Reply #12: I found this-not sure of the source

[underpants]

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/citizen-united-decision-does-open-a-major-loophole-for-foreign-interests-to-participate-in-federal-elections-through-domestic-controlled-corporations-congress-needs-to-act-quickly-to-close-the-loophole-82977732.html

Section 441e prohibits contributions or expenditures by any "foreign national" -- which is defined to include any corporation "organized under the laws of or having its principal place of business in a foreign corporation."

Thus, a corporation organized in Germany, or with its headquarters in China, remains subject to a ban on spending in U.S. elections.

But there are domestic corporations -- those organized under state law in the United States -- which are and can be controlled by foreign interests.

Those kinds of corporations -- domestic corporations owned by or controlled by foreign governments, foreign corporations or foreign individuals -- are not in any way prevented by section 441e from spending corporate treasury funds to influence U.S. elections.

Prior to the Citizens United decision, these corporations were prevented from spending their funds on expenditures to influence federal campaigns by the general prohibition on corporate campaign spending. But now that that prohibition has been struck down, these foreign-controlled domestic companies are free to spend their treasury funds directly to influence U.S. elections.

Thus, there is no statutory prohibition against foreign-controlled domestic corporations from making expenditures to influence federal elections, following the Citizens United decision.