Key Trends and Considerations in Cross-Border Life Sciences Partnering-Licensing and NewCo Transactions Between Chinese and US/European Companies

Over the past year, market sentiment and dealmaking behavior in cross-border life sciences partnering between Chinese and US/European companies have shifted meaningfully. What was, even 12 months ago, a market shaped by geopolitical uncertainty and debate over the durability of China‑to‑West collaboration has evolved into one characterized by renewed confidence, accelerating transaction volume and increasingly sophisticated deal structures. High‑profile licensing transactions, research and development collaborations and capability‑based partnerships announced since early 2025 have reinforced the position of Chinese biotech companies as integral contributors to the global innovation ecosystem.

In 2025, Chinese drugmakers signed a record $135.7 billion in outbound licensing agreements – representing one-third of all global licensing spend. At the same time, both strategic and financial investors have become more selective and more ambitious in structuring cross‑border transactions, reflecting not only the maturation of Chinese pipelines but also greater alignment around global development, execution and value creation. This executive summary highlights the key trends, deal structures and legal considerations that are shaping this dynamic market.

Deal structures: Licensing and NewCo models

Traditionally, cross-border deals took the form of straightforward licensing arrangements, where multinational pharmaceutical companies would in-license assets from Chinese biotechs for worldwide or ex-China/ex-Asia rights. These deals typically feature an upfront payment, milestone payments and royalties. However, the market has evolved to include more complex structures – most notably, the formation of NewCos, new companies established in the US or Europe that in-license assets from Chinese innovators. Investors inject capital into these NewCos to fund development, with the goal of either selling the company or partnering the asset after achieving key milestones.

While large pharma licensing deals remain prevalent, especially for de-risked, late-stage or best-in-class assets, the NewCo model has gained significant traction. This approach is particularly attractive for earlier-stage programs, allowing for focused development and capital efficiency. NewCo transactions also offer flexibility for investors and strategic partners that may choose to scale the company or exit after proof of concept is established.

Territorial scope and IP considerations

A critical negotiation point in these transactions is the territorial scope of the license. Chinese companies often retain rights for Greater China or Asia, while granting worldwide or ex-China rights to their partners. The choice between a worldwide license and a territory-split deal depends on the licensor’s strategic objectives, such as retaining a core asset for a potential initial public offering (IPO) or raising capital to fund pipeline development. Notably, as Chinese biotechs mature and diversify their pipelines, they are increasingly open to granting worldwide rights, which can simplify deal execution.

Intellectual property ownership and assignment are central to cross-border deals. Chinese biotech companies typically have complex corporate structures involving Cayman, Hong Kong and PRC entities, often with limited intercompany agreements governing IP. Before closing, it is essential to clarify and, if necessary, consolidate IP ownership in the appropriate entity to facilitate licensing and address tax, regulatory and bankruptcy risks. US investors and acquirers generally prefer IP to be held in a US entity, which can enhance fundraising and exit opportunities.

Tax and regulatory implications

Withholding tax is a headline issue for Chinese life sciences companies out-licensing assets. Depending on the jurisdictions involved, upfront payments may be subject to significant withholding, reducing the net proceeds. The characterization of payments and the location of IP can have material tax consequences, and parties should address these issues early in the structuring process. Additionally, deals involving profit-sharing or co-development may create partnership tax issues, particularly when non-US and US entities are involved.

Governance and operational challenges

Governance is often one of the most challenging aspects to negotiate, especially when both parties retain development or commercialization rights in their respective territories. Key considerations include decision-making authority for clinical development, participation in global trials and the allocation of costs and responsibilities. Misaligned incentives can arise, for example, when regulatory requirements differ between regions or when one party’s actions could impact the global safety database. Well-drafted agreements should provide flexibility while protecting each party’s interests and the overall value of the asset.

Looking ahead

The cross-border life sciences deal market between China and the US/Europe is expected to remain robust, with increasing sophistication in deal structures and a growing focus on global development. Companies contemplating such transactions should engage experienced counsel early to navigate the complex legal, tax and operational issues involved. As the market continues to evolve, proactive structuring and clear documentation will be critical to successful outcomes.

For more information or to discuss specific cross-border partnering opportunities, please contact your Cooley life sciences transactions team.