnel and other employees. These operating companies may not be able to attract or retain highly qualified personnel. In addition, competition for skilled personnel is significant in China. This competition may make it more difficult and expensive to attract, hire and retain qualified managers and employees. The Company may incur additional expenses to recruit and retain qualified replacements and its businesses may be disrupted and its financial condition and results of operations may be materially and adversely affected. In addition, key managers may join a competitor or form a competing company. An operating company may not be able to successfully enforce any contractual rights with its management team, in particular in China, where all of these individuals reside or will reside.

The Company’s business may be adversely affected if Feng Hui’s shareholders do not actively support the business or by changes in marketing and loan origination strategies.

Feng Hui’s shareholders have actively supported Feng Hui’s business by referring their commercial and other contacts to be Feng Hui customers, including that for most of such referrals the shareholder will personally guarantee the borrowings of the customer he or she has referred to Feng Hui. As of December 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, 55.8% and 39.4% respectively, of Feng Hui’s loans were guaranteed by related parties. The percentage of the Company’s loans that are so guaranteed has declined in recent years and the Company expects that percentage to decline in the future as we expand our business using other marketing and loan origination strategies. However, if these Feng Hui shareholders reduce their referrals or guarantees in the future at the shareholders’ discretion, then the Company’s results of operations could be materially adversely affected. In addition, as the Company migrates away from Feng Hui’s shareholder referral marketing and loan origination approach to approaches in which there is not a pre-existing, separate business relationship between a shareholder and the customer and the special knowledge of the customer’s business and financial condition that often comes with such a relationship, we may experience a higher loss experience than Feng Hui has experienced historically.

Discontinuation of preferential tax treatment Feng Hui currently enjoys may result in additional compliance obligations and costs so as to materially and adversely impact the Company’s net income.

Pursuant to Supplementary Rules on Accelerating Economy Development and Implementing Supportive Policy issued by the local government, Feng Hui was rewarded with certain tax refunds for years 2009 and 2010. Further, from year 2011 through 2016, local tax authorities granted Feng Hui the preferential income tax rate of 15% because Feng Hui was entitled to the preferential rate as a qualified enterprise engaged in industry under the Western Development Strategy.

There is uncertainty in the policy at the state and provincial levels as to how the direct loan business carried out by the Company will be treated with regard to income tax and business tax. If the tax authority determines that the income tax, business tax or other applicable tax Feng Hui previously paid were less than what was required, Feng Hui may be required to make payment for the overdue tax and interest on the overdue payment. Further, these preferential tax treatments will expire in 2020. The discontinuation of any of the preferential tax treatment Feng Hui has received may materially and adversely affect the Company’s results of operations.

The Company’s business continuity plans could prove to be inadequate, resulting in a material interruption in or disruption to, its business and a negative impact on the Company’s results of operations.

The Company relies heavily on communications and information systems to conduct its business, and its operations are dependent on its ability to protect its systems against damage from fire, power loss, telecommunication failure, severe weather, natural disasters, terrorism or other factors. The computer systems and network infrastructure the Company uses could be vulnerable to unforeseen problems. While the Company has a business continuity plan and other policies and procedures designed to prevent or limit the effect of a failure or interruption of our information systems, there can be no assurance that any such failures or interruptions will not occur or, if they do occur, that they will be adequately addressed. The occurrence of any failures or interruptions of our information systems could, among other things, damage the Company’s reputation or result in a loss of clients, which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations.

The Company has no material insurance coverage, which could expose it to significant costs and business disruption.

Risks associated with the Company’s business and operations include, but are not limited to, borrowers’ failure to repay the outstanding principal and interest when due and loss reserves are not sufficient cover such failure, losses of key personnel, business interruption due to power loss or network failure, and risks posed by natural disasters including storms, floods and earthquakes, any of which may result in significant costs or business disruption. The Company does not maintain any credit insurance, business interruption insurance, general third-party liability insurance, nor does it maintain key-man life insurance or any other insurance coverage except the mandatory social insurance for employees. If the Company incurs any loss that is not covered by reserves, its business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected.

The Company maintains cash deposits with various banks. These cash accounts are not sufficiently insured or otherwise protected. Should any bank or trust company holding these cash deposits become insolvent, or if the Company is otherwise unable to withdraw funds, it could lose the cash on deposit with that particular bank or trust company.

The Company uses credit reports issued by the Credit Reference Center of the People’s Bank of China for credit records, which may not cover all accurate credit activities of guarantors and borrowers.

The Company generally uses credit reports issued by the Credit Reference Center of the People’s Bank of China (“CCRC”) for guarantors and borrowers’ credit records, including privately-owned guarantors. According to the information from CCRC’s official website (http://www.pbccrc.org.cn/crc/), CCRC is a professional credit information service institution directly under the People’s Bank of China (“PBOC”) which collects comprehensive credit information about both enterprises and individuals throughout China. The 2,100 credit reports query points of the PBOC’s branches have covered almost all rural areas in China, and CCRC has 300,000 information query ports in financial institutions and networks around the country, and the credit information service network is used throughout China. As of the end of April 2015, CCRC’s database had collected credit information of over 860 million individuals and over 20 million enterprises and institutions, mainly from commercial banks as well as other financial institutions. However, the CCRC’s credit reports do not cover all credit and financing activities with all trust companies, leasing companies, asset management companies, direct lending companies, insurance companies, and other financial companies. Moreover, the PBOC had not established a credit reporting system until 1997 when it established the Bank Credit Registration System which upgraded to the CCRC in 2006. Therefore, CCRC’s credit reports may not be able to cover credit and financing activities that occurred before 1997. In addition, the accuracy of credit reports provided by CCRC may be mainly adversely affected: (1) reliability of information source; (2) victimized by criminals forging identity of the customers; (3) mistakes made by data entry operators; and (4) technical stability of CCRC’s computer system. Furthermore, despite using credit reports issued by the CCRC, privately-owned guarantors may be more susceptible to default than state-owned or public guarantors due to financial difficulties or fraud and therefore, the Company may have more difficulty enforcing guarantees from privately-owned guarantors than from state-owned or public guarantors. Finally, having clean credit history in the past does not preclude a borrower or guarantor from defaulting in the future.

Risks Related to the Company’s Corporate Structure

The Company conducts its lending business through its subsidiary Jing Kai and through Feng Hui by means of contractual arrangements, which are subject to PRC interpretations which may prove to be adverse to the Company.

Foreign ownership of direct lending business may be subject to restrictions under applicable PRC laws and regulatory practice. For example, there is some ambiguity regarding whether the Temporary Regulation of Pilot Program of Microcredit Companies in Xinjiang Province (“Xinjiang Microcredit Regulation”) may allow applicable authorities in Xinjiang Province to refuse to grant or to terminate a company’s direct lending license if one or more investors in of that company is not a Chinese citizen or legal person. The Company operates in China through Jing Kai, its indirect wholly-owned subsidiary and therefore a wholly foreign owned entity, and Feng Hui, its China incorporated variable interest entity (“VIE”). Xinjiang Province has issued Jing Kai a license to operate as a direct lender in spite of the Company’s plans for Jing Kai to be wholly-owned directly by Feng Hui Holding, and indirectly by Adrie, the Company and our shareholders, but it is possible that a PRC regulatory authority or court could later decide that such ownership violates the Xinjiang Microcredit Regulation or other existing or future regulations or policies.

Feng Hui is and will be owned, directly or indirectly, by PRC citizens who are Feng Hui’s founders, with whom Ding Xin has contractual arrangements under the VIE Agreements. The contractual arrangements will give the Company effective control over Feng Hui and enable the Company to obtain substantially all of the economic benefits arising from Feng Hui as well as consolidate the financial results of Feng Hui in its results of operations. Although the structure the Company has adopted with respect to Feng Hui is consistent with longstanding industry practice, and is commonly adopted by comparable companies in China, the PRC government may not agree that these arrangements comply with existing registration or other regulatory requirements or policies, including the Xinjiang Microcredit Regulation, or regulations policies that may be adopted in the future.

If the PRC courts or administrative authorities determine that Jing Kai’s ownership or the VIE Agreements do not comply with applicable regulations, the VIE Agreements may be determined to be void and the Company’s interests unenforceable.

We and our PRC counsel believe the ownership structures of Jing Kai and Feng Hui in China do not violate any applicable PRC law or license currently in effect; and the VIE Agreements between Ding Xin and Feng Hui and its shareholders governed by PRC law are valid, binding and enforceable in accordance with their terms and applicable PRC laws and regulations currently in effect and will not violate any applicable PRC law currently in effect such as the PRC Laws regarding foreign ownership of Chinese businesses, except to the extent that enforceability thereof may be limited by applicable bankruptcy, insolvency, reorganization and moratorium laws and other laws of general application affecting the enforcement of creditors’ rights generally or by any applicable statute of limitation or by any valid defense or set-off or counterclaim, and the fact that equitable remedies or relief (including the remedy of specific performance) are subject to the discretion of the court from which such relief may be sought.

There are substantial uncertainties regarding the interpretation and application of current PRC laws. Accordingly, the PRC regulatory authorities and PRC courts may in the future take a view that is contrary to our views and the views of our PRC legal counsel. We are aware of a recent case involving Chinachem Financial Services where certain contractual arrangements for a Hong Kong company to gain economic control over a PRC Company were declared to be void by the PRC Supreme People’s Court. If the PRC courts or regulatory authorities determine that the VIE Agreements violate applicable PRC laws, our contractual arrangements will become invalid or unenforceable. It is uncertain whether the definition and requirements for variable interest entity structures in newly developed Foreign Investment Law will be adopted or if adopted, how they would identify the existing variable interest entities.

If the interpretations of existing regulations regarding VIE Agreements change in the future, the Company could be subject to severe penalties or be forced to relinquish its interests in those operations.

If Jing Kai, Feng Hui, their respective ownership structure or the VIE Agreements, are determined to be in violation of any existing or future PRC laws, or Jing Kai or Feng Hui fails to obtain or maintain any of the required governmental permits or approvals necessary to operate their businesses, the relevant PRC regulatory authorities would have broad discretion in dealing with such violations, including:

The imposition of any of these penalties would severely disrupt our ability to conduct business and have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Ding Xin’s contractual arrangements with Feng Hui may not be as effective in providing control over Feng Hui as direct ownership.

Substantially all of the Company’s revenue and net income will be derived from Feng Hui. The Company will rely on the VIE Agreements to control and operate Feng Hui. As contemplated in the Power of Attorney, Ding Xin is authorized to nominate and appoint the directors of Feng Hui. Furthermore, Ding Xin may purchase all or part of Feng Hui’s directly registered shareholders’ equity interests in Feng Hui at any time according to the Exclusive Purchase Option Agreement. However, if Feng Hui’s registered shareholders breach the Power of Attorney and Exclusive Purchase Option Agreement or are otherwise uncooperative and any dispute relating to the Feng Hui directors, these VIE agreements or the transfer of Feng Hui’s equity interests remains unresolved, then Ding Xin would have to enforce its rights under VIE Agreement through arbitral or judicial agencies, which may be costly and time-consuming and will be subject to uncertainties in the PRC legal system. Consequently, the VIE Agreements may not be as effective in ensuring Ding Xin’s control over Feng Hui as direct ownership.

The failure to comply with PRC regulations relating to mergers and acquisitions of domestic enterprises by offshore special purpose vehicles may subject the Company to severe fines or penalties and create other regulatory uncertainties regarding the Company’s corporate structure.

On August 8, 2006, the Ministry of Commerce (“MOFCOM”), joined by the China Securities Regulatory Commission (“CSRC”), the State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission of the State Council, the State Administration of Taxation (“SAT”), the State Administration for Industry and Commerce (the “SAIC”), and the State Administration of Foreign Exchange (“SAFE”), jointly promulgated regulations entitled the Provisions Regarding Mergers and Acquisitions of Domestic Enterprises by Foreign Investors (the “M&A Rules”), which took effect as of September 8, 2006, and as amended on June 22, 2009. This regulation, among other things, has certain provisions that require offshore companies formed for the purpose of acquiring PRC domestic companies and controlled directly or indirectly by PRC individuals and companies which are the related parties with the PRC domestic companies, to obtain the approval of MOFCOM prior to engaging in such acquisitions and to obtain the approval of the CSRC prior to publicly listing special purpose vehicles’ securities on an overseas stock market. On September 21, 2006, the CSRC published on its official website a notice specifying the documents and materials that are required to be submitted for obtaining CSRC approval.

The application of the M&A Rules with respect to the Company’s corporate structure remains unclear, with no current consensus existing among leading PRC law firms regarding the scope and applicability of the M&A Rules. We believe that the MOFCOM and CSRC approvals under the M&A Rules are not required in the context of the Business Combination because we did not acquire Feng Hui’s equity or assets and Jing Kai and Ding Xin are already foreign owned. However, we cannot be certain that the relevant PRC government agencies, including the CSRC and MOFCOM, would reach the same conclusion, and we cannot be certain that MOFCOM or the CSRC will not deem that the Business Combination circumvented the M&A Rules, and other rules and notices, or that prior MOFCOM or CSRC approval is required for overseas financing. Further, we cannot rule out the possibility that the relevant PRC government agencies, including MOFCOM, would deem that the M&A Rules required approval from MOFCOM or other PRC regulatory agencies in connection with Ding Xin’s control of Feng Hui through contractual arrangements.

If the CSRC, MOFCOM, or another PRC regulatory agency subsequently determines that CSRC, MOFCOM or other approval was required for the Business Combination and/or the VIE arrangements between Ding Xin and Feng Hui, or if prior CSRC approval for overseas financings is required and not obtained, the Company may face severe regulatory actions or other sanctions from MOFCOM, the CSRC or other PRC regulatory agencies. In such event, these regulatory agencies may impose fines or other penalties on the Company’s operations in the PRC, limit the Company’s operating privileges in the PRC, delay or restrict the repatriation of the proceeds from overseas financings into the PRC, restrict or prohibit payment or remittance of dividends to us or take other actions that could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, reputation and prospects, as well as the trading price of our ordinary shares. The CSRC or other PRC regulatory agencies may also take actions requiring us, or making it advisable for us, to delay or cancel overseas financings, to restructure the Company’s corporate structure, or to seek regulatory approvals that may be difficult or costly to obtain.

The M&A Rules, along with certain foreign exchange regulations discussed below, will be interpreted or implemented by the relevant government authorities in connection with our future offshore financings or acquisitions, and we cannot predict how they will affect our acquisition strategy.

PRC regulations relating to investments in offshore companies by PRC residents may subject our PRC-resident beneficial owners or our PRC subsidiaries to liability or penalties, limit our ability to inject capital into our PRC subsidiaries or limit our PRC subsidiaries’ ability to increase their registered capital or distribute profits.

SAFE promulgated the Circular on Relevant Issues Concerning Foreign Exchange Control on Domestic Residents’ Offshore Investment and Financing and Roundtrip Investment through Special Purpose Vehicles, or SAFE Circular 37, on July 4, 2014, which replaced the former circular commonly known as “SAFE Circular 75” promulgated by SAFE on October 21, 2005. SAFE Circular 37 requires PRC residents to register with local branches of SAFE in connection with their direct establishment or indirect control of an offshore entity, for the purpose of overseas investment and financing, with such PRC residents’ legally owned assets or equity interests in domestic enterprises or offshore assets or interests, referred to in SAFE Circular 37 as a “special purpose vehicle.” SAFE Circular 37 further requires amendment to the registration in the event of any significant changes with respect to the special purpose vehicle, such as increase or decrease of capital contributed by PRC individuals, share transfer or exchange, merger, division or other material event. In the event that a PRC resident holding interests in a special purpose vehicle fails to fulfill the required SAFE registration, the PRC subsidiaries of that special purpose vehicle may be prohibited from making profit distributions to the offshore parent and from carrying out subsequent cross-border foreign exchange activities, and the special purpose vehicle may be restricted in its ability to contribute additional capital into its PRC subsidiary. Moreover, failure to comply with the various SAFE registration requirements described above could result in liability under PRC law for evasion of foreign exchange controls.

SAFE promulgated the Notice of SAFE on Further Simplifying and Improving Policies for the Foreign Exchange Administration of Direct Investment, or SAFE Circular 13, on February 13, 2015, which was effective on June 1, 2015. SAFE Circular 13 cancels two administrative approval items: foreign exchange registration under domestic direct investment and foreign exchange registration under overseas direct investment, instead. Banks shall directly examine and handle foreign exchange registration under domestic direct investment and foreign exchange registration under overseas direct investment, and SAFE and its branch shall indirectly regulate the foreign exchange registration of direct investment through banks.

We have notified substantial beneficial owners of ordinary shares who we know are PRC residents of their filing obligations in accordance with SAFE Circular 37 and SAFE Circular 13. However, we may not be aware of the identities of all of our beneficial owners who are PRC residents. We do not have control over our beneficial owners and cannot assure you that all of our PRC-resident beneficial owners will comply with SAFE Circular 37, SAFE Circular 13 and subsequent implementation rules. The failure of our beneficial owners who are PRC residents to register or amend their SAFE registrations in a timely manner pursuant to SAFE Circular 37, SAFE Circular 13 and subsequent implementation rules, or the failure of future beneficial owners of our company who are PRC residents to comply with the registration procedures set forth in SAFE Circular 37, SAFE Circular 13 and subsequent implementation rules, may subject such beneficial owners or our PRC subsidiaries to fines and legal sanctions. Furthermore, since SAFE Circular 37 and SAFE Circular 13 was recently promulgated and it is unclear how this regulation, and any future regulation concerning offshore or cross-border transactions, will be interpreted, amended and implemented by the relevant PRC government authorities, we cannot predict how these regulations will affect our business operations or future strategy. Failure to register or comply with relevant requirements may also limit our ability to contribute additional capital to our PRC subsidiaries and limit our PRC subsidiaries’ ability to distribute dividends to our company. These risks may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Any failure by Feng Hui or its shareholders to perform their obligations under the contractual arrangements would have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations.

If Feng Hui or its shareholders fail to perform their respective obligations under the VIE Agreements, the Company may have to incur substantial costs and expend additional resources to enforce such arrangements. The Company has entered into an exclusive business cooperation agreement and an exclusive purchase option agreements in relation to Feng Hui. Pursuant to exclusive business cooperation agreement, the Company is entitled to collect a service fee calculated based on the required time, complexity, content, commercial value of the Company’s services to Feng Hui. Further, the exclusive purchase option agreements provide that the Company may exercise an exclusive option to purchase, to the extent permitted under PRC law, once or at multiple times, at any time, part or all of their equity interests in Feng Hui. The option price is equal to the lowest price permissible by PRC Laws. In addition, the Company has entered into equity pledge agreements with Feng Hui shareholders to secure certain obligations of Feng Hui and Feng Hui’s equity holders to the Company under the VIE Agreements. However, the enforcement of such agreements through arbitral or judicial agencies may be costly and time-consuming and will be subject to uncertainties in the PRC legal system. Moreover, the Company’s remedies under the equity pledge agreements are primarily intended to help the Company collect debts owed to the Company by Feng Hui or its shareholders under the VIE Agreements not help the Company in acquiring the assets or equity of Feng Hui.

The VIE Agreements are governed by PRC law and provide for the resolution of disputes through arbitration or court proceedings in China. Accordingly, these contracts would be interpreted in accordance with PRC law and any disputes would be resolved in accordance with PRC legal procedures. The legal system in the PRC is not as developed as in some other jurisdictions, such as the United States. Moreover, there are very few precedents and little formal guidance as to how contractual arrangements in the context of a variable interest entity should be interpreted or enforced under PRC law, and as a result it may be difficult to predict how an arbitration panel or court would view such contractual arrangements. As a result, uncertainties in the PRC legal system could limit the Company’s ability to enforce the VIE Agreements. Under PRC law, if the losing parties fail to carry out the arbitration awards or court judgments within a prescribed time limit, the prevailing parties may only enforce the arbitration awards or court judgments in PRC courts, which would require additional expense and delay. In the event the Company is unable to enforce the VIE Agreements, the Company may not be able to receive economic benefits from or exert effective control over Feng Hui, and the Company’s ability to conduct its business, as well as the Company’s financial condition and results of operations, may be materially and adversely affected.

The Feng Hui shareholders have potential conflicts of interest with us, which may adversely affect the Company’s business.

The Chinese entities and individuals that collectively beneficially own 100% of Feng Hui’s outstanding equity interests, or their representatives, are beneficial owners of the Company. Conflicts of interest may arise as a result of such dual shareholding and governance structure. As such conflicts arise, these shareholders may not act in the Company’s best interests and such conflicts of interest may not be resolved in the Company’s favor. In addition, these shareholders may breach or cause Feng Hui to breach or refuse to renew the VIE Agreements that are intended to allow the Company to exercise effective control over Feng Hui and to receive economic benefits from Feng Hui. If the Company becomes involved in arbitral and legal proceedings to enforce such agreements, such proceedings may cost the Company substantial financial and other resources and result in disruption of its business, the outcome of which may adversely affect the Company.

The Company engages in the same lending business, within the same geographic area, targeting the same customers under the Feng Hui brand. There are currently limited internal protocols between the Company with regard to allocation of customers and potential customers. Because Feng Hui is a consolidated variable interest entity as a result of the VIE Agreements, such allocation issues generally should not affect the Company’s results. However, in the event that Feng Hui or its shareholders are in breach of the VIE agreements, then those shareholders could also direct, or cause management to direct, attractive lending customers to Feng Hui and away from Jing Kai, which could further negatively affect the Company’s business and results of operations.

If a lending company fails to maintain the requisite registered capital, licenses and approvals required under PRC law, our business, financial condition and results of operations may be materially and adversely affected.

Foreign investment is highly regulated by the PRC government and the foreign investment in the lending industry is restricted by local authorities. Numerous regulatory authorities of the central PRC government, provincial and local authorities are empowered to issue and implement regulations governing various aspects of the lending industry. Each lending company is required to obtain and maintain certain assets relevant to its business as well as applicable licenses or approvals from different regulatory authorities in order to provide its current services. These registered capital, licenses and approvals will be essential to the operation of the Company’s business. If a lending company fails to obtain or maintain any of the required registered capital, licenses or approvals for its business, it may be subject to various penalties, such as confiscation of illegal net revenue, fines and the discontinuation or restriction of its operations. Any such disruption in the business operations of a lending company could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The VIE Agreements with Feng Hui may be subject to scrutiny by the PRC tax authorities. Any adjustment of related party transaction pricing could lead to additional taxes, and therefore substantially reduce our consolidated net income and the value of your investment.

The tax regime in China is rapidly evolving and there is significant uncertainty for taxpayers in China as PRC tax laws may be interpreted in significantly different ways. As a result of the Business Combination, the PRC tax authorities may assert that we, our subsidiaries or our variable interest entity, Feng Hui, or its shareholders owe and/or are required to pay additional taxes revenue or income. In particular, under applicable PRC laws, rules and regulations, arrangements and transactions among related parties, such as the VIE Agreements, may be subject to audit or challenge by the PRC tax authorities. If the PRC tax authorities determine that any VIE Agreements were not entered into on an arm’s length basis and therefore constitute a favorable transfer pricing, the PRC tax liabilities of Ding Xin, Feng Hui or Feng Hui’s shareholders could be increased, which could increase our overall tax liabilities. In addition, the PRC tax authorities may impose late payment interest. Our net income may be materially reduced if our tax liabilities increase.

Jing Kai and Feng Hui’s complex ownership and control structure could result in inefficiencies to the Company’s business.

Jing Kai has no operating history and has commenced operations during 2016. Jing Kai is staffed entirely by new hires and in some measure may compete with Feng Hui for customers. As a result, Jing Kai may initially struggle to establish its business after the Business Combination and some of its success it has may come at the expense of Feng Hui. Furthermore, because of PRC limitations, even though the economic benefit of Feng Hui and Jing Kai will inure to us, each will need to have its own segregated capital, loan portfolio and lender base. As a result, Feng Hui and Jing Kai will not be able cross-collateralize or combine operations at the working level and may have a more complex structure than if they were under common ownership. This structure may not allow the Company to allocate resources to their most efficient use and may require redundant or additional expenses.

The Company may not be able to timely and effectively implement controls and procedures required by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

The Company is required to establish and maintain internal controls over financial reporting and disclosure controls and procedures and to comply with other requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the rules promulgated by the SEC. The Company is required to provide management’s attestation on internal controls commencing with the Company’s annual report for the year ending December 31, 2017, or such earlier date as is required under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. The standards required for a public company under Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 are significantly more stringent than those required of a privately-held company. Management may not be able to effectively and timely implement controls and procedures that adequately respond to the regulatory compliance and reporting requirements. If we are not able to implement the additional requirements of Section 404 in a timely manner or with adequate compliance, we may not be able to assess whether our internal controls over financial reporting are effective, which may subject us to adverse regulatory consequences and could harm investor confidence and the market price of our ordinary shares.

If the Company fails to establish and maintain an effective system of internal controls, we may not be able to report our financial results accurately. Any inability to report and file our financial results accurately and timely could harm our business and adversely affect the trading price of our ordinary shares.

We are required to establish and maintain internal controls over financial reporting and disclosure controls and procedures and to comply with other requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the rules promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). At present, we have instituted internal controls, but, we are in the process of correcting certain material weaknesses in our internal controls. Our management, cannot guarantee that our internal controls and disclosure controls and procedures will prevent all possible errors. Because of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no system of controls can provide absolute assurance that all control issues and instances of fraud, if any, within the company have been detected. These inherent limitations include the possibility that judgments in decision-making can be faulty and subject to simple error or mistake. Furthermore, controls can be circumvented by individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more persons, or by management override of the controls. The design of any system of controls is based in part upon certain assumptions about the likelihood of future events, and there can be no assurance that any design will succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future conditions. Over time, a control may become inadequate because of changes in conditions or the degree of compliance with policies or procedures may deteriorate. Because of inherent limitations in a cost-effective control system, misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and may not be detected.

There is no guarantee that our warrants will ever be in the money, and they may expire worthless and the terms of our warrants may be amended.

The exercise price for our warrants is $6.00 per one-half of one share ($12.00 per whole share), subject to adjustment. Warrants may be exercised only for a whole number of the Company’s ordinary shares. No fractional shares will be issued upon exercise of the warrants. There is no guarantee that the warrants will ever be in the money prior to their expiration, and they may expire worthless.

A market for the Company’s securities may not continue, which would adversely affect the liquidity and price of our securities.

The price of the Company’s securities may fluctuate significantly due to the market’s reaction and general market and economic conditions. An active trading market for our securities may never develop or, if developed, it may not be sustained. In addition, the price of the Company’s securities can vary due to general economic conditions and forecasts, our general business condition and the release of our financial reports. Additionally, if the Company’s securities are not listed on, or become delisted from, the Nasdaq Capital Market for any reason, and are quoted on the OTC Bulletin Board, an inter-dealer automated quotation system for equity securities that is not a national securities exchange, the liquidity and price of our securities may be more limited than if we were quoted or listed on the Nasdaq Capital Market or another national securities exchange. You may be unable to sell your securities unless a market can be established or sustained.

Although the Company’s ordinary shares are listed on Nasdaq, there can be no assurance that our ordinary shares will continue to be so listed or, if listed, that we will be able to comply with the continued listing standards of Nasdaq.

To continue listing the Company’s securities on the Nasdaq Capital Market, we will be required to demonstrate compliance with Nasdaq’s initial listing standards, which are more rigorous than Nasdaq’s continued listing requirements. For instance, the Company must maintain a minimum number of holders (300 round-lot holders). The Company cannot assure you that we will be able to meet those initial listing standards.

If the Nasdaq Capital Market delists the Company’s ordinary shares from trading on its exchange due to our failure to meet the Nasdaq Capital Market’s initial and/or continued listing standards, we and our security holders could face significant material adverse consequences including:

If the Business Combination’s benefits do not meet the expectations of investors, shareholders or financial analysts, the market price of the Company’s securities may decline.

If the benefits of the Business Combination do not meet the expectations of investors or securities analysts, the market price of the Company’s securities may decline. In addition, following the Business Combination, fluctuations in the price of the Company’s securities could contribute to the loss of all or part of your investment. Prior to the Business Combination, there has not been a public market for Adrie’s stock and trading in the DT Asia ordinary shares has not been active. Accordingly, the valuation ascribed to the Company’s ordinary shares in the Business Combination may not be indicative of the price that will prevail in the trading market. If an active market for the Company’s securities develops and continues, the trading price of our securities could be volatile and subject to wide fluctuations in response to various factors, some of which are beyond our control. Any of the factors listed below could have a material adverse effect on your investment in the Company’s securities and our securities may trade at prices significantly below the price you paid for them. In such circumstances, the trading price of our securities may not recover and may experience a further decline.

Factors affecting the trading price of the Company’s securities may include:

Broad market and industry factors may materially harm the market price of the Company’s securities irrespective of our operating performance. The stock market in general, and the Nasdaq Capital Market in particular, have experienced price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of the particular companies affected. The trading prices and valuations of these stocks, and of our securities, may not be predictable. A loss of investor confidence in the market for retail stocks or the stocks of other companies which investors perceive to be similar to the Company could depress our stock price regardless of our business, prospects, financial conditions or results of operations. A decline in the market price of our securities also could adversely affect our ability to issue additional securities and our ability to obtain additional financing in the future.

The Company’s business and share and warrant prices may suffer as a result of the Company’s lack of public company operating experience and if securities or industry analysts do not publish or cease publishing research or reports about the Company, its business, or its market, or if they change their recommendations regarding our ordinary shares adversely, the price and trading volume of our ordinary shares and warrants could decline.

Prior to the completion of the Business Combination, the Company had been a privately-held company. The Company’s lack of public company operating experience may make it difficult to forecast and evaluate its future prospects. If the Company is unable to execute its business strategy, either as a result of its inability to manage effectively its business in a public company environment or for any other reason, the Company’s business, prospects, financial condition and operating results may be harmed.

The trading market for our ordinary shares and warrants will be influenced by the research and reports that industry or securities analysts may publish about us, our business, our market, or our competitors. Securities and industry analysts do not currently, and may never, publish research on the Company. If no securities or industry analysts commence coverage of the Company, our Ordinary Share and warrant prices and trading volume would likely be negatively impacted. If any of the analysts who may cover the Company change their recommendation regarding our shares adversely, or provide more favorable relative recommendations about our competitors, the price of our ordinary shares and warrants would likely decline. If any analyst who may cover the Company were to cease coverage of the Company or fail to regularly publish reports on it, we could lose visibility in the financial markets, which could cause our share and warrant prices or trading volume to decline.

The Company has not registered our ordinary shares issuable upon exercise of our warrants, or our ordinary shares underlying the preferred shares or purchase option granted to EarlyBird under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”) or state securities laws at this time, and such registration may not be in place when an investor desires to exercise such warrants.

The Company has not registered the ordinary shares issuable upon exercise of our warrants, or our ordinary shares underlying the preferred shares or purchase option sold to EarlyBird under the Securities Act or any state securities laws at this time. We have agreed to use our best efforts to file with the SEC a registration statement for the registration, under the Securities Act, covering these securities as soon as practicable after the closing of the Business Combination and cause the same to become effective and to maintain the effectiveness of such registration statement, and a current prospectus relating thereto.

Warrants and the purchase option sold to EarlyBird will become exercisable for the Company’s ordinary shares, which would increase the number of shares eligible for future resale in the public market and result in dilution to our shareholders.

Each warrant entitles the holder thereof to purchase one-half of one ordinary share at a price of $6.00 per half share ($12.00 per whole share), subject to adjustment. Warrants may be exercised only for a whole number of the Company’s ordinary shares. No fractional shares will be issued upon exercise of warrants. To the extent such warrants are exercised, additional ordinary shares will be issued, which will result in dilution to the then existing holders of ordinary shares of the Company and increase the number of shares eligible for resale in the public market. Sales of substantial numbers of such shares in the public market could adversely affect the market price of our ordinary shares.

In addition, we sold an option to purchase up to 600,000 units at $11.75 per unit to EarlyBird. The option represents the right to purchase up to 660,000 ordinary shares and 600,000 warrants to purchase 300,000 full shares. The purchase option may be exercised for cash or on a cashless basis, at the holder’s option, at any time prior to September 30, 2019.

The Company’s charter permits the Board by resolution to amend our charter, including to create additional classes of securities, including shares with rights, preferences, designations and limitations as they determine which may have an anti-takeover effect.

The Company’s charter permits the Board by resolution to amend the charter including to designate rights, preferences, designations and limitations attaching to the preferred shares as they determine in their discretion, without shareholder approval with respect the terms or the issuance. When issued, the rights, preferences, designations and limitations of the preferred shares are set by the Board and can operate to the disadvantage of the outstanding ordinary shares the holders of which would not have any pre-emption rights in respect of such an issue of preferred shares. Such terms could include, among others, preferences as to dividends and distributions on liquidation, or can be used to prevent possible corporate takeovers.

The Company may redeem certain warrants prior to their exercise at a time that is disadvantageous to warrant holders, thereby making their warrants worthless.

The Company has the ability to redeem certain warrants prior to their expiration at a price of $0.01 per warrant, provided that (i) the last reported sale price of our ordinary shares equals or exceeds $18.00 per share for any 20 trading days within the 30 trading-day period ending on the third business day before we send the notice of such redemption and (ii) on the date we give notice of redemption and during the entire period thereafter until the time the warrants are redeemed, there is an effective registration statement under the Securities Act covering the ordinary shares issuable upon exercise of the warrants and a current prospectus relating to them is available unless warrants are exercised on a cashless basis. Redemption of such warrants could force holders of the warrants:

The Company is a “controlled company” within the meaning of Nasdaq rules and, as a result, the Company may qualify for, and may choose to rely on, exemptions from certain corporate governance requirements.

The Sellers under the Share Exchange Agreement beneficially own more than 50% of the voting power of all of the Company’s outstanding ordinary shares, meaning the Company is a “controlled company” within the meaning of the rules and corporate governance standards of Nasdaq. Under the Nasdaq rules, 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 Nasdaq corporate governance requirements, including:

Accordingly, as the Company qualifies as a controlled company, it may elect to be treated as such and its shareholders will not be afforded the same protections generally as shareholders of other Nasdaq-listed companies for so long as Sellers control more than 50% of the Company’s voting power and the Company relies upon such exemptions. The interests of the Company’s controlling shareholders may conflict with the interests of the Company’s other shareholders, and the concentration of voting power in such shareholders will limit the Company’s other shareholders’ ability to influence corporate matters.

Risks Related to Doing Business in China

PRC regulation of loans to, and direct investments in, PRC entities by offshore holding companies may delay or prevent us from making loans or additional capital contributions to our PRC operating subsidiaries and thereby prevent us from funding our business.

As an offshore holding company with PRC subsidiaries, we may transfer funds to our PRC subsidiaries by means of loans or capital contributions. Any loans to these PRC subsidiaries, which are foreign-invested enterprises, cannot exceed statutory limits based on the difference between the amount of our investments and registered capital in such subsidiaries, and shall be registered with SAFE, or its local counterparts. Furthermore, any capital increase contributions we make to our PRC subsidiaries, which are foreign-invested enterprises, shall be approved by MOFCOM, or its local counterparts. We may not be able to obtain these government registrations or approvals on a timely basis, if at all. If we fail to receive such registrations or approvals, our ability to provide loans or capital to increase contributions to our PRC subsidiaries may be negatively affected, which could adversely affect their liquidity and our ability to fund and expand their business.

A slowdown of the Chinese economy or adverse changes in economic and political policies of the PRC government could negatively impact China’s overall economic growth, which could materially adversely affect our business.

All of the Company’s operations will be entirely conducted in the PRC. Although the PRC economy has grown in recent years, the pace of growth has slowed, and even that rate of growth may not continue. The annual rate of growth in the PRC declined from 7.7% in 2013 to 7.3% in 2014 to 6.9% in 2015, and 6.7% in 2016, and the annual rate of growth in Xinjiang Province has declined from 11.0% in 2013 to 10.0% in 2014 to 8.8% in 2015, and 7.6% in 2016. According to a recent State Information of China forecast, China’s economic growth rate in 2017 will slow to 6.5%, its lowest since 1990. A slowdown in overall economic growth, an economic downturn or recession or other adverse economic developments in the PRC may materially reduce the demand for the Company’s direct lending service and may have a materially adverse effect on its business.

China’s economy differs from the economies of most other countries in many respects, including the amount of government involvement in the economy, the general level of economic development, growth rates and government control of foreign exchange and the allocation of resources. While the PRC economy has grown significantly over the past few decades, this growth has remained uneven across different periods, regions and economic sectors.

The PRC government also exercises significant control over China’s economic growth by allocating resources, controlling the payment of foreign currency-denominated obligations, setting monetary policy and providing preferential treatment to particular industries or companies. Any actions and policies adopted by the PRC government could negatively impact the Chinese economy or the economy of the region the Company serves, which could materially adversely affect the Company’s business.

Substantial uncertainties and restrictions with respect to the political and economic policies of the PRC government and PRC laws and regulations could have a significant impact upon the business the Company may be able to conduct in the PRC and accordingly on the results of its operations and financial condition.

The Company’s business operations may be adversely affected by the current and future political environment in the PRC. The Chinese government exerts substantial influence and control over the manner in which the Company must conduct its business activities. The Company’s ability to operate in China may be adversely affected by changes in Chinese laws and regulations. Under the current government leadership, the government of the PRC has been pursuing economic reform policies that encourage private economic activities and greater economic decentralization. However, the government of the PRC may not continue to pursue these policies, or may significantly alter these policies from time to time without notice.

There are substantial uncertainties regarding the interpretation and application of PRC laws and regulations, including, but not limited to, the laws and regulations governing the Company’s business, or the enforcement and performance of the Company’s arrangements with borrowers in the event of the imposition of statutory liens, death, bankruptcy or criminal proceedings. Only after 1979 did the Chinese government begin to promulgate a comprehensive system of laws that regulate economic affairs in general, deal with economic matters such as foreign investment, corporate organization and governance, commerce, taxation and trade, as well as encourage foreign investment in China. Although the influence of the law has been increasing, China has not developed a fully integrated legal system and recently enacted laws and regulations may not sufficiently cover all aspects of economic activities in China. Also, because these laws and regulations are relatively new, and because of the limited volume of published cases and their lack of force as precedents, interpretation and enforcement of these laws and regulations involve significant uncertainties. New laws and regulations that affect existing and proposed future businesses may also be applied retroactively. In addition, there have been constant changes and amendments of laws and regulations over the past 30 years in order to keep up with the rapidly changing society and economy in China. Because government agencies and courts provide interpretations of laws and regulations and decide contractual disputes and issues, their inexperience in adjudicating new business and new polices or regulations in certain less developed areas causes uncertainty and may affect the Company’s business. Consequently, we cannot predict the future direction of Chinese legislative activities with respect to either businesses with foreign investment or the effectiveness on enforcement of laws and regulations in China. The uncertainties, including new laws and regulations and changes of existing laws, as well as judicial interpretation by inexperienced officials in the agencies and courts in certain areas, may cause possible problems to foreign investors.

The Company’s direct lending business is subject to extensive regulation and supervision by state, provincial and local government authorities, which may interfere with the way the Company conducts its business and may negatively impact its financial results.

The Company is subject to extensive and complex state, provincial and local laws, rules and regulations with regard to their loan operations, capital structure, maximum interest rates, and provision for loan losses, among other things. These laws, rules and regulations are issued by different central government ministries and departments, provincial and local governments and are enforced by different local authorities in Xinjiang Province and the city of Urumqi. In addition, it is not clear whether direct lending companies are subject to certain banking regulations to which state-owned and commercial banks are subject. Therefore, the interpretation and implementation of such laws, rules and regulations may not be clear and occasionally the Company has to depend on oral inquiries with local government authorities. As a result of the complexity, uncertainties and constant changes in these laws, rules and regulation, including changes in interpretation and implementation of such, the Company’s business activities and growth may be adversely affected if they do not respond to the changes in a timely manner or are found to be in violation of the applicable laws, regulations and policies as a result of a different position from theirs taken by the competent authority in the interpretation of such applicable laws, regulations and policies. If the Company is found to be not in compliance with these laws and regulations, they may be subject to sanctions by regulatory authorities, monetary penalties and/or reputation damage, which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business operations and profitability.

You may experience difficulties in effecting service of legal process, enforcing foreign judgments or bringing original actions against us or our management, in China, based upon United States laws, including the U.S. federal securities laws, or other foreign laws.

We are a company organized under the laws of the British Virgin Islands. Substantially all of our operations are conducted in China, and substantially all of our assets are located in China. All of our directors and officers reside in China, and substantially all of the assets of those persons are located outside of the United States. As a result, it may be difficult for a shareholder to effect service of process within the United States upon these persons, or to enforce judgments against us which are obtained in United States courts, including judgments predicated upon the civil liability provisions of the securities laws of the United States or any state in the United States.

Furthermore, the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments are provided for under the PRC Civil Procedures Law. PRC courts may recognize and enforce foreign judgments in accordance with the requirements of the PRC Civil Procedures Law based either on treaties between China and the country where the judgment is made or on principles of reciprocity between jurisdictions. China does not have any treaties or other form of reciprocity with the United States providing for the reciprocal recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments. In addition, according to the PRC Civil Procedures Law, courts in the PRC will not enforce a foreign judgment against us or our directors or officers if they decide that the judgment violates the basic principles of PRC laws, national sovereignty, security or public interest. As a result, it is uncertain whether and on what basis a PRC court would enforce a judgment rendered by a court in the United States.

Lastly, in the event shareholders originate an action against a company without domicile in China for disputes related to contracts or other property interests, the PRC courts may accept a cause of action if (a) the disputed contract is concluded or performed in the PRC or the disputed subject matter is located in the PRC, (b) the company (as defendant) has properties that can be seized within the PRC, (c) the company has a representative organization within the PRC, or (d) the parties chose to submit to the jurisdiction of the PRC courts in the contract on the condition that such submission does not violate the requirements of jurisdiction under the PRC Civil Procedures Law. The action may be initiated by the shareholder by filing a complaint with the PRC courts. The PRC courts would determine whether to accept the complaint in accordance with the PRC Civil Procedures Law. The shareholder may participate in the action by itself or entrust any other person or PRC legal counsel to participate on behalf of such shareholder. Foreign citizens and companies will have the same rights as PRC citizens and companies in such an action unless such foreign country restricts the rights of PRC citizens and companies.

Jing Kai’s and Ding Xin’s ability to pay dividends to us may be restricted due to foreign exchange control and other regulations of China.

As an offshore holding company, we will rely principally on dividends from our subsidiaries in China, Jing Kai and Ding Xin, for our cash requirements. Under the applicable PRC laws and regulations, foreign-invested enterprises in China may pay dividends only out of their accumulated profits, if any, determined in accordance with PRC accounting standards and regulations. In addition, a foreign-invested enterprise in China is required to set aside a portion of its after-tax profit to fund specific reserve funds prior to payment of dividends. In particular, at least 10% of its after-tax profits based on PRC accounting standards each year is required to be set aside towards its general reserves until the accumulative amount of such reserves reach 50% of its registered capital. These reserves are not distributable as cash dividends.

Furthermore, Jing Kai’s and Ding Xin’s ability to pay dividends may be restricted due to foreign exchange control policies and the availability of its cash balance. Substantially all of the Company’s operations are conducted in China and all of the revenue we recognize, through Jing Kai (from its direct lending operations and through the VIE arrangements with Feng Hui) and through Ding Xin, will be denominated in RMB. RMB is subject to exchange control regulation in China, and, as a result, Jing Kai and Ding Xin may be unable to distribute any dividends outside of China due to PRC exchange control regulations that restrict our ability to convert RMB into U.S. dollars.

The lack of dividends or other payments from Jing Kai and Ding Xin may limit our ability to make investments or acquisitions that could be beneficial to our business, pay dividends or otherwise fund, and conduct our business. Our funds may not be readily available to us to satisfy obligations which have been incurred outside the PRC, which could adversely affect our business and prospects or our ability to meet our cash obligations. Accordingly, if we do not receive dividends from Jing Kai or Ding Xin, our liquidity and financial condition will be materially and adversely affected.

Dividends payable to our foreign investors and gains on the sale of our ordinary shares by our foreign investors may become subject to tax by the PRC.

Under the Enterprise Income Tax Law and its implementation regulations issued by the State Council of the PRC, a 10% PRC withholding tax is applicable to dividends payable to investors that are non-resident enterprises, which do not have an establishment or place of business in the PRC or which have such establishment or place of business but the dividends are not effectively connected with such establishment or place of business, to the extent such dividends are derived from sources within the PRC. Similarly, any gain realized on the transfer of shares by such investors is also subject to PRC tax at a current rate of 10%, subject to any reduction or exemption set forth in relevant tax treaties, if such gain is regarded as income derived from sources within the PRC. If we are deemed a PRC resident enterprise, dividends paid on our shares, and any gain realized from the transfer of our shares, would be treated as income derived from sources within the PRC and would as a result be subject to PRC taxation. Furthermore, if we are deemed a PRC resident enterprise, dividends payable to individual investors who are non-PRC residents and any gain realized on the transfer shares by such investors may be subject to PRC tax at a current rate of 20%, subject to any reduction or exemption set forth in applicable tax treaties. It is unclear whether we or any of our subsidiaries established outside of China are considered a PRC resident enterprise, holders of shares would be able to claim the benefit of income tax treaties or agreements entered into between China and other countries or areas. If dividends payable to our non-PRC investors, or gains from the transfer of our shares by such investors are subject to PRC tax, the value of your investment in our shares may decline significantly.

Our global income may be subject to PRC taxes under the PRC Enterprise Income Tax Law, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.

Under the PRC Enterprise Income Tax Law, or the New EIT Law, and its implementation rules, which became effective in January 2008, an enterprise established outside of the PRC with a “de facto management body” located within the PRC is considered a PRC resident enterprise and will be subject to the enterprise income tax at the rate of 25% on its global income. The implementation rules define the term “de facto management bodies” as “establishments that carry out substantial and overall management and control over the manufacturing and business operations, personnel and human resources, finance and treasury, and acquisition and disposition of properties and other assets of an enterprise.” On April 22, 2009, the State Administration of Taxation (the “SAT”), issued a circular, or SAT Circular 82, which provides certain specific criteria for determining whether the “de facto management body” of a PRC-controlled enterprise that is incorporated offshore is located in China. Although the SAT Circular 82 only applies to offshore enterprises controlled by PRC enterprises or PRC enterprise groups, not those controlled by PRC individuals or foreigners, the determining criteria set forth in the SAT Circular 82 may reflect the SAT’s general position on how the “de facto management body” test should be applied in determining the resident status of all offshore enterprises for the purpose of PRC tax, regardless of whether they are controlled by PRC enterprises or individuals. Although we do not believe that our legal entities organized outside of the PRC constitute PRC resident enterprises, it is possible that the PRC tax authorities could reach a different conclusion. In such case, we may be considered a PRC resident enterprise and may therefore be subject to the 25% enterprise income tax on our global income, which could significantly increase our tax burden and materially and adversely affect our cash flow and profitability. In addition to the uncertainty regarding how the new PRC resident enterprise classification for tax purposes may apply, it is also possible that the rules may change in the future, possibly with retroactive effect.

We and our shareholders face uncertainties with respect to indirect transfers of equity interests in PRC resident enterprises by their non-PRC holding companies.

On February 3, 2015, the State Administration of Taxation issued an Announcement on Several Issues Concerning Enterprise Income Tax on Income Arising from Indirect Transfers of Property by Non-PRC Resident Enterprises, or Announcement 7, with the same effective date. Under Announcement 7, an “indirect transfer” refers to a transaction where a non-resident enterprise transfers its equity interest and other similar interest in an offshore holding company, which directly or indirectly holds Chinese taxable assets (the assets of an “establishment or place” situated in China; real property situated in China and equity interest in Chinese resident enterprises) and any indirect transfer without reasonable commercial purposes are subject to the PRC taxation. In addition, Announcement 7 specifies the conditions under which an indirect transfer is deemed to lack a reasonable commercial purpose which include: (1) 75% or more of the value of the offshore holding company’s equity is derived from Chinese taxable assets, (2) anytime in the year prior to the occurrence of the indirect transfer of Chinese taxable assets, 90% or more of the total assets (excluding cash) of the offshore holding company are direct or indirect investment in China, or 90% or more of the revenue of the offshore holding company was sourced from China; (3) the functions performed and risks assumed by the offshore holding company(ies), although incorporated in an offshore jurisdiction to conform to the corporate law requirements there, are insufficient to substantiate their corporate existence and (4) the foreign income tax payable in respect of the indirect transfer is lower than the Chinese tax which would otherwise be payable in respect of the direct transfer if such transfer were treated as a direct transfer. As a result, gains derived from such indirect transfer will be subject to PRC enterprise income tax, currently at a rate of 10%.

Announcement 7 grants a safe harbor under certain qualifying circumstances, including transfers in the public securities market and certain intragroup restricting transactions, however, there is uncertainty as to the implementation of Announcement 7. For example, Announcement 7 requires the buyer to withhold the applicable taxes without specifying how to obtain the information necessary to calculate taxes and when the applicable tax shall be submitted. Announcement 7 may be determined by the tax authorities to be applicable to our offshore restructuring transactions or sale of the shares of our offshore subsidiaries where non-resident enterprises, being the transferors, were involved. Though Announcement 7 does not impose a mandatory obligation of filing the report of taxable events, the transferring party shall be subject to PRC withholding tax if the certain tax filing conditions are met. Non-filing may result in an administrative penalty varying from 50% to 300% of unpaid taxes. As a result, we and our non-resident enterprises in such transactions may become at risk of being subject to taxation under Announcement 7, and may be required to expend valuable resources to comply with Announcement 7 or to establish that we and our non-resident enterprises should not be taxed under Announcement 7, for any restructuring or disposal of shares of our offshore subsidiaries, which may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Restrictions on currency exchange may limit our ability to utilize our revenue effectively.

Substantially all of our revenue is denominated in Renminbi. The Renminbi is currently convertible under the “current account,” which includes dividends, trade and service-related foreign exchange transactions, but not under the “capital account,” which includes foreign direct investment and loans. Currently, our PRC subsidiaries, which are wholly-foreign owned enterprises, may purchase foreign currency for settlement of “current account transactions,” including payment of dividends to us, without the approval of SAFE by complying with certain procedural requirements. However, the relevant PRC governmental authorities may limit or eliminate our ability to purchase foreign currencies in the future for current account transactions. Since a significant amount of our future revenue will be denominated in Renminbi, any existing and future restrictions on currency exchange may limit our ability to utilize revenue generated in Renminbi to fund our business activities outside of the PRC or pay dividends in foreign currencies to our shareholders. Foreign exchange transactions under the capital account remain subject to limitations and require approvals from, or registration with, SAFE or banks and other relevant PRC governmental authorities. This could affect our ability to obtain foreign currency through debt or equity financing for our subsidiaries and Feng Hui.

Fluctuations in the foreign currency exchange rate between U.S. Dollars and Renminbi could adversely affect our financial condition.

The value of the RMB against the U.S. dollar and other currencies may fluctuate. Exchange rates are affected by, among other things, changes in political and economic conditions and the foreign exchange policy adopted by the PRC government. On July 21, 2005, the PRC government changed its policy of pegging the value of the RMB to the U.S. dollar. Under this policy, the RMB is permitted to fluctuate within a narrow and managed band against a basket of foreign currencies. Following the removal of the U.S. dollar peg, the RMB appreciated more than 20% against the U.S. dollar over three years. From July 2008 until June 2010, however, the RMB traded stably within a narrow range against the U.S. dollar. On June 20, 2010, the PBOC announced that the PRC government would reform the RMB exchange rate regime and increase the flexibility of the exchange rate. Since June 2010, the RMB has appreciated more than 10% against the U.S. dollar. In April 2012, the PRC government announced it would allow greater RMB exchange rate fluctuation. On August 11, 12 and 13, 2015, the PRC government successively set the central parity rate for the RMB more than 3% lower in the aggregate than that of August 10, 2015 and announced that it will begin taking into account previous day’s trading in setting the central parity rate. In 2015, the yuan experienced a 4.88% drop in value, and on January 4, 2016 the PRC government set the U.S. dollar-Chinese yuan currency pair to a reference rate of 6.5%, the lowest rate in 4.5 years. However, it is difficult to predict how market forces or PRC or U.S. government policy may impact the exchange rate between the RMB and the U.S. dollar in the future. As significant international pressure remains on the PRC government to adopt a more flexible currency policy, greater fluctuation of the RMB against the U.S. dollar could result.

Our revenues and costs are mostly denominated in RMB, and a significant portion of our financial assets are also denominated in RMB. Any significant fluctuations in the exchange rate between the RMB and the U.S. dollar may materially adversely affect our cash flows, revenues, earnings and financial position, and the amount of and any dividends we may pay on our shares in U.S. dollars. Fluctuations in the exchange rate between the RMB and the U.S. dollar could also result in foreign currency translation losses for financial reporting purposes. Additionally, the adjusted net income targets for purposes of determining the earn-out payments pursuant to the Exchange Agreement are based on the U.S. dollar-RMB exchange rate as of June 30, 2015, so any continued depreciating in the Chinese currency will make it easier for these targets to be met and the Escrow Shares to be released as earn-out payments.

If any dividend is declared in the future and paid in a foreign currency, you may be taxed on a larger amount in U.S. dollars than the U.S. dollar amount that you will actually ultimately receive.

If you are a U.S. holder of our ordinary shares, you will be taxed on the U.S. dollar value of your dividends, if any, at the time you receive them, even if you actually receive a smaller amount of U.S. dollars when the payment is in fact converted into U.S. dollars. Specifically, if a dividend is declared and paid in a foreign currency such as the RMB, the amount of the dividend distribution that you must include in your income as a U.S. holder will be the U.S. dollar value of the payments made in the foreign currency, determined at the spot rate of the foreign currency to the U.S. dollar on the date the dividend distribution is includible in your income, regardless of whether the payment is in fact converted into U.S. dollars. Thus, if the value of the foreign currency decreases before you actually convert the currency into U.S. dollars, you will be taxed on a larger amount in U.S. dollars than the U.S. dollar amount that you will actually ultimately receive.

Future inflation in China may inhibit economic activity and adversely affect the Company’s operations.

The Chinese economy has experienced periods of rapid expansion in recent years which can lead to high rates of inflation or deflation. This has caused the PRC government to, from time to time, enact various corrective measures designed to restrict the availability of credit or regulate growth and contain inflation. High inflation may in the future cause the PRC government to once again impose controls on credit and/or prices, or to take other action, which could inhibit economic activity in China. Any action on the part of the PRC government that seeks to control credit and/or prices may adversely affect the Company’s business operations.

PRC laws and regulations have established more complex procedures for certain acquisitions of Chinese companies by foreign investors, which could make it more difficult for the Company to pursue growth through acquisitions in China.

Further to the Regulations on Mergers and Acquisitions of Domestic Enterprises by Foreign Investors, or the New M&A Rules, the Anti-monopoly Law of the PRC, the Rules of Ministry of Commerce on Implementation of Security Review System of Mergers and Acquisitions of Domestic Enterprises by Foreign Investors promulgated by MOFCOM or the MOFCOM Security Review Rules, was issued in August 2011, which established additional procedures and requirements that are expected to make merger and acquisition activities in China by foreign investors more time-consuming and complex, including requirements in some instances that MOFCOM be notified in advance of any change of control transaction in which a foreign investor takes control of a PRC enterprise, or that the approval from MOFCOM be obtained in circumstances where overseas companies established or controlled by PRC enterprises or residents acquire affiliated domestic companies. PRC laws and regulations also require certain merger and acquisition transactions to be subject to merger control review and or security review.

The MOFCOM Security Review Rules, effective from September 1, 2011, which implement the Notice of the General Office of the State Council on Establishing the Security Review System for Mergers and Acquisitions of Domestic Enterprises by Foreign Investors promulgated on February 3, 2011, further provide that, when deciding whether a specific merger or acquisition of a domestic enterprise by foreign investors is subject to the security review by MOFCOM, the principle of substance over form should be applied and foreign investors are prohibited from bypassing the security review requirement by structuring transactions through proxies, trusts, indirect investments, leases, loans, control through agreements control or offshore transactions.

Further, if the business of any target company that the Company seeks to acquire falls into the scope of security review, the Company may not be able to successfully acquire such company either by equity or asset acquisition, capital contribution or through any VIE Agreement. The Company may grow its business in part by acquiring other companies operating in its industry. Complying with the requirements of the relevant regulations to complete such transactions could be time consuming, and any required approval processes, including approval from MOFCOM, may delay or inhibit its ability to complete such transactions, which could affect its ability to maintain or expand its market share.

In addition, SAFE promulgated the Circular on the Settlement of Foreign Currency Capital of Foreign-invested Enterprises, or Circular 19, on June 1, 2015. Under Circular 19, registered capital of a foreign-invested company settled in RMB converted from foreign currencies may only be used within the business scope approved by the applicable governmental authority and the equity investments in the PRC made by the foreign-invested company shall be subject to the relevant laws and regulations about the foreign-invested company’s reinvestment in the PRC. In addition, foreign-invested companies cannot use such capital to make the investments on securities, and cannot use such capital to issue the entrusted RMB loans (except approved in its business scope), repay the RMB loans between the enterprises and the ones which have been transferred to the third party. Circular 19 may significantly limit our ability to effectively use the proceeds from future financing activities as the Chinese subsidiaries may not convert the funds received from us in foreign currencies into RMB, which may adversely affect their liquidity and our ability to fund and expand our business in the PRC.

Failure to comply with the United States Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and Chinese anti-corruption laws could subject us to penalties and other adverse consequences.

As our shares are listed on Nasdaq, we are subject to the United States Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which generally prohibits United States companies from engaging in bribery or other prohibited payments to foreign officials for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business. Non-U.S. companies, including some that may compete with us, may not be subject to these prohibitions. In addition, in 2012, the central government of the PRC commenced a far-reaching campaign against corruption. That ongoing campaign involves aggressive enforcement of existing Chinese anti-corruption laws. Corruption, extortion, bribery, pay-offs, theft and other fraudulent practices may occur from time-to-time in the PRC. Our employees or other agents may engage in such conduct for which we might be held responsible. If our employees or other agents are found to have engaged in such practices, we could suffer severe penalties and other consequences that may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our management may have to expend time and resources becoming familiar with United States securities laws, which could lead to various regulatory issues.

Management of the Company has limited familiarity with United States securities laws. They may have to expend time and resources becoming more familiar with such laws. This could be expensive and time-consuming and could lead to various regulatory issues, which may adversely affect our operations.

If we become directly subject to the recent scrutiny, criticism and negative publicity involving U.S.-listed Chinese companies, we may have to expend significant resources to investigate and resolve the matter which could harm our business operations and our reputation and could result in a loss of your investment in our shares, especially if such matter cannot be addressed and resolved favorably.

U.S. public companies that have substantially all of their operations in China have been the subject of intense scrutiny, criticism and negative publicity by investors, financial commentators and regulatory agencies, such as the SEC. Much of the scrutiny, criticism and negative publicity has centered around financial and accounting irregularities, a lack of effective internal controls over financial accounting, inadequate corporate governance policies or a lack of adherence thereto and, in many cases, allegations of fraud. As a result of the scrutiny, criticism and negative publicity, the publicly traded stock of many U.S. listed Chinese companies has sharply decreased in value and, in some cases, has become virtually worthless. Many of these companies are now subject to shareholder lawsuits and SEC enforcement actions and are conducting internal and external investigations into the allegations. It is not clear what effect this sector-wide scrutiny, criticism and negative publicity will have on our company and our business. If we become the subject of any unfavorable allegations, whether such allegations are proven to be true or untrue, we will have to expend significant resources to investigate such allegations and/or defend the Company. This situation may be a major distraction to our management. If such allegations are not proven to be groundless, our Company and business operations will be severely hampered and your investment in our stock could be rendered worthless.

The disclosures in our reports and other filings with the SEC and our other public pronouncements are not subject to the scrutiny of any regulatory bodies in the PRC.

Our reports and other filings with the SEC are subject to SEC review in accordance with the rules and regulations promulgated by the SEC under the Securities Act and the Exchange Act. Our SEC filings and other disclosure and public pronouncements are not subject to the review or scrutiny of any PRC regulatory authority. For example, the disclosure in our SEC reports and other filings are not subject to the review by CSRC, a PRC regulator that is tasked with oversight of the capital markets in China. Accordingly, you should review our SEC reports, filings and our other public pronouncements with the understanding that no local regulator has done any review of our Company, our SEC reports, other filings or any of our other public pronouncements.