UTME UTime Limited

ITEM 3. KEY INFORMATION

3.A. Selected Financial Data

3.B. Capitalization and Indebtedness

Not Applicable.

3.C. Reasons For The Offer And Use Of Proceeds

Not Applicable.

3.D. Risk Factors

An investment in our ordinary shares involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the risks and uncertainties described below together with all other information contained in this annual report, including the matters discussed under the headings “Forward-Looking Statements” and “Operating and Financial Review and Prospects” before you decide to invest in our ordinary shares. We are a holding company with substantial operations in China and are subject to a legal and regulatory environment that in many respects differs from the United States. If any of the following risks, or any other risks and uncertainties that are not presently foreseeable to us, actually occur, our business, financial condition, results of operations, liquidity and our future growth prospects could be materially and adversely affected.

Risks Related to Our Business and Industry

We have incurred significant losses and we may continue to experience losses in the future.

We have incurred significant losses in the past. In fiscal year 2020 and 2021, respectively, we had losses from operations of RMB19.7 million and RMB14.5 million (US$2.2 million), and net losses of RMB21.7 million and RMB16.6 million (US$2.5 million). We also had net cash used by operating activities of RMB17.1 million in fiscal year 2020, and cash used in operations of RMB2.5 million (US$0.4 million) in fiscal year 2021. We may continue to have an adverse effect on our shareholders’ equity and working capital in the future.

We cannot assure you that we will be able to generate profits or positive cash flow from operating activities in the future. Our ability to achieve profitability depends in large part on our ability to manage our costs and expenses. We intend to manage and control our costs and expenses as a proportion of our total revenues, but there can be no assurance that we will achieve this goal. We may experience losses in the future due to our continued investments in technology, talent, content and other initiatives. In addition, our ability to achieve and sustain profitability is affected by various factors, some of which are beyond our control, such as changes in macroeconomic and regulatory environment or competitive dynamics in the industry. Accordingly, you should not rely on our financial results of any prior period as an indication of our future performance.

We may need to raise additional capital or obtain loans from financial institutions from time to time and our operations could be curtailed if we are unable to obtain the required additional funding when needed. We may not be able to do so when necessary, and/or the terms of any financings may not be advantageous to us.

As of the fiscal year ended March 31, 2020 and 2021, respectively, we had accumulated deficit of RMB32.8 million and RMB49.4 million (US$7.5 million). Due to our accumulated deficit, we may need to obtain additional funding from outside sources, including from the sales of our securities, grants or other forms of financing. Our accumulated deficit increases the difficulty in completing such sales or securing alternative sources of funding, and there can be no assurances that we will be able to obtain such funding on favorable terms or at all. If we are unable to obtain sufficient financing from the sale of our securities or from alternative sources, we may be required to reduce, defer or discontinue certain of our research and development and operating activities or we may not be able to continue as a going concern. If we cannot continue as a going concern, our shareholders may lose their entire investment in our ordinary shares. Future reports from our independent registered public accounting firm may contain statements expressing doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern.

We generate a significant portion of our net revenues from a small number of major customers and key projects and any loss of business from these customers or key projects could reduce our net revenues and significantly harm our business.

We have derived, and believe that in the foreseeable future we will continue to derive, a significant portion of our net revenues from a small number of major customers and key projects. Our top three customers in fiscal year 2020 accounted for approximately 57.3%, 9.6% and 6.0% of our net revenues in fiscal year 2020. For the year ended March 31, 2021, our top three customers accounted for approximately 41.3%, 6.8% and 6.3% of our net revenues.

Our ability to maintain close relationships with our major customers is essential to the growth and profitability of our business. However, the volume of work performed for a specific customer is likely to vary from year-to-year and project-to-project, especially since we are generally not the exclusive service solutions provider for our customers, some of our customers have in-house research and development capabilities, and we do not have long-term purchase commitments from any of our customers. A major customer in one year may not provide the same level of net revenues for us in any subsequent year. The products we provide to our customers, and the net revenues and income from those products, may decline or vary as the type and quantity of products changes over time. In addition, reliance on any individual customer for a significant portion of our net revenues may give that customer a degree of pricing leverage when negotiating contracts and terms of service with us.

In addition, a number of factors not within our control could cause the loss of, or reduction in, business or revenues from any customer, and these factors are not predictable. These factors include, among others, a customer’s decision to re-negotiate the royalty payment of a contract if the volume of unit sales exceeds original expectations, pricing pressure from competitors, a change in a customer’s business strategy, or failure of a mobile chipset manufacturer or mobile device OEM to develop competitive products. Our customers may also choose to pursue alternative technologies and develop alternative products in addition to, or in lieu of, our products, either on their own or in collaboration with others, including our competitors. The loss of any major customer or key project, or a significant decrease in the volume of customer demand or the price at which we sell our products to customers, could materially adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

The outbreak of the coronavirus in China, India and across the world may have a material adverse effect on our business.

Our business could be materially and adversely affected by the outbreak of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (“COVID-19” or the “coronavirus”), or the coronavirus, in China. On January 30, 2020, the World Health Organization declared the coronavirus outbreak a “Public Health Emergency of International Concern” and on March 10, 2020, declared it to be a pandemic. Actions taken around the world to help mitigate the spread of the coronavirus include restrictions on travel, and quarantines in certain areas, and forced closures for certain types of public places and businesses. The coronavirus and actions taken to mitigate it have had and are expected to continue to have an adverse impact on the economies and financial markets of many countries, including the geographical area in which the Company operates.

Our headquarters (Shenzhen) and our factory (Guizhou) are located in China where the coronavirus originated. The World Health Organization has declared the coronavirus outbreak in China a public health emergency of international concern. As this virus is transmitted between humans, the Chinese government has imposed travel restrictions in certain parts of the country and several businesses operating in China have scaled back operations. The development of the coronavirus outbreak could materially disrupt our business and operations, slow down the overall economy, curtail consumer spending, interrupt our sources of supply, and make it difficult to adequately staff our operations. As a result, our operating results, financial condition and cash flows could be materially adversely impacted.

The coronavirus is impacting several areas of the world, including Asia and the United States. Many factories in China closed during February 2020 at the mandate of the Chinese government and did not reopen until March 2020. This has impacted the manufacturing productivity of our factories as well as those of our suppliers, and therefore the amount of inventory we receive and can ship to customers. We are hopeful that all operations will return to normal as soon as possible. We are doing everything we can to keep customer production running and to keep things as smooth and stable as possible. However, the coronavirus could negatively impact our sales performance, depending on the duration and severity of the coronavirus’ impact on the operations of our vendors and suppliers, as well as our ability to restore production to normal levels.

The impact of COVID-19 on our business, financial condition, and results of operations include, but are not limited to, the following:

We depend on third party service providers for logistics and aftersales services, and any failure of our third party service providers to perform may have a material negative impact on our business.

We outsource all of our transportation and logistics services, as well as after-sale services, for our products to third-party service providers. We rely on these outsourcing partners to bring our products to our customers and provide after sale services. While these arrangements allow us to focus on our main business, they also reduce our direct control over the logistics and aftersales services provided to our customers. Any failure of our logistics partners to perform may have a material negative impact on the timely delivery of our products and customer satisfaction. In addition, logistics in our primary locations or transit to final destinations may be disrupted for a variety of reasons including, natural and man-made disasters, information technology system failures, commercial disputes, military actions or economic, business, labor, environmental, public health, or political issues. We may also be unable to pass any increase in logistics costs to our customers. Errors that occur in product maintenance processes can compromise our products and services, adversely affect customer experience, and harm our business.

We rely on outsourcing manufacturers to produce a majority of our products. If we encounter issues with them, our business and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected.

We rely on outsourcing manufacturers to produce a majority of our products. However, the volume of orders designated to a specific manufacturer is likely to vary from year-to-year and project-to-project, especially since we generally do not enter into exclusive relationship with the manufacturers and we do not have long-term or fixed-term purchase commitments with any of our outsourcing manufacturers. A major manufacturer in one year may not provide the same amount of products to us in any subsequent year. The products each manufacturer supplies us may decline or vary our customer orders change over time. Additionally, our contracts with these manufacturers can be terminated at any time. Therefore, we may not be able to maintain a long-term cooperative relationship with our outsourcing manufacturers for our existing products. We may also experience operational difficulties with our outsourcing manufacturers, including reductions in the availability of production capacity, failure to comply with product specifications, insufficient quality control, failure to meet production deadlines, increases in manufacturing costs and longer lead time. Our outsourcing manufacturers may experience disruptions in their manufacturing operations due to equipment breakdowns, labor strikes or shortages, natural disasters, component or material shortages, cost increases, violation of environmental, health or safety laws and regulations, or other problems. We may be unable to pass the cost increases to our customers. We may have disputes with our outsourcing manufacturers, which may result in litigation expenses, divert our management’s attention and cause supply shortages to us. In addition, we may not be able to identify outsourcing manufacturers who are capable of producing new products we target to launch in the future.

Our expansion into new product categories and scenarios, and substantial increases in product lines may expose us to new challenges and more risks.

We strive to continue to expand and diversify our product offerings to cover additional scenarios in the mobile or IoT era. Expanding into new product categories and scenarios outside of the mobile phone and accessories category, such as to wearable devices, speakers and related consumer electronics and substantially increasing our product lines involve new risks and challenges. Our potential lack of familiarity with new products and scenarios and the lack of relevant customer data relating to these products may make it more difficult for us to anticipate user demand and preferences. We may misjudge market demand, resulting in inventory buildup and possible inventory write-downs. We may not be able to effectively control our costs and expenses in rolling out these new product categories and scenarios. We may have certain quality issues and experience higher return rates on new products, receive more customer complaints and face costly product liability claims, such as injury allegedly or actually caused by our products, which would harm our brand and reputation as well as our financial performance.

Furthermore, we may need to price our new products more aggressively to penetrate new markets, and gain market share or remain competitive. It may be difficult for us to achieve profitability in the new product categories and our profit margin, if any, may be lower than we anticipate, which would adversely affect our overall profitability and results of operations.

Our international expansion is subject to a variety of costs and risks and we may not be successful, which could adversely affect our profitability and operating results.

We intend to expand or enter into new geographic markets, such as the United States and Canada, where we have limited or no experience in marketing, selling our products and deploying our services. International expansion has required and will continue to require us to invest significant capital and other resources and our efforts may not be successful. Our expansion may be subject to risks such as: brand awareness, sales and distribution network, differences in customer preference, political and economic instability, trade restrictions, difficulties in forming and managing local staff and teams, lesser degrees of intellectual property protection.

The occurrence of any of these risks could negatively affect our international business and consequently our business and operating results. In addition, the concern over these risks may also prevent us from entering into or releasing certain of our products in certain markets.

Our use of open source software could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, operating results and cash flow.

Certain of our technology and our suppliers’ technology may contain or may be derived from “open source” software, which, under certain open source licenses, may offer accessibility to a portion of a product’s source code and may expose related intellectual property to adverse licensing conditions. Licensing of such technology may impose certain obligations on us if we were to distribute derivative works of the open source software. For example, these obligations may require us to make source code for derivative works available or license such derivative works under a particular type of license that is different from what we customarily use to license our technology. While we believe we have taken appropriate steps and employ adequate controls to protect our intellectual property rights, our use of open source software presents risks that, if we inappropriately use open source software, we may be required to reengineer our technology, discontinue the sale of our technology, release the source code of our proprietary technology to the public at no cost or take other remedial actions, which could adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition. There is a risk that open source licenses could be construed in a way that could impose unanticipated conditions or restrictions on our ability to commercialize our products or solutions, which could adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition.

We operate in a rapidly evolving industry. If we fail to keep up with technological developments and changing requirements of our customers, business, financial condition and results of operations may be materially and adversely affected.

The mobile industry is rapidly evolving and subject to continuous technological developments. Our success depends on our ability to keep up with these technological developments and the resulting changes in customers’ demands. There may also be changes in the industry landscape as different types of platforms compete with one another for market share. If we do not adapt our software and service platform solutions to such changes in an effective and timely manner as more mobile operating system platforms become available in the future, we may suffer a loss in market share. Given that we operate in a rapidly evolving industry, we also need to continuously invest significant resources in research and development in order to enhance our existing products and to respond to changes in customer preference, new challenges and industry changes in a timely and effective manner. If we fail to keep up with technological developments and continue to innovate to meet the needs of our customers, our software and service platform solutions may become less attractive to customers, which in turn may adversely affect our reputation, competitiveness, results of operations and prospects.

We face intense competition from onshore and offshore third party software providers in the mobile phone market, and, if we are unable to compete effectively, we may lose customers and our revenues may decline. The lack of technological development and increase in competition may lead to a decline in our sustainable growth.

The mobile phone market is highly fragmented and competitive, and we expect competition to persist and intensify from both existing competitors and new market entrants. We believe that the principal competitive factors in our industry are reliability and efficiency, performance, product features and functionality, development complexity and time-to-market, price, support for multiple architectures and processors, interoperability with other systems, support for emerging industry and customer standards and protocols and levels of training, technical services and customer support.

The market in which we operate is highly competitive and is subject to frequent changes due to technological improvements and advancements, availability of new and alternative services and frequently changing client preferences and demands. Our ability to anticipate changes in technology and regulatory standards and to develop and introduce new and enhanced products successfully on a timely basis will be a significant factor in our ability to grow and to remain competitive. The development and acquisition of technology requires substantial investments, and we cannot guarantee that we will be able to achieve the technological advances that may be necessary for us to remain competitive. If we fail to update the technology used in their handsets, it will be challenging for us to experience sustained growth in both existing and new markets and consequently, we may lose our market share and revenue.

We may undertake acquisitions, investments, joint ventures or other strategic alliances in the future, which could expose us to new operational, regulatory and market risks. In addition, such future undertakings may not be successful, which may adversely affect our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

We intend to grow both organically by expanding our current business lines and geographic coverage and through acquisitions, investments, joint ventures or other strategic alliances if the appropriate opportunities arise. These potential business plans, acquisitions, investments, joint ventures and strategic alliances may expose us to new operational, regulatory and market risks, as well as risks associated with additional capital requirements. In addition, we may not be able to identify suitable future acquisition or investment candidates or joint venture or alliance partners. Even if we identify suitable candidates or partners, we may be unable to complete an acquisition, investment or alliance on terms commercially acceptable to us. If we fail to identify appropriate candidates or partners, or complete desired acquisitions, investments or alliances, we may not be able to implement our strategies effectively or efficiently.

In addition, our ability to successfully integrate acquired companies and their operations may be adversely affected by a number of factors, including, among others, the ability to capitalize on anticipated synergies, diversion of resources and management’s attention, difficulties in retaining personnel of the acquired companies, unanticipated problems or legal liabilities and tax and accounting issues. If we fail to integrate any acquired company efficiently, our earnings, revenues, gross margins, operating margins and business operations could be adversely affected. The integration of acquired companies is a complex, time-consuming and expensive process.

Security and privacy breaches may expose us to liability and harm our reputation and business.

As part of our business we may receive and process information about our employees, customers and partners, and we may store (or contract with third parties to store) our customers’ data. There are numerous laws governing privacy and the storage, sharing, use, disclosure and protection of personally identifiable information and user data. Specifically, personally identifiable and other confidential information is increasingly subject to legislation and regulations in numerous domestic and international jurisdictions. The regulatory framework for privacy protection in China and worldwide, including India and the United States, is currently evolving and is likely to remain uncertain for the foreseeable future. We could be adversely affected if legislation or regulations in China and elsewhere on the world where we have business operations are expanded to require changes in business practices or privacy policies, or if the relevant governmental authorities in China and elsewhere on the world where we have business operations interpret or implement their legislation or regulations in ways that negatively affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. For example, in November 2016, China released the Cybersecurity Law, which took effect in June 2017. The Cybersecurity Law requires network operators to perform certain functions related to cybersecurity protection and the strengthening of network information management. For instance, under the Cybersecurity Law, network operators of key information infrastructure, including network operators of key information infrastructures in public communications and information industry, generally shall, during their operations in the PRC, store the personal information and important data collected and produced within the territory of the PRC and their purchase of network products and services that may affect national securities shall be subject to national cybersecurity review. While we take security measures relating to service platform solutions, specifically, and our operations (including MVNO business operation), generally, those measures may not prevent security breaches that could harm our business and we cannot assure you that the measures we have taken or will take are adequate under the Cybersecurity Law and other relevant laws and regulations. Advances in computer capabilities, inadequate technology or facility security measures or other factors may result in a compromise or breach of our systems and the data we store and process. Our security measures may be breached as a result of actions by third parties or employee error or malfeasance. A party who is able to circumvent our security measures or exploit inadequacies in our security measures, could, among other things, misappropriate proprietary information (including information about our employees, customers and partners and our customers’ information), cause the loss or disclosure of some or all of this information, cause interruptions in our operations or our customers’ or expose our customers to computer viruses or other disruptions or vulnerabilities. Any compromise of our systems or the data it stores or processes could result in a loss of confidence in the security of our service platform solutions, damage our reputation, disrupt our business, lead to legal liability and adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations. Moreover, a compromise of our systems could remain undetected for an extended period of time, exacerbating the impact of that compromise. Actual or perceived vulnerabilities may lead to claims against us by our customers, partners or other third parties, which could be material. While our customer agreements typically contain provisions that seek to limit our liability, there is no assurance these provisions will be enforceable and effective under applicable law. In addition, the cost and operational consequences of implementing further data protection measures could be significant.

We are vulnerable to technology infrastructure failures, which could harm our reputation and business.

We rely on our technology infrastructure for many functions, including selling our service platform solutions, supporting our customers and billing, collecting and making payments. We also rely on our own technology infrastructure, which is located on a third-party site, as well as the technology infrastructure of third parties, to provide some of our back-end services. This technology infrastructure may be vulnerable to damage or interruption from natural disasters, power loss, telecommunication failures, terrorist attacks, computer intrusions and viruses, software errors, computer denial-of-service attacks and other events. A significant number of the systems making up this infrastructure are not redundant, and our disaster recovery planning is not sufficient for every eventuality. This technology infrastructure is also subject to break-ins, sabotage and intentional acts of vandalism by internal employees, contractors and third parties. Despite any precautions we or our third-party partners may take, such problems could result in, among other consequences, interruptions in our services and loss of data, which could harm our reputation, business and financial condition. We do not carry business interruption insurance sufficient to protect us from all losses that may result from interruptions in our services as a result of technology infrastructure failures or to cover all contingencies. Any interruption in the availability of our websites and on-line interactions with customers and partners would create a large volume of questions and complaints that would need to be addressed by our support personnel. If our support personnel cannot meet this demand, customer and partner satisfaction levels may fall, which in turn could cause additional claims, reduced revenue, reputation damage or loss of customers.

We may not be able to continue to use or adequately protect our intellectual property rights, which could harm our business reputation and competitive position.

We believe that patents, trademarks, trade secrets, copyright, software registration and other intellectual property we use are important to our business. We rely on a combination of patent, trademark, copyright, software registration and trade secret protection laws in China, the United States, the Philippines, Kenya and other jurisdictions, as well as confidentiality procedures and contractual provisions to protect our intellectual property and brand name. Risks related to mis-branded counterfeit, unlawful copying can lead to security problems, loss of consumer confidence, losing out on the brand image, reputation and goodwill. Presently, “Do Mobile” is not a registered trademark in India. Any failure by us to maintain or protect our intellectual property rights, including any unauthorized use of our intellectual property by third parties or use of “UTime” or “Do Mobile” as a company name to conduct software or services business, may adversely affect our current and future revenues and our reputation.

In addition, the validity, enforceability and scope of protection available under intellectual property laws with respect to the mobile and Internet industries in China, where a significant part of our business and operations are located, are uncertain and still evolving. Implementation and enforcement of PRC intellectual property-related laws have historically been deficient, ineffective and hampered by corruption and local protectionism. Accordingly, protection of intellectual property rights in China may not be as effective as in the United States or other countries. Furthermore, policing unauthorized use of proprietary technology is difficult and expensive, and we may need to resort to litigation to enforce or defend patents issued to us or to determine the enforceability, scope and validity of our proprietary rights or those of others. Such litigation and an adverse determination in any such litigation, if any, could result in substantial costs and diversion of resources and management attention, which could harm our business and competitive position.

We also may be required to enter into license agreements with certain third parties to use their intellectual property for our business operations. If such third parties fail to perform under these license agreements or if the agreements are terminated for any reason, our business and results of operations may be negatively impacted. Furthermore, if we are deemed to be using third parties’ intellectual property without due authorization, we may become subject to legal proceedings or sanctions, which may be time-consuming and costly to defend, divert management attention and resources or require us to enter into licensing agreements, which may not be available on commercial terms, or at all.

The international nature of our business exposes us to risks that could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

We conduct our business throughout the world in multiple locations. Our corporate structure also spans multiple jurisdictions, with our parent company incorporated in the Cayman Islands and structured as a holding company and intermediate and operating subsidiaries incorporated in China, Hong Kong and India. As a result, we are exposed to risks typically associated with conducting business internationally, many of which are beyond our control. These risks include, among others:

The potential for war or terrorist attacks may also cause uncertainty and cause our business to suffer in ways that we cannot predict. Our business could also be adversely affected by the outbreaks of epidemics in China and globally, such as the coronavirus which originated in Wuhan, China at the end of 2019, Ebola virus disease, H1N1 flu, H7N9 flu, avian flu, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, or SARS, or other epidemics. Past occurrences of epidemics have caused different degrees of damage to the national and local economies in India. A recurrence of an outbreak of any kind of epidemic could cause a slowdown in the levels of economic activity generally, which may adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. Should major public health issues, including pandemics, arise, we could be adversely affected by more stringent employee travel restrictions, additional limitations in freight services, governmental actions limiting the movement of products between regions, delays in production ramps of new products and disruptions in the operations of our component suppliers.

The occurrence of any of these events could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.

Furthermore, we are in the process of implementing policies and procedures designed to facilitate compliance with laws and regulations in various jurisdictions applicable to us, but there can be no assurance that our employees, contractors or agents will not violate such laws and regulations or our policies. Any such violations could, individually or in the aggregate, materially and adversely affect our financial condition and operating results.

Inadequacy of skilled personnel may lead to decline in sales of mobile phones by us.

Competition in our industry for qualified employees, especially technical employees, is intense, and our competitors directly target our employees from time to time. We have also experienced employees leaving us to start competing businesses or to join the in-house research and development teams of our customers. The loss of the technical knowledge and industry expertise of any of these individuals could seriously impede our success. Moreover, the loss of these individuals, particularly to a competitor, some of which are in a position to offer greater compensation, and any resulting loss of customers or trade secrets and technological expertise could further lead to a reduction in our market share and adversely affect our business. If we are required to increase the compensation payable to our qualified employees to compete with certain competitors with greater resources than we have or to discourage employees from leaving us to start competing businesses, our operating expenses will increase which, in turn, will adversely affect our results or operations.

Moreover, our sales team plays a pivotal role in the success of the business of every organization. The unique and important role of sales is to bridge the gap between the potential customer’s needs and the products/services that the organization offers that can fulfil their needs. Every organization strives to have best sales team who possess skill set for understanding consumer behavior and consumer needs and excellent communication skill. Our growth strategy places significant dependence on the experience and the continued efforts of our sales executives. There has always been dearth of such skilled sales personnel, and we may need to incur significant expenditure for attracting skilled sales personnel and for retaining its existing sales team. We may not be able to retain our existing sales team or attract and recruit new sales executives in the future. This may result in drop in sale of mobile handsets and will consequently have an adverse effect on our revenue and sustained growth.

Our success depends substantially on the continuing efforts of our senior executives and other key personnel, and our business may be severely disrupted if we lose their services.

Our future success heavily depends upon the continued services of our senior executives and other key employees. In particular, we rely on the expertise, experience, customer relationships and reputation of Minfei Bao, our founder, chairman and chief executive officer. We currently do not maintain key man life insurance for any of the senior members of our management team or other key employees. If one or more of our senior executives or key employees are unable or unwilling to continue in their present positions, it could disrupt our business operations, and we may not be able to replace them easily or at all. In addition, competition for senior executives and key employees in our industry is intense, and we may be unable to retain our senior executives and key employees or attract and retain new senior executive and key employees in the future, in which case our business may be severely disrupted, and our financial condition and results of operations may be materially and adversely affected.

If any of our senior executives or key employees joins a competitor or forms a competing company, it may lose customers, know-how and other key employees and staff members to them. Also, if any of our business development managers, who generally keep a close relationship with our customers, joins a competitor or forms a competing company, we may lose customers, and our net revenues may be materially and adversely affected. Additionally, there could be unauthorized disclosure or use of our technical knowledge, practices or procedures by such employees. All of our executives and key employees have entered into employment agreements with us that contain non-competition provisions, non-solicitation and nondisclosure covenants. However, if any dispute arises between our executive officers or key employees and us, such non-competition, non-solicitation and nondisclosure provisions might not provide effective protection to us, especially in China, where most of these executive officers and key employees reside, in light of the uncertainties with China’s legal system.

We could be impacted by unfavorable results of legal proceedings, including the pending proceeding against Do Mobile, and may, from time to time, be involved in future litigation in which substantial monetary damages are sought.

The Company is subject to various legal proceedings and claims that have arisen in the ordinary course of business, from time to time, and new claims may arise in the future.

On September 17, 2018, Wukai Song, the majority shareholder in Bridgetime, filed a complaint with the NCLT against Ekta Grover and Yunchuan Li, the directors of Do Mobile at the time, alleging mismanagement of corporate affairs, embezzlement of funds and absenting themselves from the management of Do Mobile. Further, Mr. Song sought the following relief from the NCLT:

On November 16, 2018 and November 15, 2018, Ms. Grover and Mr. Li, respectively, filed an answer with the NCLT. Further, on November 17, 2018, Mr. Wukai Song filed an application for interim relief seeking removal of Ms. Grover and Mr. Li from the board of directors of Do Mobile.

On September 30, 2019, the NCLT issued its interim order, which allowed Mr. Wukai Song to carry out certain statutory compliances of Do Mobile, and the NCLT has also directed Ms. Grover, director of Do Mobile, to handover the digital signature of directors to Mr. Wukai Song for carrying out said statutory compliances and undertaking its business pending resolution of the litigation.

Since the litigation involves Ms. Ekta Grover and Mr. Li Yunchuan, who were the directors of Do Mobile, and who resigned on December 24, 2020 and March 3, 2021 respectively, such directors could no longer attend to the affairs of Do Mobile. As a result, Do Mobile did not have an effective board and was facing significant challenges in its daily operation. For instance, Do Mobile was unable to undertake certain corporate actions, such as: (a) convening and holding board meetings of Do Mobile as mandatorily required under the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 every year; (b) convening an annual general meeting where among other things, the Do Mobile shareholders approve and adopt the financial statements of Do Mobile as required under the Companies Act, 2013; (c) reporting annual compliances with the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 through various e-forms with the office of the Registrar of Companies, Ministry of Corporate Affairs; (d) submitting an annual report titled ‘Foreign Liabilities and Assets’ each year as required by companies receiving foreign direct investment and other related compliances under Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999; and (e) maintenance of statutory registers as required under various applicable laws.

Do Mobile is also a party to two other matters initiated in connection with the aforesaid matter before the NCLT. These matters, which were filed at Tis Hazari court (district court) in Delhi, India were (i) Do Mobile Pvt. Ltd. v. DBS Bank Ltd. (civil suit no. 813/2019); and (ii) Ekta Grover v. Do Mobile India Pvt. Ltd. (civil suit no. 917/2019).

The above-mentioned instances of non-compliance expose Do Mobile to potential fines and penalties. Do Mobile directors and officers may also be prosecuted for such non-compliance under the official-in-default doctrine in the Companies Act, 2013, should they fail to undertake their statutory duties to act in the best interest of Do Mobile.

The litigation against Ekta Grover and Yunchuan Li is still pending before Delhi Bench of the NCLT and the matter was scheduled to be heard again on June 3, 2021. However due to the lockdown, the courts were functioning at a limited capacity and the matter could not be taken up on the designated date. Do Mobile is awaiting intimation regarding the revised date of hearing in this matter. In order to amicably settle such ongoing litigation between Do Mobile and its directors, Do Mobile and director Ms. Grover have entered into a settlement agreement, dated January 16, 2020 (“Settlement Agreement”). In terms of the Settlement Agreement, Do Mobile and Ms. Grover have arrived at the following understanding:

The matter of Do Mobile Pvt. Ltd. v. DBS Bank Ltd. (civil suit no. 813/2019) was initiated by Mr. Li in the Tis Hazari district court to seek revival of the authority granted to him and Ms. Grover to operate the bank account of Do Mobile. Since the dispute regarding the powers of Mr. Li and Ms. Grover in their capacity as directors of Do Mobile was pending before the NCLT, the district court refused to grant any interim relief to the then directors of Do Mobile. An application seeking withdrawal of the matter was filed by Do Mobile on April 1, 2021. At present, the matter is pending before the Tis Hazari district court and will be heard next on September 22, 2021. The court is yet to pass an order allowing the application requesting withdrawal of the suit.

Since the litigation commenced, all major decisions for Do Mobile have been made by the Company’s group headquarters in Shenzhen, China. Such decisions include those relating to the type and quantum of products to be released in the market. Furthermore, all sales are being made and the marketing strategy for Do Mobile is being formulated from the corporate headquarter in Shenzhen, China. However, Do Mobile is making its own decisions relating to customer acquisition, recruitment of sales forces and office administration.

In order to avoid operational challenges in Do Mobile on account of ongoing litigation at the NCLT, the Company nominated the following persons to manage the daily operations of Do Mobile:

In order to avoid operational challenges due to the on-going litigation in the NCLT, effective December 12, 2020, Do Mobile appointed two new directors on its board, Mr. Song and Aayushi Gautam. At present, the board of Do Mobile consists of two directors, Mr. Song and Ms. Gautam. Ms. Grover and Mr. Li both have resigned from their directorship in Do Mobile with effect from December 24, 2020 and March 3, 2021 respectively. Further, one share of Do Mobile which was held by Ms. Grover has been transferred by her to Ms. Aayushi Gautam. Do Mobile has also appointed Mr. Tarun Garg as its Finance Head, effective in July 2020. As a result of the constitution of a new board of directors, Do Mobile has been able to overcome its operational challenges.

On August 24, 2018, UTime GZ submitted an arbitration against Guizhou Nianfu Supply Chain Management Co., Ltd. (“Nianfu GZ”), alleging Nianfu GZ defaulted payment of RMB7,428,592.35 (US$1.1 million) under certain supply chain service agreement between UTime GZ and Nianfu GZ (No. GZNF-GZLD2017-386, the “Service Agreement”), and seeking compensation losses. On July 24, 2019, a judgment was rendered awarding that (i) Nianfu GZ shall pay RMB1,748,689.70 (US$0.3 million) for the balance for goods to UTime GZ; and (ii) Nianfu GZ shall pay UTime GZ the property preservation fees and legal fees of RMB18,728.70 (US$2,850.1) in total. This judgment has taken effect and UTime GZ has received the amount of RMB1,816,621.90 (US$0.3 million) on September 23, 2019. On August 14, 2019, UTime GZ has submitted a new arbitration against Nianfu GZ at Shenzhen Court of International Arbitration (“SCIA”), mainly because our management was not satisfied with the amount of the compensation awarded by the SCIA, seeking termination of the Service Agreement and the payment of RMB5,932,637.83 (US$0.9 million) by Nianfu GZ under the Service Agreement. The new arbitration application was accepted by SCIA on September 3, 2019 and the tribunal heard the case on November 14, 2019. On March 16, 2020, a new judgment was rendered by the arbitration tribunal awarding that the Service Agreement shall be terminated and Nianfu GZ shall pay RMB5,679,902.65 (US$0.9 million) to UTime GZ. The new judgment has taken effect and on June 19, 2020, UTime GZ has received the amount of RMB5,820,000.00 (US$0.9 million) including the arbitration fee and attorney’s fee.

On August 23, 2018, UTime SZ submitted an arbitration against Shenzhen Nianfu Supply Chain Management Co., Ltd. (“Nianfu SZ”), alleging Nianfu SZ defaulted on payment of RMB1,913,616.60 (US$0.3 million) under certain supply chain service agreement between UTime SZ and Nianfu SZ, seeking compensation losses. On March 29, 2019, SCIA issued the Correspondence No. Hua Nan Guo Zhong Shen Fa [2019] D3704 stating that the arbitration tribunal decided to suspend the case (No. SHEN DX20180565) from March 29, 2019, due to the fact that Nianfu SZ was going through the bankruptcy proceedings and the time for resuming the arbitration procedure shall be notified by the arbitration tribunal separately. On June 24, 2020, UTime SZ has withdrawn the case (No. SHEN DX20180565) from the SCIA.

Regardless of the merit of particular claims, litigation may be expensive, time consuming, disruptive to our operations and distracting to management. For instance, if such litigation against Do Mobile stays pending, there will be no effective board of Do Mobile, which may lead to serious complications for Do Mobile. Continued non-compliance may impact Do Mobile’s operations negatively, which could result in the imposition of substantial penalties by the government and lead to prosecution of our management. Therefore, our business operations could be negatively impacted by unfavorable results of legal proceedings.

In addition, we may from time to time be involved in future litigation in which substantial monetary damages are sought. Litigation claims may relate to intellectual property, contracts, employment, securities and other matters arising out of the conduct of our current and past business activities. Any claims, whether with or without merit, could be time consuming, expensive to defend and could divert management’s attention and resources. We may maintain insurance against some, but not all, of these potential claims, and the levels of insurance we do maintain may not be adequate to fully cover any and all losses. Nonetheless, the results of any future litigation or claims are inherently unpredictable, and such outcomes could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, cash from operating activities or financial condition.

Compromised product quality of our mobile products may damage our brand and reputation of and customers could stop using our mobile handsets.

Quality of any product plays a vital role towards its demand and any failure to maintain quality standards may impact sales and revenues. Much of the mobile products we sell, for instance, the mobile handsets sold by Do Mobile, are being manufactured by third party vendors. Though we conduct frequent vendor inspections in an effort to ensure that these vendors adhere to our prescribed quality standards; however, there remains an element of risk about the quality of mobile handsets as we cannot guarantee that our inspections will capture all existing or latent defects. Our inability to maintain the quality of our products, may materially impact our reputation and business.

We may not be able to successfully sustain our growth strategy into new geographic markets and innovative consumer electronic products. Inability to effectively manage growth, our current and planned resources and related issues could materially and adversely affect our business of and impact future financial performance.

We have experienced rapid growth since we commenced operations. Our rapid expansion may expose us to new challenges and risks. Currently we are not involved in any other business vertical and are solely dependent upon revenue from its mobile handset business. In the event, our mobile handset vertical becomes vulnerable due to any unforeseen circumstance or we become unable to successfully augment our existing business of sale of mobile handsets, then our business and financial condition could material adverse effect. Even if we introduce any new service or product as a part of its business operations, it may take time to establish in a highly competitive Asian market, hence, there can be no assurance that we will be able to achieve its intended return on investments.

A further principal component of our growth strategy is to expand the geographical scope of our business. This growth strategy will require deployment of additional funds and resources, continued expansion and enhancement of our infrastructure and technology, improvement of our operational and financial systems and controls, and will also entail procuring additional approvals, permissions and licenses from regulatory authorities. This will put strain on our funds position and there will always be a requirement of infusion of additional capital. For example, we currently manage all of our human resources functions with a traditional and basic system and expect that we will need to upgrade our current system as we continue to increase our headcount. We also need to expand, train and manage our growing employee base. In addition, our management will be required to obtain, maintain or expand relationships with mobile chipset manufacturers, mobile device OEMs and mobile operators, as well as other third-party business partners. We cannot assure you that our current and planned personnel, infrastructure, systems, procedures and controls will be adequate to support our expanding operations. As we enter new markets, such expansion may subject us to various challenges, including those relating to our lack of familiarity with the culture, legal regulations and economic conditions of the new regions, difficulties in selection and appointment of distributors, display centers, staffing and managing such operations. The risks involved in entering new geographical markets may be higher than expected, and we may face significant competition in such markets. By expanding into new markets, we may be exposed to significant liabilities and could lose some or all of our investment in such regions. If we fail to manage our expansion effectively, our business, results of operations and prospects may be materially and adversely affected. Any delay or non-availability of additional capital will also impact our growth curve and may lead to stagnation and loss of business.

Continuous expansion also involves challenges relating to recruitment, training and retention of human resources of caliber. Failure to train and retain employees may result in attrition, which will put pressure on us for recruitment, which may also lead to increased human resource costs, which may also impact our financial position.

We are dependent on raw materials and mobile device components from off shore entities and from local markets, and an increase in their cost could have an adverse effect on our business.

The stability or variability in the prices of materials or components depends on various factors which could have an adverse effect on our business and accordingly, a major fluctuation should not be ruled out in the future. Several components used in handsets sold by us are sourced from offshore companies, primarily from China. The price and availability of the materials or components depends on several factors beyond our control, including supplier’s preferability, overall economic conditions, production levels, market demand for such material, production and transportation cost, duties, taxes and trade restrictions. Any impact on supply of components for any reason whatsoever will have direct impact on our business.

We have engaged in transactions with related parties, and such transactions present possible conflicts of interest that could have an adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

We have entered into a number of transactions with related parties, including our significant shareholders and directors. For example, we have entered into several transactions with persons or our Chief Executive Officer, Minfei Bao, where we borrowed funds from him for additional working capital demand. See “Item 7. Major Shareholders And Related Party Transactions — B. Related Party Transactions — Loans from Mr. Bao”. We may in the future enter into additional transactions with entities in which members of our board of directors and other related parties hold ownership interests.

Transactions with related parties present potential for conflicts of interest, as the interests of related party may not align with the interests of our shareholders. Although we believe that these transactions were in our best interests, we cannot assure you that these transactions were entered into on terms as favorable to us as those that could have been obtained in an arms-length transaction. We may also engage in transactions with related parties in the future. These transactions, individually or in the aggregate, may have an adverse effect on our business and results of operations or may result in government enforcement actions or other litigation.

We may be adversely affected by product liability exposure claims.

We face an inherent business risk of exposure to product liability claims in the event that our products fail to perform to their specifications. In case of any product liability claim, we may need to incur significant expenditure in defending any such claims. We may incur losses relating to these claims or the defense of these claims.

We may also be required to participate in recalls involving our mobile products, if any prove to be defective, or we may voluntarily initiate a recall or make payments related to such claims as a result of various industry or business practices or the need to maintain good customer relationships. Such a recall would result in a diversion of resources. Where defective designs or defective components parts cause significant bodily damage or injury, our liability risks will increase.

We do not maintain product liability insurance, and to the extent we do obtain such insurance in the future, we cannot assure investors that it will be sufficient to cover all product liability claims, that such claims will not exceed our insurance coverage limits or that such insurance will continue to be available on commercially reasonable terms, if at all. Any product liability claim brought against us could have a material adverse effect on the results of our operations.

Our management and auditors identified material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting that, if not properly remediated, could result in material misstatements in our consolidated financial statements that could cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information and have a negative effect on the trading price of our ordinary shares.

Neither we nor BDO China Shu Lun Pan Certified Public Accountants LLP (“BDO China”), our independent registered public accounting firm, has performed a comprehensive assessment of our internal control over financial reporting, as defined by the standards of the PCAOB, for purposes of identifying and reporting material weaknesses and other control deficiencies. We are not currently required to comply with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and therefore are not required to assess the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. Further, BDO China has not been engaged to express, nor has it expressed, an opinion on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. In connection with its audits of our consolidated financial statements as of, and for the year ended, March 31, 2021, BDO China identified certain errors relating to accounts and disclosures, in the aggregate, material to the consolidated financial statements. The Company has reflected all material proposed adjustments and disclosures in its financial statements.

The material weaknesses identified related to (i) our lack of sufficient qualified financial reporting and accounting personnel with an appropriate knowledge under accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“U.S. GAAP”), and (ii) our lack of comprehensive accounting policies and procedures manual in accordance with U.S. GAAP. We are taking remedial measures to improve the effectiveness of our controls, including by hiring additional accounting and finance personnel and by seeking to engage an outside consultant. The existence of material weaknesses is an indication that there is a more than remote likelihood that a material misstatement of our financial statements will not be prevented or detected in a future period, and the process of designing and implementing effective internal controls and procedures will be a continual effort that may require us to expend significant resources to establish and maintain a system of controls that is adequate to satisfy our reporting obligations as a public company. We cannot assure you that the measures we take will be sufficient to remediate the material weaknesses identified by our management and BDO China or that we will implement and maintain adequate controls over our financial processes and reporting in the future in order to avoid additional material weaknesses or controlled deficiencies in our internal control over financing reporting. If our remediation efforts are not successful or other material weaknesses or control deficiencies occur in the future, we may be unable to report our financial results accurately or on a timely basis, which could cause our reported financial results to be materially misstated and result in the loss of investor confidence and cause the trading price of our ordinary shares to decline. Moreover, ineffective controls could significantly hinder our ability to prevent fraud.

Our internal controls over financial reporting may not be effective and our independent registered public accounting firm may not be able to certify as to their effectiveness, which could have a significant and adverse effect on our business and reputation.

Prior to our initial public offering in April 2021, we were a private company with limited accounting personnel and other resources with which to address our internal controls and procedures. We will be in a continuing process of developing, establishing, and maintaining internal controls and procedures that will allow our management to report on, and our independent registered public accounting firm to attest to, our internal controls over financial reporting if and when required to do so under Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Although our independent registered public accounting firm is not required to attest to the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act until the date we are no longer an emerging growth company and neither a large accelerated filer nor an accelerated filer, our management will be required to report on our internal controls over financial reporting under Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. If we fail to achieve and maintain the adequacy of our internal controls, we would not be able to conclude on an ongoing basis that we have effective internal controls over financial reporting in accordance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. At such time, our independent registered public accounting firm may issue a report that is adverse in the event it is not satisfied with the level at which our controls are documented, designed or operating. Moreover, our testing, or the subsequent testing by our independent registered public accounting firm, may reveal other material weaknesses or that the material weaknesses described above have not been fully remediated. If we do not remediate the material weaknesses described above, or if other material weaknesses are identified or we are not able to comply with the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in a timely manner, our reported financial results could be materially misstated or could subsequently require restatement, we could receive an adverse opinion regarding our internal controls over financial reporting from our independent registered public accounting firm and we could be subject to investigations or sanctions by regulatory authorities, which would require additional financial and management resources, and the market price of our ordinary shares could decline.

We are subject to various anti-corruption and anti-bribery laws, including the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, and U.K., PRC and Indian anti-corruption and anti-bribery laws; any determination that we have violated such laws could damage our business and reputation, limit our ability to bid for certain business opportunities, and subject us to significant criminal and civil penalties, civil litigation (such as shareholder derivative suits), and commercial liabilities.

We are subject to anti-corruption and anti-bribery laws in the United States, United Kingdom, China, and India that prohibit certain improper payments made directly or indirectly to government departments, agencies, and instrumentalities; officials of those government departments, agencies, and instrumentalities; political parties and their officials; candidates for political office; officials of public international organizations; persons acting on behalf of the foregoing; and commercial counterparties. These laws include the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, the PRC Criminal Law, the PRC Anti-Unfair Competition Law, the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 of India, the Indian Penal Code, 1860, the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 and anti-corruption laws in various Indian states.

We are engaged in business in a number of countries that are regarded as posing significant risks of corruption. Of particular note, we conduct operations, have agreements with state-controlled enterprises and other third parties and make sales in the PRC, and we have research and development activities in India, each of which may be exposed to corruption risk. It is our policy to implement safeguards and procedures to prohibit these practices by our employees, officers, directors, or by third parties acting on our behalf. However, we cannot rule out the risk that any of our employees, officers, directors, or third parties acting on our behalf may engage in breaches of our policies or anti-corruption laws, for which we might be held responsible.

Allegations of violations of these anti-corruption and anti-bribery laws, and investigation into such allegations, could negatively affect our reputation, business, operating results, and financial condition. The violation of these laws may result in substantial monetary and even criminal sanctions, follow-on civil litigation (such as shareholder derivative suits), and monitoring of our compliance program by the United States or other governments, each of which could negatively affect our reputation, business, operating results, and financial condition. In addition, the United States or other governments may seek to hold us liable for violations of these laws committed by companies in which we invest or acquire.

The agreements governing the loan facilities we currently have contain restrictions and limitations that could significantly affect our ability to operate our business, raise capital, as well as significantly affect our liquidity, and therefore could adversely affect our results of operations.

We have incurred certain indebtedness under loan facilities with various lenders including Shenzhen Rural Commercial Bank (“SRCB”) and CRBZ.

Covenants governing our loan facilities with SRCB and CRBZ restrict, among other things, our ability to:

Historically, we have been subject to certain financial covenants from our lenders. Before we paid off our loan from CCB, our credit agreement with CCB required us to satisfy certain financial covenants, including periodic status reports and a debt to asset ratio of no more than seventy-five percent (75%). Our credit agreements with SRCB also require us to meet certain monthly revenue targets, each for a term of three years. These credit agreements require us to maintain monthly revenue at least RMB3.0 million (US$0.5 million). Such monthly revenue amounts shall be deposited into an account established by UTime SZ and under the supervision of SRCB. UTime SZ may withdraw funds from such account only after ensuring that the applicable principal and interest of the SRCB loans are paid off as they become due on a monthly basis. Apart from the aforementioned restriction, UTime SZ is able to fully control the funds in the supervision account. However, if UTime SZ fails to meet the minimum monthly revenue covenant in the credit agreement, SRCB shall have the right to raise the interest rate by 50% from the date of funding (i.e. July 16, 2021) or to accelerate the loan.

In addition to the above-mentioned financial covenants, the SRCB and CRBZ loan documents contain customary events of default, including but not limited to: non-payment of principal, interest and fees or other amounts; violation of covenants; inaccuracy of representations and warranties; and certain bankruptcy and other insolvency events. If UTime SZ is in breach of any of these credit agreements, the applicable lender shall have the right to dispose of the collateral in accordance with the law.

Our ability to comply with these and other provisions under our outstanding loans may be affected by events beyond our control. Although as of July 21, 2021, we believe we are in compliance with all of our loan covenants, such covenants and obligations are ongoing, and the breach of any such covenants or obligations not otherwise waived or cured could result in a default under the applicable debt obligations and could trigger acceleration of those obligations.

Any defaults under our loan arrangements could adversely affect our growth, our financial condition, our results of operations and our ability to make payments on our debt. The ability to make payments of principal and interest on indebtedness will depend on our financial condition, which is subject to general economic conditions, industry cycles and financial, business and other factors affecting our operations, many of which are beyond our control. If sufficient cash flow is not generated from operations to service such debt, we may be required, among other things, to:

Such measures might be insufficient to service the indebtedness. In addition, any such financing, refinancing or sale of assets may not be available on commercially reasonable terms, or at all. In addition, we may not be able to grow market share, take advantage of future opportunities or respond to competitive pressures or unanticipated requirements, which could negatively impact our business, operating results and financial condition.

Defaults under either of our loan agreements with each of SRCB and CRBZ could result in a substantial loss of our assets.

Historically, we have mortgaged our assets to obtain loans with various banking institutions. We have mortgaged our office owned by UTime SZ and pledged accounts receivables equal to RMB22,500,000 (US$3.4 million) owned by UTime SZ under our credit agreement with CCB, which was terminated in November 2020. Additionally, we have pledged accounts receivables due to UTime GZ between January 1, 2020 and July 1, 2021 from one of our customers, TCL Huizhou, pursuant to a factoring agreement with an affiliate of TCL Huizhou. We have mortgaged our office owned by UTime SZ under our credit agreement with CRBZ. See “Item 5. Operating And Financial Review And Prospects— Liquidity and Capital Resources — Financing Activities.”

A failure to repay any of the indebtedness under either of our loan agreements with SRCB or CRBZ as they become due or to otherwise comply with the covenants contained in any of such agreements could result in an event of default thereunder. If not cured or waived, an event of default under any of such agreements could enable the lender thereunder to declare all borrowings outstanding on such debt, together with accrued and unpaid interest and fees, to be due and payable and terminate all commitments to extend further credit. Such lenders could also elect to foreclose on our assets securing such debt. In such an event, the Company may not be able to refinance or repay all of its indebtedness, pay dividends or have sufficient liquidity to meet operating and capital expenditure requirements. Any such acceleration could cause us to lose a substantial portion of our assets and will substantially adversely affect our ability to continue our operations.

Controversies affecting China’s trade with the United States could harm our operations.

In July 2018 and again in September 2018, the United States imposed tariffs on a wide range of products and other goods from China. In May 2019, negotiations on tariffs and other trade matters between the United States and China came to a halt, and both sides escalated the trade dispute. In June 2019, trade talks resumed between the United States and China, and the United States indicated it would not impose additional tariffs at this time. Although negotiation resumed in the second half of 2019 between the United States and China and the two countries reached a trade deal in January 2020, it is possible the United States will impose additional tariffs. Given our major manufacturing in China, the imposition of tariffs by the United States presents negative effect for us. Tariffs that have already been announced and implemented have covered certain of our products. The trade controversy between the United States and China is still evolving, and we cannot predict future trade policy. However, future tariffs could cover more or all of our products, resulting in an adverse effect on our operations, including customer demand from the United States.

Risks Related to Our Corporate Structure

We are a holding company, and will rely on dividends paid by our subsidiaries for our cash needs. Any limitation on the ability of our subsidiaries to make dividend payments to us, or any tax implications of making dividend payments to us, could limit our ability to pay our parent company expenses or pay dividends to holders of our ordinary shares.

We are a holding company and conduct substantially all of our business through our operating subsidiaries, including limited liability companies established in China and in India. We will rely on dividends paid by our subsidiaries for our cash needs, including the funds necessary to pay dividends and other cash distributions to our shareholders, to service any debt we may incur and to pay our operating expenses.

We rely on dividends and other distributions on equity paid by our PRC Subsidiary to fund any cash and financing requirements we may have, and any limitation on the ability of our PRC Subsidiary to make payments to us could have a material adverse effect on our ability to conduct our business. If our PRC Subsidiary incurs debt on its own behalf in the future, the instruments governing the debt may restrict its ability to pay dividends or make other distributions to us. Under PRC laws and regulations, our PRC Subsidiary, which is a wholly foreign-owned enterprise, may pay dividends only out of its accumulated profits as determined in accordance with PRC accounting standards and regulations. In addition, a wholly foreign-owned enterprise is required to set aside at least 10% of its accumulated after-tax profits each year, if any, to fund a certain statutory reserve fund, until the aggregate amount of such fund reaches 50% of its registered capital. Such reserve funds cannot be distributed to us as dividends. At its discretion, a wholly foreign-owned enterprise may allocate a portion of its after-tax profits based on PRC accounting standards to an enterprise expansion fund, or a staff welfare and bonus fund.

Our PRC Subsidiary generates primarily all of its revenue in Renminbi, which is not freely convertible into other currencies. As result, any restriction on currency exchange may limit the ability of our PRC Subsidiary to use its Renminbi revenues to pay dividends to us. The PRC government may continue to strengthen its capital controls, and more restrictions and substantial vetting process may be put forward by State Administration of Foreign Exchange (the “SAFE”) for cross-border transactions falling under both the current account and the capital account. Any limitation on the ability of our PRC Subsidiary to pay dividends or make other kinds of payments to us could materially and adversely limit our ability to grow, make investments or acquisitions that could be beneficial to our business, pay dividends, or otherwise fund and conduct our business.

In addition, the Enterprise Income Tax Law and its implementation rules provide that a withholding tax rate of up to 10% will be applicable to dividends payable by Chinese companies to non-PRC-resident enterprises unless otherwise exempted or reduced according to treaties or arrangements between the PRC central government and governments of other countries or regions where the non-PRC resident enterprises are incorporated. Any limitation on the ability of our PRC subsidiary to pay dividends or make other distributions to us could materially and adversely limit our ability to grow, make investments or acquisitions that could be beneficial to our business, pay dividends, or otherwise fund and conduct our business.

With respect to Do Mobile, our Indian subsidiary, any limitation on declaration and payment of dividend may create a barrier for us to meet our cash and financing requirements and this could have a material adverse effect on our ability to conduct our business. As per the extant provisions of Indian laws and regulations, our Indian subsidiary (being a wholly foreign owned company), may pay dividends only out of its profits from the current year or previous years or its free reserves subject to the treatment and adjustment prescribed in applicable Indian law, i.e., the Companies Act, 2013. Pursuant to applicable Indian taxation law until March 31, 2020, it was necessary for our Indian subsidiary to pay tax on the dividend declared and distributed to the shareholders and, a non-resident shareholder of an Indian company was not liable to pay any tax in India on the dividends received by it. However, Finance Act, 2020 (which became effective on April 1, 2020) amends certain provisions relating to taxation of dividends declared by Indian companies, and provides that any distribution of dividend from April 1, 2020 onwards will only be subject to tax in the hands of the recipient shareholder and the Indian companies are not required to pay any tax on the dividend declared and distributed to the shareholders. Furthermore, non-resident shareholders would now be paying tax on the dividend income as per the rate prescribed under the relevant double taxation avoidance agreements or Indian law, whichever is more beneficial. The said amendments shall entitle foreign investors to claim credit in their country of residence of tax paid in India in respect of dividend distributed by domestic companies. The change in the tax regime by Indian Government regarding payment of taxes may increase tax burden in the hands of the parent company of our Indian Subsidiary.

Minfei Bao, our founder, chairman and chief executive officer, as well as Min He, one of our directors, will continue to have significant influence over us after our initial public offering, including control over decisions that require the approval of shareholders, which could limit your ability to influence the outcome of matters submitted to shareholders for a vote.

As of the date of this report, Minfei Bao beneficially owns 4,380,000 of our ordinary shares, or 52.98% of our issued and outstanding ordinary shares, through Grandsky Phoenix Limited, a British Virgin Islands company, of which Mr. Bao controls 100% of the equity interest. As of the date of this report, Min He, one of our directors, beneficially owns 137,793 of our ordinary shares, or 1.66% of our issued and outstanding ordinary shares through HMercury Capital Limited, a British Virgin Islands company, of which Mr. He is the controlling shareholder. Prior to our initial public offering, Mr. Bao and Mr. He, collectively controlled 100% of our outstanding ordinary shares. Immediately after our initial public offering, they collectively control approximately 54.64% of our outstanding ordinary shares. As long as Mr. Bao owns or controls a significant amount of our outstanding voting power of our ordinary shares, Mr. Bao, or Mr. Bao and Mr. He, if they act together, has or have the ability to exercise substantial control over all corporate actions requiring shareholder approval, irrespective of how our other shareholders may vote, including:

Moreover, beneficial ownership of our ordinary shares by Mr. Bao may also adversely affect the trading price of our ordinary shares on Nasdaq to the extent investors perceive disadvantages in owning shares of a company with a controlling shareholder. As a result, this concentration of ownership may not be in the best interests of our other shareholders.

We are a “controlled company” within the meaning of Nasdaq’s Rules and, as a result, may rely on exemptions from certain corporate governance requirements that provide protection to shareholders of other companies.

We are a “controlled company” as defined under Nasdaq’s Rules because Mr. Bao holds more than 50% of our voting power, and we continue to be a controlled company upon completion of our initial public offering. For so long as we remain a controlled company under that definition, we are permitted to elect to rely, and may rely, on certain exemptions from the obligation to comply with certain corporate governance requirements, including:

As a result, you will not have the same protections afforded to shareholders of companies that are subject to all of the corporate governance requirements of the NASDAQ Stock Market Rules, if we utilize such exemptions. We currently do not intend to utilize the controlled company exemptions. To the extent we cease to qualify as a controlled company, we will no longer be able to rely on any of these exemptions.

Change in the tax regime in India will increase tax burden on us.

Bridgetime Limited holds 99.99% shareholding in Do Mobile in India. Until March 31, 2020, a non-resident shareholder of an Indian company was not liable to pay any tax in India on the dividends received by it. However, with the introduction of the Finance Act, 2020 (which became effective from April 1, 2020), non-resident shareholders will now be paying tax on the dividend income distributed by an Indian company from April 1, 2020 onwards as per the rate prescribed under the relevant double taxation avoidance agreements or Indian law, whichever is more beneficial. Accordingly, this will increase tax burden on Bridgetime Limited. Further, there are number of taxes and other levies imposed at the level of the Central Government and State Government in India. In addition to income tax, it includes: (i) goods and service tax; (ii) stamp duty charges; and (iii) surcharges and cess. These tax rates may increase in future creating more financial burden on Do Mobile and may affect the overall tax efficiency of Do Mobile. Additional tax exposure could adversely affect its business and results of operations.

We may become subject to taxation in the Cayman Islands, which would negatively affect our results.

We have received an undertaking from the Financial Secretary of the Cayman Islands that, in accordance with section 6 of the Tax Concessions Act (As Revised) of the Cayman Islands, until the date falling 20 years after October 15, 2018, being the date of such undertaking, no law which is enacted in the Cayman Islands imposing any tax to be levied on profits, income, gains or appreciations shall apply to us or our operations and, in addition, that no tax to be levied on profits, income, gains or appreciations or which is in the nature of estate duty or inheritance tax shall be payable (i) on or in respect of the shares, debentures or other obligations of our company or (ii) by way of the withholding in whole or in part of a payment of dividend or other distribution of income or capital by our company to its members or a payment of principal or interest or other sums due under a debenture or other obligation of our company. If we otherwise were to become subject to taxation in the Cayman Islands, our financial condition and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected. See “Item 10.E. Taxation — Cayman Islands Taxation”.

We are subject to various changing laws and regulations regarding regulatory matters, corporate governance and public disclosure that have increased both our costs and the risk of non-compliance.

We are subject to rules and regulations by various governing bodies, including, for example, the SEC, which is charged with the protection of investors and the oversight of companies whose securities are publicly traded, and to new and evolving regulatory measures under applicable law. Our efforts to comply with new and changing laws and regulations have resulted in and are likely to continue to result in, increased general and administrative expenses and a diversion of management time and attention from revenue-generating activities to compliance activities.

Moreover, because these laws, regulations and standards are subject to varying interpretations, their application in practice may evolve over time as new guidance becomes available. This evolution may result in continuing uncertainty regarding compliance matters and additional costs necessitated by ongoing revisions to our disclosure and governance practices. If we fail to address and comply with these regulations and any subsequent changes, we may be subject to penalty and our business may be harmed.

Because we are incorporated under the laws of the Cayman Islands, you may face difficulties in protecting your interests, and your ability to protect your rights through the U.S. Federal courts may be limited.

We are a Cayman Islands exempted company with limited liability and substantially all of our assets will be located outside the United States. In addition, most of our directors and officers are nationals or residents of jurisdictions other than the United States and all or a substantial portion of their assets are located outside the United States. As a result, it may be difficult for investors to effect service of process within the United States upon us or our directors or executive officers, or enforce judgments obtained in the United States courts against us or our directors or officers.

Further, mail addressed to us and received at our registered office will be forwarded unopened to the forwarding address supplied by our directors. Our directors will only receive, open or deal directly with mail which is addressed to them personally (as opposed to mail which is only addressed to us). We, our directors, officers, advisors or service providers (including the organization which provides registered office services in the Cayman Islands) will not bear any responsibility for any delay, howsoever caused, in mail reaching this forwarding address.

Our corporate affairs are governed by our amended and restated memorandum and articles of association, the Companies Act (As Revised) (as the same may be supplemented or amended from time to time) and the common law of the Cayman Islands. The rights of shareholders to take action against the directors, actions by minority shareholders and the fiduciary responsibilities of our directors to us under Cayman Islands law are to a large extent governed by the common law of the Cayman Islands. The common law of the Cayman Islands is derived in part from judicial precedent in the Cayman Islands as well as from English common law, the decisions of whose courts are of persuasive authority, but are not technically binding on a court in the Cayman Islands. The rights of our shareholders and the fiduciary responsibilities of our directors under Cayman Islands law are not as clearly established as they would be under statutes or judicial precedent in some jurisdictions in the United States. In particular, the Cayman Islands has a less exhaustive body of securities laws as compared to the United States, and certain states, such as Delaware, have more fulsome and judicially interpreted bodies of corporate law. As a result, there may be significantly less protection for investors than is available to investors in companies organized in the United States, particularly Delaware. In addition, Cayman Islands companies may not have standing to initiate a shareholders’ derivative action in a Federal court of the United States.

The Cayman Islands courts are also unlikely:

In those circumstances, although there is no statutory enforcement in the Cayman Islands of judgments obtained in the United States, the courts of the Cayman Islands will recognize and enforce a foreign money judgment of a foreign court of competent jurisdiction without retrial on the merits based on the principle that a judgment of a competent foreign court imposes upon the judgment debtor an obligation to pay the sum for which judgment has been given provided certain conditions are met. For a foreign judgment to be enforced in the Cayman Islands, such judgment must be final and conclusive and for a liquidated sum, and must not be in respect of taxes or a fine or penalty, inconsistent with a Cayman Islands judgment in respect of the same matter, impeachable on the grounds of fraud or obtained in a manner, and or be of a kind the enforcement of which is, contrary to natural justice or the public policy of the Cayman Islands (awards of punitive or multiple damages may well be held to be contrary to public policy). A Cayman Islands Court may stay enforcement proceedings if concurrent proceedings are being brought elsewhere.

Like many jurisdictions in the United States, in certain circumstances Cayman Islands law permits mergers and consolidations between Cayman Islands companies and between Cayman Islands companies and non-Cayman Islands companies (provided that is facilitated by the laws of that other jurisdiction) and any such company may be the surviving entity for the purposes of mergers or the consolidated company for the purposes of consolidations. For these purposes, (a) “merger” means the merging of two or more constituent companies and the vesting of their undertaking, property and liabilities in one of such companies as the surviving company and (b) a “consolidation” means the combination of two or more constituent companies into a consolidated company and the vesting of the undertaking, property and liabilities of such companies to the consolidated company. In order to effect such a merger or consolidation, the directors of each constituent company must approve a written plan of merger or consolidation, which must, in most instances, then be authorized by a special resolution (usually a majority of 66 2/3% in value) of the shareholders of each constituent company and such other authorization, if any, as may be specified in such constituent company’s articles of association. A merger between a Cayman parent company and its Cayman subsidiary or subsidiaries does not require authorization by a resolution of shareholders provided a copy of the plan of merger is given to every member of each subsidiary company to be merged (unless waived by such member). For this purpose a subsidiary is a company of which at least 90% of the votes cast at its general meeting are held by the parent company. The consent of each holder of a fixed or floating security interest over a constituent company is required unless this requirement is waived by a court in the Cayman Islands. The plan of merger or consolidation must be filed with the Registrar of Companies who, if satisfied that the requirements of the Companies Act (As Revised) which includes certain other formalities, have been complied with, will register it. The filing must include a declaration as to the solvency of the consolidated or surviving company, a list of the assets and liabilities of each constituent company and an undertaking that a copy of the certificate of merger or consolidation will be given to the members and creditors of each constituent company and published in the Cayman Islands Gazette. Dissenting shareholders have the right to be paid the fair value of their shares (which, if not agreed between the parties, will be determined by the Cayman Islands court) if they follow the required procedures, subject to certain exceptions. Court approval is not required for a merger or consolidation which is effected in compliance with these statutory procedures.

In addition, there are statutory provisions that facilitate the reconstruction and amalgamation of companies in certain circumstances, provided that the arrangement is approved by a majority in number of each class of shareholders and creditors with whom the arrangement is to be made, and who must in addition represent two-thirds in value of each such class of shareholders or creditors, as the case may be, that are present and voting either in person or by proxy at a meeting, or meetings, convened for that purpose. The convening of the meetings and subsequently the arrangement must be sanctioned by the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands. While a dissenting shareholder has the right to express to the court the view that the transaction ought not be approved, the court can be expected to approve the arrangement if it determines that:

If the arrangement and reconstruction is approved, the dissenting shareholder would have no rights comparable to appraisal rights, which would otherwise ordinarily be available to dissenting shareholders of U.S. corporations, providing rights to receive payment in cash for the judicially determined value of the shares.

In addition, there are further statutory provisions to the effect that, when a take-over offer is made and approved by holders of 90.0% in value of the shares affected (within four months after the making of the offer), the offeror may, within two months following the expiry of such period, require the holders of the remaining shares to transfer such shares on the terms of the offer. An objection can be made to the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands, but this is unlikely to succeed unless there is evidence of fraud, bad faith, collusion or inequitable treatment of shareholders.

Further, transactions similar to a merger, reconstruction and/or an amalgamation may in some circumstances be achieved through other means to these statutory provisions, such as a share capital exchange, asset acquisition or control, through contractual arrangements, of an operating business.

As a result of all of the above, public shareholders may have more difficulty in protecting their interests in the face of actions taken by management, members of the board of directors or controlling shareholders than they would as public shareholders of a U.S. company.

Provisions of our amended and restated memorandum and articles of association or Cayman Islands law could delay or prevent an acquisition of our company, even if the acquisition may be beneficial to our shareholders, could make it more difficult for you to change management, and could have an adverse effect on the market price of our ordinary shares.

Provisions in our amended and restated memorandum and articles of association may discourage, delay or prevent a merger, acquisition or other change in control that shareholders may consider favorable, including transactions in which shareholders might otherwise receive a premium for their shares. In addition, these provisions may frustrate or prevent any attempt by our shareholders to replace or remove our current management by making it more difficult to replace or remove our board of directors. Such provisions may reduce the price that investors may be willing to pay for our ordinary shares in the future, which could reduce the market price of our ordinary shares. These provisions include:

If the PRC government finds that the agreements that establish the structure for operating some of our operations in China do not comply with PRC regulations relating to the relevant industries, or if these regulations or the interpretation of existing regulations change in the future, we could be subject to severe penalties or be forced to relinquish our interests in those operations.

We are a Cayman Islands exempted company and our PRC Subsidiary is considered foreign-invested enterprise. In December 2018, UTime HK established a wholly owned subsidiary in China, UTime WFOE, our wholly-owned foreign enterprise (“WFOE”). In March 2019, we obtained control over UTime SZ via our WFOE by entering into a series of contractual arrangements with UTime SZ, our VIE, and its shareholder. In August 2019, the amended and restated contractual agreements were entered into among UTime SZ, our VIE, and its shareholders, which were further amended and restated in September 2019.

Our WFOE has entered into a series of contractual arrangements with our VIE and its shareholders, respectively, which enable us to (i) exercise effective control over our VIE, (ii) receive substantially all of the economic benefits of our VIE, and (iii) have an exclusive option to purchase all or part of the equity interests and assets in our VIE when and to the extent permitted by PRC laws. As a result of these contractual arrangements, we have control over and are the primary beneficiary of our VIE and hence consolidate their financial results into our consolidated financial statements under U.S. GAAP. See “Item 4A. — History and Corporate Structure — Contractual Arrangements with the VIE and its Respective Shareholders” for further details.

In the opinion of B&D Law Firm, our PRC legal counsel, (i) the ownership structures of our VIE in China and our WFOE, both currently and immediately after giving effect to our initial public offering, comply with all existing PRC laws and regulations; and (ii) the contractual arrangements between our WFOE, our VIE and its shareholders governed by PRC law are valid, binding and enforceable, and will not result in any violation of PRC laws or regulations currently in effect. However, our PRC legal counsel has also advised us that there are substantial uncertainties regarding the interpretation and application of current and future PRC laws, regulations and rules. Accordingly, the PRC regulatory authorities may take a view that is contrary to the opinion of our PRC legal counsel. It is uncertain whether any new PRC laws or regulations relating to variable interest entity structures will be adopted or if adopted, what they would provide. If we or our VIE is found to be in violation of any existing or future PRC laws or regulations, or fail to obtain or maintain any of the required permits or approvals, the relevant PRC regulatory authorities would have broad discretion to take action in dealing with such violations or failures, including:

The imposition of any of these penalties would result in a material and adverse effect on our ability to conduct our business. In addition, it is unclear what impact the PRC government actions would have on us and on our ability to consolidate the financial results of our VIE in our consolidated financial statements, if the PRC government authorities were to find our legal structure and contractual arrangements to be in violation of PRC laws and regulations. If the imposition of any of these government actions causes us to lose our right to direct the activities of our VIE or our right to receive substantially all the economic benefits and residual returns from our VIE and we are not able to restructure our ownership structure and operations in a satisfactory manner, we would no longer be able to consolidate the financial results of our VIE in our consolidated financial statements. Either of these results, or any other significant penalties that might be imposed on us in this event, would have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

We rely on contractual arrangements with our VIE and its shareholders for a large portion of our business operations, which may not be as effective as direct ownership in providing operational control.

We have relied and expect to continue to rely on contractual arrangements with our VIE and its shareholders to conduct certain of our key businesses. These contractual arrangements may not be as effective as direct ownership in providing us with control over our VIE. For example, our VIE and its shareholders could breach their contractual arrangements with us by, among other things, failing to conduct their operations in an acceptable manner or taking other actions that are detrimental to our interests.

If we had direct ownership of our VIE, we would be able to exercise our rights as a shareholder to effect changes in the board of directors of our VIE, which in turn could implement changes, subject to any applicable fiduciary obligations, at the management and operational level. However, under the current contractual arrangements, we rely on the performance by our VIE and its shareholders of their obligations under the contracts to exercise control over our VIE. However, the shareholders of our consolidated VIE may not act in the best interests of our Company or may not perform their obligations under these contracts. Such risks exist throughout the period in which we intend to operate certain portions of our business through the contractual arrangements with our VIE. If any disputes relating to these contracts remains unresolved, we will have to enforce our rights under these contracts through the operations of PRC laws and arbitration, litigation and other legal proceedings and therefore will be subject to uncertainties in the PRC legal system. Therefore, our contractual arrangements with our VIE may not be as effective in ensuring our control over the relevant portion of our business operations as direct ownership would be.

Any failure by our VIE or its shareholders to perform their obligations under our contractual arrangements with them would have a material and adverse effect on our business.

We refer to the shareholders of our VIE as its nominee shareholders because although they remain the holders of equity interests on record in our VIE, pursuant to the terms of the relevant power of attorney, such shareholders have irrevocably authorized our WFOE or any individual duly appointed by WFOE to exercise their rights as a shareholder of the relevant VIE. However, if our VIE or its shareholders fail to perform their respective obligations under the contractual arrangements, we may have to incur substantial costs and expend additional resources to enforce such arrangements. We may also have to rely on legal remedies under PRC laws, including seeking specific performance or injunctive relief, and claiming damages, which we cannot assure, will be effective under PRC law. For example, if the shareholders of our VIE refuse to transfer their equity interest in our VIE to us or our designee if we exercise the purchase option pursuant to these contractual arrangements, or if they otherwise act in bad faith toward us, then we may have to take legal actions to compel them to perform their contractual obligations.

Our contractual arrangements are governed by PRC laws. Accordingly, these contracts would be interpreted in accordance with PRC laws, and any disputes would be resolved in accordance with PRC legal procedures, which may not protect you as much as those of other jurisdictions, such as the United States.

All of the agreements under our contractual arrangements are governed by PRC laws and provide for the resolution of disputes through arbitration in China. Accordingly, these contracts would be interpreted in accordance with PRC laws and any disputes would be resolved in accordance with PRC legal procedures. The legal system in the PRC is not as developed as in some other jurisdictions, such as the United States. As a result, uncertainties in the PRC legal system could limit our ability to enforce these contractual arrangements. See “Risks Related to Doing Business in China — Uncertainties with respect to the PRC legal system and changes in laws and regulations in China could adversely affect us.” Meanwhile, there is very little precedent and formal guidance as to how contractual arrangements in the context of a VIE should be interpreted or enforced under PRC laws. There remain significant uncertainties regarding the ultimate outcome of such arbitration should legal action become necessary. In addition, under PRC laws, rulings by arbitrators are final, parties cannot appeal the arbitration results in courts, and if the losing parties fail to carry out the arbitration awards within a prescribed time limit, the prevailing parties may only enforce the arbitration awards in PRC courts through arbitration award recognition proceedings, which would require additional expenses and delay. In the event we are unable to enforce these contractual arrangements, or if we suffer significant delays or other obstacles in the process of enforcing these contractual arrangements, we may not be able to exert effective control over our VIE, and our ability to conduct our business may be negatively affected.

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

As an offshore holding company of our PRC Subsidiary, we may make loans to our PRC Subsidiary, our VIE and the VIE’s subsidiaries, or may make additional capital contributions to our PRC Subsidiary, subject to satisfaction of applicable governmental registration and approval requirements.

Any loans we extend to our PRC Subsidiary, which are treated as foreign-invested enterprises under PRC law, cannot exceed the statutory limit and must be registered with the local counterpart of the SAFE.

We may also decide to finance our PRC Subsidiary by means of capital contributions. According to the relevant PRC regulations on foreign-invested enterprises in China, these capital contributions are subject to registration with or approval by local Administration for Market Regulation (“AMR”). In addition, the PRC government also restricts the convertibility of foreign currencies into Renminbi and use of the proceeds. On March 30, 2015, SAFE promulgated the Notice of the State Administration of Foreign Exchange on Reforming the Administration of Foreign Exchange Settlement of Capital of Foreign-invested Enterprises, or SAFE Circular 19, which took effect and replaced certain previous SAFE regulations from June 1, 2015. SAFE further promulgated the Notice of the State Administration of Foreign Exchange on Reforming and Standardizing the Foreign Exchange Settlement Management Policy of Capital Account, or SAFE Circular 16, effective on June 9, 2016, which, among other things, amend certain provisions of SAFE Circular 19. According to SAFE Circular 19 and SAFE Circular 16, the flow and use of the Renminbi capital converted from foreign currency denominated registered capital of a foreign-invested company is regulated such that Renminbi capital may not be used for business beyond its business scope or to provide loans to persons other than affiliates unless otherwise permitted under its business scope. Violations of the applicable circulars and rules may result in severe penalties, including substantial fines as set forth in the Foreign Exchange Administration Regulations. If our VIE requires financial support from us or our WOS in the future and we find it necessary to use foreign currency-denominated capital to provide such financial support, our ability to fund our VIE’s operations will be subject to statutory limits and restrictions, including those described above. These circulars may limit our ability to transfer any foreign currency we hold, including the net proceeds from our initial public offering, to our VIE and our PRC subsidiary, which may adversely affect our liquidity and our ability to fund and expand our business in China. Despite the restrictions under these SAFE circulars, our PRC Subsidiary may use its income in Renminbi generated from their operations to finance the VIE through entrustment loans to the VIE or loans to the VIE’s shareholders for the purpose of making capital contributions to the VIE. In addition, our PRC Subsidiary can use Renminbi funds converted from foreign currency registered capital to carry out any activities within their normal course of business and business scope. On October 23, 2019, the SAFE promulgated the Notice of the State Administration of Foreign Exchange on Further Promoting the Convenience of Cross-border Trade and Investment, or the SAFE Circular 28, which, among other things, allows all foreign-invested companies to use Renminbi converted from foreign currency-denominated capital for equity investments in China, as long as the equity investment is genuine, does not violate applicable laws, and complies with the negative list on foreign investment.

In light of the various requirements imposed by PRC regulations on loans to, and direct investment in, PRC entities by offshore holding companies, we cannot assure you that we will be able to complete the necessary government registrations or obtain the necessary government approvals on a timely basis, if at all, with respect to future loans to our PRC Subsidiary or our VIE or future capital contributions by us to our PRC Subsidiary. If we fail to complete such registrations or obtain such approvals, our ability to use the proceeds we expect to receive from our initial public offering and to capitalize or otherwise fund our PRC operations may be negatively affected, which could materially and adversely affect our liquidity and our ability to fund and expand our business.

The shareholders of our VIE may have potential conflicts of interest with us, which may materially and adversely affect our business and financial condition.

As of the date of this report, Mr. Bao and Mr. He hold 96.95% and 3.05% equity interest in UTime SZ, respectively. The shareholders of our VIE may have potential conflicts of interest with us. The shareholders may breach, or cause our VIE to breach, or refuse to renew, the existing contractual arrangements we have with them and our VIE, which would have a material and adverse effect on our ability to effectively control our VIE and receive economic benefits from it. For example, the shareholders may be able to cause our agreements with our VIE to be performed in a manner adverse to us by, among other things, failing to remit payments due under the contractual arrangements to us on a timely basis. We cannot assure you that when conflicts of interest arise the shareholders will act in the best interests of our Company or such conflicts will be resolved in our favor. Currently, we do not have any arrangements to address potential conflicts of interest between the shareholders and our Company. If we cannot resolve any conflict of interest or dispute between us and the shareholders, we would have to rely on legal proceedings, which could result in disruption of our business and subject us to substantial uncertainty as to the outcome of any such legal proceedings.

The shareholders of our VIE may be involved in personal disputes with third parties or other incidents that may have an adverse effect on their equity interests in our VIE and the validity or enforceability of our contractual arrangements with our VIE and its shareholder. For example, in the event that one of the shareholders of our VIE divorces his spouse, the spouse may claim that the equity interest of our VIE held by such shareholder is part of their community property and should be divided between such shareholder and his spouse. If such claim is supported by the court, the relevant equity interest may be obtained by the shareholder’s spouse or any third party who is not subject to obligations under our contractual arrangements, which could result in a loss of our effective control over the VIE. Similarly, if any of the equity interests of our VIE is inherited by a third party on whom the current contractual arrangements are not binding, we could lose our control over the VIE or have to maintain such control by incurring unpredictable costs, which could cause significant disruption to our business and operations and harm our financial condition and results of operations.

Although under our current contractual arrangements, each of the spouses of Mr. Bao and Mr. He have executed spousal consent letters, under which each of them agreed that she will not take any actions or raise any claims to interfere with the performance by her spouse of the obligations under these contractual arrangements, including claiming community property ownership on the equity interest, and renounce any and all right and interest related to the equity interest that she may be entitled to under applicable laws. We cannot assure you that these undertakings and arrangements will be complied with or effectively enforced. In the event that any of them is breached or becomes unenforceable and leads to legal proceedings, it could disrupt our business, distract our management’s attention and subject us to substantial uncertainties as to the outcome of any such legal proceedings.

Contractual arrangements in relation to our VIE may be subject to scrutiny by the PRC tax authorities and they may determine that we or our VIE owes additional taxes, which could negatively affect our financial condition and the value of your investment.

Under applicable PRC laws and regulations, arrangements and transactions among related parties may be subject to audit or challenge by the PRC tax authorities. We could face material and adverse tax consequences if the PRC tax authorities determine that the VIE contractual arrangements were not entered into on an arm’s length basis in such a way as to result in an impermissible reduction in taxes under applicable PRC laws, rules and regulations, and adjust the income of our VIE in the form of a transfer pricing adjustment. A transfer pricing adjustment could, among other things, result in a reduction of expense deductions recorded by our VIE for PRC tax purposes, which could in turn increase its tax liabilities without reducing our WFOE’s tax expenses. In addition, the PRC tax authorities may impose late payment fees and other penalties on our VIE for the adjusted but unpaid taxes according to the applicable regulations. Our financial position could be materially and adversely affected if our VIE’s tax liabilities increase or if it is required to pay late payment fees and other penalties.

We may lose the ability to use and enjoy assets held by our VIE that are material to the operation of certain portion of our business if our VIE goes bankrupt or becomes subject to a dissolution or liquidation proceeding.

As part of our contractual arrangements with our VIE, our VIE and its subsidiaries hold certain assets that are material to the operation of certain portion of our business, including intellectual property and premise. If our VIE goes bankrupt and all or part of its assets become subject to liens or rights of third-party creditors, we may be unable to continue some or all of our business activities, which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. Under the contractual arrangements, our VIE may not, in any manner, sell, transfer, mortgage or dispose of its assets or legal or beneficial interests in the business without our prior consent. However, in the event that the shareholders breach this obligation and voluntarily liquidate our VIE, or our VIE declares bankruptcy, or all or part of its assets become subject to liens or rights of third-party creditors, we may be unable to continue some or all of our operations, which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. Furthermore, if our VIE or its subsidiaries undergo a voluntary or involuntary liquidation proceeding, its shareholders or unrelated third-party creditors may claim rights to some or all of its assets, hindering our ability to operate our business, which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our current corporate structure and business operations may be affected by the newly enacted Foreign Investment Law.

On March 15, 2019, the National People’s Congress approved the Foreign Investment Law, which took effect on January 1, 2020. On December 26, 2019, the Regulation on the Implementation of the Foreign Investment Law of the People’s Republic of China, was issued by the State Council and came into force on January 1, 2020. The Foreign Investment Law defines the “foreign investment” as the investment activities in China conducted directly or indirectly by foreign investors in the following manners: (i) a foreign investor, individually or collectively with other investors establishes a foreign-invested enterprise within China; (ii) a foreign investor acquires stock shares, equity shares, shares in assets, or other like rights and interests of an enterprise within China; (iii) a foreign investor, individually or collectively with other investors, invests and establishes new projects within China; and (iv) a foreign investor invests through other approaches as stipulated by laws, administrative regulations, or otherwise regulated by the State Council. Since the Foreign Investment Law is relatively new, uncertainties exist in relation to its interpretation and implementation. The Foreign Investment Law does not explicitly classify whether variable interest entities that are controlled through contractual arrangements would be deemed as foreign invested enterprises if they are ultimately “controlled” by foreign investors. However, it has a catch-all provision under definition of “foreign investment” that includes investments made by foreign investors in China through other means as provided by laws, administrative regulations or the State Council. The Foreign Investment Law still leaves leeway for future laws, administrative regulations or provisions of the State Council to provide for contractual arrangements as a form of foreign investment. Therefore, there can be no assurance that our control over our VIE through contractual arrangements will not be deemed as foreign investment in the future.

The Foreign Investment Law grants national treatment to foreign-invested entities, except for those foreign-invested entities that operate in industries specified as either “restricted” or “prohibited” from foreign investment in a “negative list”. The Foreign Investment Law provides that foreign-invested entities operating in “restricted” or “prohibited” industries will require market entry clearance and other approvals from relevant PRC government authorities. On June 23, 2020, the Ministry of Commerce of the PRC (the “MOFCOM”) and the National Development and Reform Commission (the “NDRC”) jointly issued the latest version of Negative List (Edition 2020), which became effective on July 23, 2020. See “Regulations — Regulations relating to Foreign Investment — The Guidance Catalogue of Industries for Foreign Investment”. Currently, our business related to the operation of designing, manufacturing and marketing mobile communication devices, and selling a variety of related accessories falls within the permitted category. However, we cannot assure you that our current operations or any newly-developed business in the future will still deemed to be “permitted” in the “negative list”, which may be promulgated or be amended from time to time by the MOFCOM and the NDRC. If our control over our VIE through contractual arrangements are deemed as foreign investment in the future, and any business of our VIE is “restricted” or “prohibited” from foreign investment under the “negative list” promulgated or amended in the future, we may be deemed to be in violation of the Foreign Investment Law, the contractual arrangements that allow us to have control over our VIE may be deemed as invalid and illegal, and we may be required to unwind such contractual arrangements and/or restructure our business operations, any of which may have a material adverse effect on our business operation.

Furthermore, if future laws, administrative regulations or provisions mandate further actions to be taken by companies with respect to existing contractual arrangements, we may face substantial uncertainties as to whether we can complete such actions in a timely manner, or at all. Failure to take timely and appropriate measures to cope with any of these or similar regulatory compliance challenges could materially and adversely affect our current corporate structure and business operations.

Risks Related to Doing Business in China

Changes in China’s economic, political or social conditions or government policies could have a material adverse effect on our business and operations.

Substantially most of our assets and operations are located in China. Accordingly, our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects may be influenced to a significant degree by political, economic and social conditions in China generally. The Chinese economy differs from the economies of most developed countries in many respects, including the level of government involvement, level of development, growth rate, control of foreign exchange and allocation of resources. Although the Chinese government has implemented measures emphasizing the utilization of market forces for economic reform, the reduction of state ownership of productive assets, and the establishment of improved corporate governance in business enterprises, a substantial portion of productive assets in China is still owned by the government. In addition, the Chinese government continues to play a significant role in regulating industry development by imposing industrial policies. The Chinese government also exercises significant control over China’s economic growth through allocating resources, controlling payment of foreign currency-denominated obligations, setting monetary policy, and providing preferential treatment to particular industries or companies.

While the Chinese economy has experienced significant growth over the past decades, growth has been uneven, both geographically and among various sectors of the economy, and the rate of growth has been slowing since 2012. Any adverse changes in economic conditions in China, in the policies of the Chinese government or in the laws and regulations in China could have a material adverse effect on the overall economic growth of China. Such developments could adversely affect our business and operating results, lead to reduction in demand for our services and adversely affect our competitive position. The Chinese government has implemented various measures to encourage economic growth and guide the allocation of resources. Some of these measures may benefit the overall Chinese economy, but may have a negative effect on us. For example, our financial condition and results of operations may be adversely affected by government control over capital investments or changes in tax regulations. In addition, in the past the Chinese government has implemented certain measures, including interest rate adjustment, to control the pace of economic growth. These measures may cause decreased economic activity in China, which may adversely affect our business and operating results.

Uncertainties with respect to the PRC legal system and changes in laws and regulations in China could adversely affect us.

We conduct our business primarily through our PRC Subsidiary, VIE and UTime GZ in China. Our operations in China are governed by PRC laws and regulations. Our PRC Subsidiary, VIE and UTime GZ are subject to laws and regulations applicable to foreign investment in China. The PRC legal system is a civil law system based on written statutes. Unlike the common law system, prior court decisions under the civil law system may be cited for reference but have limited precedential value. In addition, any new or changes in PRC laws and regulations related to foreign investment in China could affect the business environment and our ability to operate our business in China.

From time to time, we may have to resort to administrative and court proceedings to enforce our legal rights. Any administrative and court proceedings in China may be protracted, resulting in substantial costs and diversion of resources and management attention. Since PRC administrative and court authorities have significant discretion in interpreting and implementing statutory provisions and contractual terms, it may be more difficult to evaluate the outcome of administrative and court proceedings and the level of legal protection we enjoy than in more developed legal systems. These uncertainties may impede our ability to enforce the contracts into which we have entered and could materially and adversely affect our business and results of operations.

Furthermore, the PRC legal system is based in part on government policies and internal rules, some of which are not published on a timely basis or at all and may have retroactive effect. As a result, we may not be aware of our violation of any of these policies and rules until sometime after the violation. Such unpredictability towards our contractual, property and procedural rights could adversely affect our business and impede our ability to continue our operations.

Changes in international trade policies, trade dispute or the emergence of a trade war, may have a material adverse effect on our business.

Political events, international trade disputes, and other business interruptions could harm or disrupt international commerce and the global economy, and could have a material adverse effect on us and our customers, service providers, network carriers and other partners.

International trade disputes could result in tariffs and other protectionist measures that could adversely affect our business. Tariffs could increase the cost of the goods and products which could affect consumers’ discretionary spending levels and therefore adversely impact our business. In addition, political uncertainty surrounding international trade disputes and the potential of the escalation to trade war and global recession could have a negative effect on consumer confidence, which could adversely affect our business.

There are significant uncertainties under the PRC Enterprise Income Tax Law relating to the withholding tax liabilities of our PRC Subsidiary, and dividends payable by our PRC Subsidiary to our offshore subsidiaries may not qualify to enjoy certain treaty benefits.

We are an exempted company incorporated under the laws of the Cayman Islands and as such rely on dividends and other distributions on equity from our PRC Subsidiary to satisfy part of our liquidity requirements. Pursuant to the PRC Enterprise Income Tax Law, a withholding tax rate of 10% currently applies to dividends paid by a PRC “resident enterprise” to a foreign enterprise investor, unless any such foreign investor’s jurisdiction of incorporation has a tax treaty with China that provides for preferential tax treatment.

Pursuant to the Arrangement between the Mainland China and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and Tax Evasion on Income, or the Double Tax Avoidance Arrangement came into effect on December 8, 2006, and four conventions implemented as of June 11, 2008, December 20, 2010, December 29, 2015 and December 6, 2019, such withholding tax rate may be lowered to 5% if a Hong Kong resident enterprise owns no less than 25% of a PRC enterprise. Under the Circular on Certain Issues with Respect to the Enforcement of Dividend Provisions in Tax Treaties issued in February 2009 by the SAT, the taxpayer needs to satisfy certain conditions to enjoy the benefits under a tax treaty. These conditions include: (i) the taxpayer must be the beneficial owner of the relevant dividends, and (ii) the corporate shareholder to receive dividends from the PRC Subsidiary must have met the direct ownership thresholds during the 12 consecutive months preceding the receipt of the dividends. However, if the main purpose of an offshore arrangement is to obtain a preferential tax treatment, the PRC tax authorities have the discretion to adjust the preferential tax rate enjoyed by the relevant offshore entity. Further, the SAT promulgated the Notice on How to Understand and Recognize the “Beneficial Owner” in Tax Treaties in 2009, which limits the “beneficial owner” to individuals, enterprises or other organizations normally engaged in substantive operations, and sets forth certain detailed factors in determining “beneficial owner” status; and based on the Announcement on Certain Issues with Respect to the “Beneficial Owner” in Tax Treaties, issued on February 3, 2018, and effective on April 1, 2018, that the business activities conducted by the applicant do not constitute substantive business activities is one of the factors which are not conductive to the determination of an applicant’s status as a “beneficial owner”.

In addition, the Administrative Measures for Non-Resident Enterprises to Enjoy Treatments under Tax Treaties, or SAT Public Notice No.60, which became effective in August 2015, require non-resident enterprises to determine whether they are qualified to enjoy the preferential tax treatment under the tax treaties and file relevant report and materials with the tax authorities. In October 2019, the State Administration of Taxation (SAT) issued the Announcement of the SAT on Issuing the Measures for the Administration of Non-resident Taxpayers’ Enjoyment of Treaty Benefits (SAT Public Notice No.35), which took effect on January 1, 2020, while SAT Public Notice No.60 will be abolished at the same time. SAT Public Notice No.35 stipulates that non-resident taxpayers can enjoy tax treaty benefits via the “self-assessment of eligibility, claiming treaty benefits, retaining documents for inspection” mechanism. There are also other conditions for enjoying the reduced withholding tax rate according to other relevant tax rules and regulations. As of March 31, 2021 and 2020, we did not record any withholding tax on the retained earnings of our subsidiaries in the PRC as we intended to re-invest all earnings generated from our PRC Subsidiary for the operation and expansion of our business in China, and we intend to continue this practice in the foreseeable future. Should our tax policy change to allow for offshore distribution of our earnings, we would be subject to a significant withholding tax. We cannot assure you that our determination regarding our qualification to enjoy the preferential tax treatment will not be challenged by the relevant tax authority or we will be able to complete the necessary filings with the relevant tax authority and enjoy the preferential withholding tax rate of 5% under the Double Taxation Arrangement with respect to dividends to be paid by our PRC Subsidiary to UTime HK, our Hong Kong subsidiary.

We, or entities who provide services to us or with whom we associate, are not permitted to be subject to inspection by the U.S. federal or state regulators such as PCAOB, and therefore, our investors may be deprived of the benefits of such inspection. Additionally, we could be delisted if we are unable to meet the PCAOB inspection requirements in time.

Any disclosure of documents or information located in China by foreign agencies may be subject to jurisdiction constraints and must comply with China’s state secrecy laws, which broadly define the scope of “state secrets” to include matters involving economic interests and technologies. There is no guarantee that requests from U.S. federal or state regulators or agencies to investigate or inspect our operations will be honored by us, by entities, who provide services to us or with whom we associate, without violating PRC legal requirements, especially as those entities are located in China. Furthermore, under the current PRC laws, an on-site inspection of our facilities by any of the U.S. regulators may be limited or prohibited.

Our independent registered public accounting firm that issues the audit report included in this annual report filed with the SEC, as an auditor of companies that are traded publicly in the United States and a firm registered with the PCAOB is required by the laws of the United States to undergo regular inspections by PCAOB to assess its compliance with the laws of the United States and professional standards. Because our auditor is located in China, a jurisdiction where PCAOB is currently unable to conduct inspections without the approval of the PRC authorities, our auditor, like other independent registered public accounting firms operating in China, is currently not inspected by PCAOB.

In May 2013, the PCAOB announced that it had entered into a Memorandum of Understanding on Enforcement Cooperation with the China Securities Regulatory Commission, or CSRC, and the PRC Ministry of Finance, which establishes a cooperative framework between the parties for the production and exchange of audit documents relevant to investigations undertaken by the PCAOB, the CSRC or the PRC Ministry of Finance in the United States and the PRC, respectively. The PCAOB continues to be in discussions with the CSRC, and the PRC Ministry of Finance to permit joint inspections in the PRC of audit firms that are registered with PCAOB and audit Chinese companies that trade on U.S. exchanges. On December 7, 2018, the SEC and the PCAOB issued a joint statement highlighting continued challenges faced by the U.S. regulators in their oversight of financial statement audits of U.S.-listed companies with significant operations in China. However, it remains unclear what further actions, if any, the SEC and the PCAOB will take to address the problem.

On April 21, 2020, SEC Chairman Jay Clayton and PCAOB Chairman William D. Duhnke III, along with other senior SEC staff, released a joint statement highlighting the risks associated with investing in companies based in or have substantial operations in emerging markets including China, reiterating past SEC and PCAOB statements on matters including the difficulty associated with inspecting accounting firms and audit work papers in China and higher risks of fraud in emerging markets and the difficulty of bringing and enforcing SEC, Department of Justice and other U.S. regulatory actions, including in instances of fraud, in emerging markets generally. However, it remains unclear what further actions, if any, the SEC and the PCAOB will take to address these problems. Inspections of other firms that PCAOB has conducted outside of China have identified deficiencies in those firms’ audit procedures and quality control procedures, which may be addressed as part of the inspection process to improve future audit quality.

On August 6, 2020, the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets (“PWG”) released a report recommending that the SEC take steps to implement the five recommendations outlined in the report. In particular, to address companies from jurisdictions that do not provide the PCAOB with sufficient access to fulfill its statutory mandate, or Non-Cooperating Jurisdictions (“NCJs”), the PWG recommends enhanced listing standards on U.S. stock exchanges. This would require, as a condition to initial and continued exchange listing, PCAOB access to work papers of the principal audit firm for the audit of the listed company. Companies unable to satisfy this standard as a result of governmental restrictions on access to audit work papers and practices in NCJs may satisfy this standard by providing a co-audit from an audit firm with comparable resources and experience where the PCAOB determines it has sufficient access to audit work papers and practices to conduct an appropriate inspection of the co-audit firm. The report permits the new listing standards to provide for a transition period until January 1, 2022 for listed companies, but would apply immediately to new listings once the necessary rulemakings and/or standard-setting are effective. The measures in the PWG Report are presumably subject to the standard SEC rulemaking process before becoming effective. On August 10, 2020, the SEC announced that SEC Chairman had directed the SEC staff to prepare proposals in response to the PWG Report, and that the SEC was soliciting public comments and information with respect to these proposals. After we are listed on the Nasdaq Capital Market, if we fail to meet the new listing standards before the deadline specified thereunder due to factors beyond our control, we could face possible de-listing from the Nasdaq Capital Market, deregistration from the SEC and/or other risks, which may materially and adversely affect, or effectively terminate, our ordinary shares trading in the United States.

The inability of PCAOB to conduct inspections of independent registered public accounting firms operating in China makes it more difficult to evaluate the effectiveness of our auditor’s audit procedures or quality control procedures. As a result, investors may be deprived of the benefits of PCAOB inspections.

As part of a continued regulatory focus in the United States on access to audit and other information currently protected by national law, in particular China’s, in June 2019, a bipartisan group of lawmakers introduced bills in both houses of the U.S. Congress, which if passed, would require the SEC to maintain a list of issuers for which PCAOB is not able to inspect or investigate an auditor report issued by a foreign public accounting firm. The proposed Ensuring Quality Information and Transparency for Abroad-Based Listings on our Exchanges (EQUITABLE) Act prescribes increased disclosure requirements for these issuers and, beginning in 2025, the delisting from U.S. national securities exchanges of issuers included on the SEC’s list for three consecutive years. On May 20, 2020 and December 2, 2020, the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives, respectively, passed S. 945, the Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act, or the “Kennedy Bill.” U.S. President Donald J. Trump signed into law on December 18, 2020 the Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act, which will require the SEC to propose rules within 90 days after its enactment to prohibit securities of any registrant from being listed on any of the U.S. securities exchanges or traded “over the counter” if the auditor of the registrant’s financial statements is not subject to PCAOB inspection for three consecutive years after the law becomes effective. We could be delisted if we are unable to cure the situation to meet the PCAOB inspection requirement in time. On July 21, 2020, the U.S. House of Representatives approved its version of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021, which contains provisions comparable to the Kennedy Bill. These bills amend the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 to direct the SEC to prohibit securities of any registrant from being listed on any of the U.S. securities exchanges or traded “over-the-counter” if the auditor of the registrant’s financial statements is not subject to PCAOB inspection for three consecutive years after the law becomes effective. Enactment of this legislation or other efforts to increase U.S. regulatory access to audit information could cause investor uncertainty for affected issuers, including us, and the market price of our ordinary shares could be adversely affected, and we could be delisted if we are unable to cure the situation to meet the PCAOB inspection requirement in time. Furthermore, there have been recent media reports on deliberations within the U.S. government regarding potentially limiting or restricting China-based companies from accessing U.S. capital markets. If any such deliberations were to materialize, the resulting legislation may have a material and adverse impact on the stock performance of China-based issuers listed in the United States, including ours.

You may experience difficulties in effecting service of legal process, enforcing foreign judgments or bringing actions in China against us or our management named in this report based on foreign laws.

We are an exempted company incorporated under the laws of the Cayman Islands, we conduct substantially most of our operations in China and substantially most of our assets are located in China. In addition, most of our senior executive officers reside within China for a significant portion of the time and most are PRC nationals. As a result, it may be difficult for you to effect service of process upon us or those persons inside mainland China. It may also be difficult for you to enforce in U.S. courts judgments obtained in U.S. courts based on the civil liability provisions of the U.S. federal securities laws against us and our officers and directors who reside and whose assets are located outside the United States. In addition, there is uncertainty as to whether the courts of the Cayman Islands or the PRC would recognize or enforce judgments of U.S. courts against us or such persons predicated upon the civil liability provisions of the securities laws of the United States or any state.

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 forms of reciprocity with the United States that provide for the reciprocal recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments. In addition, according to the PRC Civil Procedures Law, the PRC courts will not enforce a foreign judgment against us or our directors and officers if they decide that the judgment violates the basic principles of PRC laws or 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.

See also “Risks Related to our Corporate Structure — Because we are incorporated under the laws of the Cayman Islands, you may face difficulties in protecting your interests, and your ability to protect your rights through the U.S. Federal courts may be limited” for risks associated with investing in us as a Cayman Islands company.

There are uncertainties under the PRC laws relating to the procedures for U.S. regulators to investigate and collect evidence from companies located in the PRC.

According to Article 177 of the newly amended PRC Securities Law which became effective in March 2020 (the “Article 177”), the securities regulatory authority of the PRC State Council may collaborate with securities regulatory authorities of other countries or regions in order to monitor and oversee cross border securities activities. Article 177 further provides that overseas securities regulatory authorities are not allowed to carry out investigation and evidence collection directly within the territory of the PRC, and that any Chinese entities and individuals are not allowed to provide documents or materials related to securities business activities to overseas agencies without prior consent of the securities regulatory authority of the PRC State Council and the competent departments of the PRC State Council.

Our PRC counsel has advised us of their understanding that (i) the Article 177 is applicable in the limited circumstances related to direct investigation or evidence collection conducted by overseas authorities within the territory of the PRC (in such case, the foregoing activities are required to be conducted through collaboration with or by obtaining prior consent of competent Chinese authorities); (ii) from the view of the internal logical relations of the Article 177, it seems that the Article 177 does not limit or prohibit the Company, as a company duly incorporated in Cayman Islands and to be listed on NASDAQ, from providing the required documents or information to NASDAQ or the SEC pursuant to applicable Listing Rules and U.S. securities laws; and (iii) as the Article 177 is relatively new and there is no implementing rules or regulations which have been published regarding application of the Article 177, it remains unclear how the law will be interpreted, implemented or applied by the Chinese Securities Regulatory Commission or other relevant government authorities. As of the date hereof, we are not aware of any implementing rules or regulations which have been published regarding application of Article 177. However, we cannot assure you that relevant PRC government agencies, including the securities regulatory authority of the PRC State Council, would reach the same conclusion as we do. As such, there are uncertainties as to the procedures and time requirement for the U.S. regulators to bring about investigations and evidence collection within the territory of the PRC.

Our principal business operation is conducted in the PRC. In the event that the U.S. regulators carry out investigation on us and there is a need to conduct investigation or collect evidence within the territory of the PRC, the U.S. regulators may not be able to carry out such investigation or evidence collection directly in the PRC under the PRC laws. The U.S. regulators may consider cross-border cooperation with securities regulatory authority of the PRC by way of judicial assistance, diplomatic channels or regulatory cooperation mechanism established with the securities regulatory authority of the PRC. However, there is no assurance that the U.S. regulators could succeed in establishing such cross-border cooperation in a specific case or could establish the cooperation in a timely manner. If U.S. regulators are unable to conduct such investigations, such U.S. regulators may determine to suspend and ultimately delist our ordinary shares from the Nasdaq Capital Market or choose to suspend or de-register our SEC registration.

Fluctuations in exchange rates could have a material and adverse effect on our results of operations and the value of your investment.

The conversion of Renminbi into foreign currencies, including U.S. dollars, is based on rates set by the People’s Bank of China. The Renminbi has fluctuated against the U.S. dollar, at times significantly and unpredictably. The value of Renminbi against the U.S. dollar and other currencies is affected by changes in China’s political and economic conditions and by China’s foreign exchange policies, among other things. We cannot assure you that Renminbi will not appreciate or depreciate significantly in value against the U.S. dollar in the future. It is difficult to predict how market forces or PRC or U.S. government policy may impact the exchange rate between Renminbi and the U.S. dollar in the future.

Significant revaluation of the Renminbi may have a material and adverse effect on your investment. For example, to the extent that we need to convert U.S. dollars we receive from our initial public offering into Renminbi for our operations, appreciation of the Renminbi against the U.S. dollar would have an adverse effect on the Renminbi amount we would receive from the conversion. Conversely, if we decide to convert our Renminbi into U.S. dollars for the purpose of making payments for dividends on our ordinary shares or for other business purposes, appreciation of the U.S. dollar against the Renminbi would have a negative effect on the U.S. dollar amount available to us.

Very limited hedging options are available in China to reduce our exposure to exchange rate fluctuations. To date, we have not entered into any hedging transactions in an effort to reduce our exposure to foreign currency exchange risk. While we may decide to enter into hedging transactions in the future, the availability and effectiveness of these hedges may be limited and we may not be able to adequately hedge our exposure or at all. In addition, our currency exchange losses may be magnified by PRC exchange control regulations that restrict our ability to convert Renminbi into foreign currency.

Governmental control of currency conversion may limit our ability to utilize our net revenues effectively and affect the value of your investment.

The PRC government imposes controls on the convertibility of the Renminbi into foreign currencies and, in certain cases, the remittance of currency out of China. We receive substantially all of our revenues in Renminbi. Under our current corporate structure, our Cayman Islands exempted company primarily relies on dividend payments from our PRC Subsidiary to fund any cash and financing requirements we may have. Under existing PRC foreign exchange regulations, payments of current account items, including profit distributions, interest payments and trade and service-related foreign exchange transactions, can be made in foreign currencies without prior approval of SAFE by complying with certain procedural requirements. Specifically, under the existing exchange restrictions, without prior approval of SAFE, cash generated from the operations of our PRC Subsidiary in China may be used to pay dividends to our company. However, approval from or registration with appropriate government authorities is required where Renminbi is to be converted into foreign currency and remitted out of China to pay capital expenses such as the repayment of loans denominated in foreign currencies. As a result, we need to obtain SAFE approval to use cash generated from the operations of our PRC Subsidiary, VIE and UTime GZ to pay off their respective debt in a currency other than Renminbi owed to entities outside China, or to make other capital expenditure payments outside China in a currency other than Renminbi.

In light of the flood of capital outflows of China in 2016 due to the weakening RMB, the PRC government has imposed more restrictive foreign exchange policies and stepped up scrutiny of major outbound capital movement including overseas direct investment. More restrictions and substantial vetting process are put in place by SAFE to regulate cross-border transactions falling under the capital account. If any of our shareholders regulated by such policies fails to satisfy the applicable overseas direct investment filing or approval requirement timely or at all, it may be subject to penalties from the relevant PRC authorities. The PRC government may at its discretion further restrict access in the future to foreign currencies for current account transactions. If the foreign exchange control system prevents us from obtaining sufficient foreign currencies to satisfy our foreign currency demands, we may not be able to pay dividends in foreign currencies to our shareholders.

China’s M&A Rules and certain other PRC regulations establish complex procedures for some acquisitions of PRC companies by foreign investors, which could make it more difficult for us to pursue growth through acquisitions in China.

The Regulations on Mergers and Acquisitions of Domestic Enterprises by Foreign Investors, or the M&A Rules, and other recently adopted regulations and rules concerning mergers and acquisitions established additional procedures and requirements that could make merger and acquisition activities by foreign investors more time consuming and complex. For example, the M&A Rules require that MOFCOM be notified in advance of any change-of-control transaction in which a foreign investor takes control of a PRC domestic enterprise, if (i) any important industry is concerned, (ii) such transaction involves factors that impact or may impact national economic security, or (iii) such transaction will lead to a change in control of a domestic enterprise which holds a famous trademark or PRC time-honored brand. Moreover, the Anti-Monopoly Law promulgated by the SCNPC effective in 2008 requires that transactions which are deemed concentrations and involve parties with specified turnover thresholds (i.e., during the previous fiscal year, (i) the total global turnover of all operators participating in the transaction exceeds RMB10 billion (US$1.5 billion) and at least two of these operators each had a turnover of more than RMB400 million (US$60.9 million) within China, or (ii) the total turnover within China of all the operators participating in the concentration exceeded RMB2 billion, and at least two of these operators each had a turnover of more than RMB400 million (US$60.9 million) within China) must be cleared by MOFCOM before they can be completed. In addition, in 2011, the General Office of the State Council promulgated a Notice on Establishing the Security Review System for Mergers and Acquisitions of Domestic Enterprises by Foreign Investors, also known as Circular 6, which officially established a security review system for mergers and acquisitions of domestic enterprises by foreign investors. Further, MOFCOM promulgated the Regulations on Implementation of Security Review System for the Merger and Acquisition of Domestic Enterprises by Foreign Investors, effective 2011, to implement Circular 6. Under Circular 6, a security review is required for mergers and acquisitions by foreign investors having “national defense and security” concerns and mergers and acquisitions by which foreign investors may acquire the “de facto control” of domestic enterprises with “national security” concerns. Under the foregoing MOFCOM regulations, MOFCOM will focus on the substance and actual impact of the transaction when deciding whether a specific merger or acquisition is subject to security review. If MOFCOM decides that a specific merger or acquisition is subject to a security review, it will submit it to the Inter-Ministerial Panel, an authority established under Circular 6 led by the NDRC, and MOFCOM under the leadership of the State Council, to carry out security review. The regulations prohibit foreign investors from bypassing the security review by structuring transactions through trusts, indirect investments, leases, loans, control through contractual arrangements or offshore transactions.

In the future, we may grow our business by acquiring complementary businesses. Complying with the requirements of the above-mentioned regulations and other relevant rules to complete such transactions could be time consuming, and any required approval processes, including obtaining approval from MOFCOM or its local counterparts may delay or inhibit our ability to complete such transactions. It is unclear whether our business would be deemed to be in an industry that raises “national defense and security” or “national security” concerns. However, MOFCOM or other government agencies may publish explanations in the future determining that our business is in an industry subject to the security review, in which case our future acquisitions in China, including those by way of entering into contractual control arrangements with target entities, may be closely scrutinized or prohibited.

PRC regulations relating to the establishment of offshore special purpose companies by PRC residents may subject our PRC resident beneficial owners or our PRC Subsidiary to liability or penalties, limit our ability to inject capital into our PRC Subsidiary, limit our PRC Subsidiary’s ability to increase their registered capital or distribute profits to us, or may otherwise adversely affect us.

In July 2014, 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, and its implementation guidelines, to replace the Circular on Several Issues Concerning Foreign Exchange Administration for Domestic Residents to Engage in Return Investments via Overseas Special Purpose Vehicles, or SAFE Circular 75, which ceased to be effective upon the promulgation of SAFE Circular 37. SAFE Circular 37 requires PRC residents (including PRC individuals and PRC corporate entities) to register with SAFE or its local branches in connection with their direct or indirect offshore investment activities. SAFE Circular 37 is applicable to our shareholders who are PRC residents and may be applicable to any offshore acquisitions that we make in the future.

Under SAFE Circular 37, PRC residents who make, or have prior to the implementation of SAFE Circular 37 made, direct or indirect investments in offshore special purpose vehicles, or SPVs, will be required to register such investments with SAFE or its local branches. In addition, any PRC resident who is a direct or indirect shareholder of a SPV, is required to update its filed registration with the local branch of SAFE with respect to that SPV, to reflect any material change. Moreover, any subsidiary of such SPV in China is required to urge the PRC resident shareholders to update their registration with the local branch of SAFE. If any PRC shareholder of such SPV fails to make the required registration or to update the previously filed registration, the subsidiary of such SPV in China may be prohibited from distributing its profits or the proceeds from any capital reduction, share transfer or liquidation to the SPV, and the SPV may also be prohibited from making additional capital contributions into its subsidiary in China. On February 13, 2015, SAFE promulgated the Circular on Further Simplifying and Improving the Policies Concerning Foreign Exchange Control on Direct Investment, or SAFE Circular 13, which became effective on June 1, 2015. Under SAFE Circular 13, applications for foreign exchange registration of inbound foreign direct investments and outbound overseas direct investments, including those required under SAFE Circular 37, will be filed with qualified banks instead of SAFE. The qualified banks will directly examine the applications and accept registrations under the supervision of SAFE.

If our shareholders who are PRC residents or entities do not complete their registration with the local SAFE branches, our PRC Subsidiary may be prohibited from distributing their profits and any proceeds from any reduction in capital, share transfer or liquidation to us, and we may be restricted in our ability to contribute additional capital to our PRC Subsidiary. Moreover, failure to comply with SAFE registration requirements could result in liability under PRC laws for evasion of applicable foreign exchange restrictions.

Mr. Bao and Mr. He, who indirectly hold a majority of our shares, and who are known to us as being PRC residents have completed the initial SAFE registration in connection with our financings and will update their registration filings with SAFE under SAFE Circular 37 when any changes should be registered under SAFE Circular 37.

However, we may not at all times be fully aware or informed of the identities of all our shareholders or beneficial owners that are required to make or update such registrations, and we cannot compel our beneficial owners to comply with SAFE registration requirements. As a result, we cannot assure you that all of our shareholders or beneficial owners who are PRC residents or entities have complied with, and will in the future make or obtain any applicable registrations or approvals required by, SAFE regulations. Failure by such shareholders or beneficial owners to comply with SAFE regulations or failure by us to amend the foreign exchange registrations of our PRC Subsidiary, could subject us to fines or legal sanctions, restrict our overseas or cross-border investment activities, limit our subsidiary’s ability to make distributions or pay dividends or affect our ownership structure, which could adversely affect our business and prospects.

If we are classified as a PRC resident enterprise for PRC income tax purposes, such classification could result in unfavorable tax consequences to us and our non-PRC shareholders.

Under the PRC Enterprise Income Tax Law and its implementation rules, an enterprise established outside of the PRC with “de facto management body” within the PRC is considered a “resident enterprise” and will be subject to the enterprise income tax on its global income at the rate of 25%. The implementation rules define the term “de facto management body” as the body that exercises full and substantial control and overall management over the business, productions, personnel, accounts and properties of an enterprise. In 2009, the State Administration of Taxation, or SAT, issued the Circular on Issues Concerning the Identification of Chinese-Controlled Overseas Registered Enterprises as Resident Enterprises in Accordance With the Actual Standards of Organizational Management, known as SAT Circular 82, which has been revised by the Decision of the State Administration of Taxation on Issuing the Lists of Invalid and Abolished Tax Departmental Rules and Taxation Normative Documents on December 29, 2017 and by the Decision of the State Council on Cancellation and Delegation of a Batch of Administrative Examination and Approval Items on November 8, 2013. Circular 82 has provided certain specific criteria for determining whether the “de facto management body” of a PRC-controlled enterprise that is incorporated offshore is located in China. Further to SAT Circular 82, the SAT issued the Administrative Measures for Enterprise Income Tax of PRC-Controlled Offshore Incorporated Resident Enterprises (Trial), or SAT Bulletin 45, effective 2011, to provide more guidance on the implementation of SAT Circular 82. SAT Bulletin 45 clarified certain issues in the areas of resident status determination, post-determination administration and competent tax authorities’ procedures.

According to SAT Circular 82, an offshore incorporated enterprise controlled by a PRC enterprise or a PRC enterprise group will be regarded as a PRC tax resident by virtue of having its “de facto management body” in China and will be subject to PRC enterprise income tax on its global income only if all of the following conditions are met: (i) the places where the senior management and senior management departments responsible for the daily production, operation and management of the enterprise perform their duties are mainly located within the territory of the PRC; (ii) decisions relating to the enterprise’s financial matters (such as money borrowing, lending, financing and financial risk management) and human resource matters (such as appointment, dismissal and salary and wages) are made or are subject to approval by organizations or personnel in the PRC; (iii) the enterprise’s primary assets, accounting books and records, company seals, and board and shareholder resolutions, are located or maintained in the PRC; and (iv) at least 50% of voting board members or senior executives habitually reside in the PRC. Although SAT Circular 82 and SAT Bulletin 45 only apply to offshore incorporated enterprises controlled by PRC enterprises or PRC enterprise groups and not those controlled by PRC individuals or foreigners, the determination criteria set forth therein may reflect the SAT’s general position on how the term “de facto management body” could be applied in determining the tax resident status of offshore enterprises, regardless of whether they are controlled by PRC enterprises, individuals or foreigners.

In addition, the SAT issued the Announcement of the State Administration of Taxation on Issues concerning the Determination of Resident Enterprises Based on the Standards of Actual Management Institutions in January 2014 to provide more guidance on the implementation of SAT Circular 82. This bulletin further provides that, among other things, an entity that is classified as a “resident enterprise” in accordance with the circular shall file the application for classifying its status of residential enterprise with the local tax authorities where its main domestic investors are registered. From the year in which the entity is determined to be a “resident enterprise,” any dividend, profit and other equity investment gain shall be taxed in accordance with the enterprise income tax law and its implementing rules.

We believe that none of our entities outside of China is a PRC resident enterprise for PRC tax purposes. See “Regulation — Regulations on Tax — PRC Enterprise Income Tax”. However, the tax resident status of an enterprise is subject to determination by the PRC tax authorities and uncertainties remain with respect to the interpretation of the term “de facto management body.” Our PRC legal counsel has also advised us that there is a risk that the PRC tax authorities may deem us as a PRC resident enterprise since a substantial majority of the members of our management team are located in China. If the PRC tax authorities determine that we are a PRC resident enterprise for enterprise income tax purposes, we will be subject to the enterprise income tax on our global income at the rate of 25% and we will be required to comply with PRC enterprise income tax reporting obligations. In addition, we may be required to withhold a 10% withholding tax from dividends we pay to our shareholders that are non-resident enterprises, and non-resident enterprise shareholders may be subject to PRC tax on gains realized on the sale or other disposition of ordinary shares, if such income is treated as sourced from within the PRC. Furthermore, if we are deemed a PRC resident enterprise, dividends payable to our non-PRC individual shareholders and any gain realized on the transfer of ordinary shares by such shareholders may be subject to PRC tax at a rate of 20% unless a reduced rate is available under an applicable tax treaty. It is unclear whether non-PRC shareholders of our company would be able to claim the benefits of any tax treaties between their country of tax residence and the PRC in the event that we are treated as a PRC resident enterprise. Any such tax may reduce the returns on your investment in the ordinary shares.

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

On December 10, 2009, SAT issued the Notice on Strengthening Administration of Enterprise Income Tax for Share Transfers by Non-PRC Resident Enterprises, or SAT Circular 698, with retroactive effect from January 1, 2008. Pursuant to the SAT Circular 698, where a non-resident enterprise transfers the equity interests of a PRC resident enterprise indirectly by disposition of the equity interests of an overseas holding company, or an Indirect Transfer, and such overseas holding company is located in a tax jurisdiction that: (i) has an effective tax rate less than 12.5% or (ii) does not tax foreign income of its residents, the non-resident enterprise, being the transferor, shall report to the competent tax authority of the PRC resident enterprise this Indirect Transfer.

On February 3, 2015, the SAT issued the Announcement of the State Administration of Taxation on Several Issues Relating to Enterprise Income Tax of Transfers of Assets between Non-resident Enterprises, or SAT Bulletin 7. SAT Bulletin 7 has introduced a new tax regime that is significantly different from the previous one under former SAT Circular 698 (which was repealed by the Announcement of the State Administration of Taxation on Matters Concerning Withholding of Income Tax of Non-resident Enterprises at Source by SAT). SAT Bulletin 7 extends its tax jurisdiction to not only Indirect Transfers set forth under former SAT Circular 698 but also transactions involving transfer of other taxable assets through offshore transfer of a foreign intermediate holding company. In addition, SAT Bulletin 7 provides clearer criteria than former SAT Circular 698 for assessment of reasonable commercial purposes and has introduced safe harbors for internal group restructurings and the purchase and sale of equity of a same listed foreign enterprise by a non-resident enterprise through a public securities market. SAT Bulletin 7 also brings challenges to both foreign transferor and transferee (or other person who is obligated to pay for the transfer) of taxable assets. Where a non-resident enterprise transfers taxable assets indirectly by disposing of the equity interests of an overseas holding company, which is an Indirect Transfer, the non-resident enterprise, being the transferor, or the transferee, or the PRC entity that directly owns the taxable assets, may report such Indirect Transfer to the relevant tax authority. Using a “substance over form” principle, the PRC tax authority may disregard the existence of the overseas holding company if it lacks a reasonable commercial purpose and was established for the purpose of reducing, avoiding or deferring PRC tax. As a result, gains derived from such Indirect Transfer may be subject to PRC enterprise income tax, and the transferee or other person who is obligated to pay for the transfer is obligated to withhold the applicable taxes, currently at a rate of 10% for the transfer of equity interests in a PRC resident enterprise. Both the transferor and the transferee may be subject to penalties under PRC tax laws if the transferee fails to withhold the taxes and the transferor fails to pay the taxes. However, according to the aforesaid safe harbor rule, the PRC tax would not be applicable to the transfer by any non-resident enterprise of our ordinary shares acquired and sold on public securities markets.

On October 17, 2017, SAT issued the Announcement of the State Administration of Taxation on Issues Concerning the Withholding of Non-resident Enterprise Income Tax at Source, or SAT Bulletin 37, which, among others, repealed the Circular 698 on December 1, 2017. SAT Bulletin 37 further details and clarifies the tax withholding methods in respect of income of non-resident enterprises under Circular 698. And certain rules stipulated in SAT Bulletin 7 are replaced by SAT Bulletin 37. Where the non-resident enterprise fails to declare the tax payable pursuant to Article 39 of the Enterprise Income Tax Law, the tax authority may order it to pay the tax due within required time limits, and the non-resident enterprise shall declare and pay the tax payable within such time limits specified by the tax authority; however, if the non-resident enterprise voluntarily declares and pays the tax payable before the tax authority orders it to do so within required time limits, it shall be deemed that such enterprise has paid the tax in time.

We face uncertainties as to the reporting and other implications of certain past and future transactions where PRC taxable assets are involved, such as offshore restructuring, sale of the shares in our offshore subsidiaries and investments. Our company may be subject to withholding obligations if our company is transferee in such transactions, under SAT Bulletin 37 and SAT Bulletin 7. For transfer of shares in our company by investors who are non-PRC resident enterprises, our PRC Subsidiary may be required to expend valuable resources to comply with SAT Bulletin 37 and SAT Bulletin 7 or to request the relevant transferors from whom we purchase taxable assets to comply with these circulars, or to establish that our company should not be taxed under these circulars, which may have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

The approval of the China Securities Regulatory Commission may be required in connection with our initial public offering, and, if required, we cannot predict whether we will be able to obtain such approval.

The Regulations on Mergers and Acquisitions of Domestic Companies by Foreign Investors, or the M&A Rules, adopted by six PRC regulatory agencies requires an overseas special purpose vehicle formed for listing purposes through acquisitions of PRC domestic companies and controlled by PRC companies or individuals to obtain the approval of the CSRC prior to the listing and trading of such special purpose vehicle’s securities on an overseas stock exchange. However, the application of the M&A Rules remains unclear.

Our PRC counsel, B&D Law Firm, has advised us based on their understanding of the current PRC laws, rules and regulations that the CSRC’s approval is not required for the listing and trading of our ordinary shares on NASDAQ in the context of our initial public offering, given that: (i) our PRC Subsidiary was incorporated as wholly foreign-owned enterprises by means of direct investment rather than by merger or acquisition of equity interest or assets of a PRC domestic company owned by PRC companies or individuals as defined under the M&A Rules that are our beneficial owners; and (ii) no provision in the M&A Rules clearly classifies contractual arrangements as a type of transaction subject to the M&A Rules.

However, our PRC counsel has further advised us that there remains some uncertainty as to how the M&A Rules will be interpreted or implemented in the context of an overseas offering and its opinions summarized above are subject to any new laws, rules and regulations or detailed implementations and interpretations in any form relating to the M&A Rules. We cannot assure you that relevant PRC government agencies, including the CSRC, would reach the same conclusion as we do. If it is determined that CSRC approval is required for our initial public offering, we may face sanctions by the CSRC or other PRC regulatory agencies for failure to seek CSRC approval for our initial public offering. These sanctions may include fines and penalties on our operations in the PRC, limitations on our operating privileges in the PRC, delays in or restrictions on the repatriation of the proceeds from our initial public offering into the PRC, restrictions on or prohibition of the payments or remittance of dividends by our PRC Subsidiary, or other actions that could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, reputation and prospects, as well as the trading price of our ordinary shares.

Failure to make adequate contributions to various government-sponsored employee benefits plans as required by PRC laws and regulations may subject us to penalties.

Companies operating in China are required to participate in various government-sponsored employee benefit plans, including certain social insurance, housing provident funds and other welfare-oriented payment obligations, and contribute to the plans in amounts equal to certain percentages of salaries, including bonuses and allowances, of employees up to a maximum amount specified by the local government from time to time at locations where the labor relations between us and our employees are based. The laws and regulations on employee benefit plans have not been enforced consistently by the local governments in China given the different levels of economic development in different locations. Following local common practice, we do not pay certain social insurance or housing fund contributions for each of our employees and the amount we paid was lower than the requirements of relevant PRC regulations. Therefore, in our consolidated financial statements, we have made an estimate and accrued a provision in relation to the potential make-up of our contributions for these plans. If we are determined by local authorities to have failed to make adequate contributions to any employee benefits as required by relevant PRC laws and regulations, we may face late fees or fines in relation to the underpaid employee benefits. As a result, our financial condition and results of operations may be materially and adversely affected.

Increases in labor costs and enforcement of stricter labor laws and regulations in the PRC may adversely affect our business and our profitability.

China’s overall economy and the average wage in China have increased in recent years and are expected to continue to grow. The average wage level for our employees has also increased in recent years. We expect that our labor costs, including wages and employee benefits, will continue to increase. Unless we are able to pass on these increased labor costs to those who pay for our services, our profitability and results of operations may be materially and adversely affected.

In addition, we have been subject to stricter regulatory requirements in terms of entering into labor contracts with our employees and paying various statutory employee benefits, including pensions, housing fund, medical insurance, work-related injury insurance, unemployment insurance and maternity insurance to designated government agencies for the benefit of our employees. Pursuant to the PRC Labor Contract Law and its implementation rules, employers are subject to stricter requirements in terms of signing labor contracts, minimum wages, paying remuneration, determining the term of employee’s probation and unilaterally terminating labor contracts. In the event that we decide to terminate some of our employees or otherwise change our employment or labor practices, the PRC Labor Contract Law and its implementation rules may limit our ability to effect those changes in a desirable or cost-effective manner, which could adversely affect our business and results of operations.

In October 2010, the SCNPC promulgated the Law on Social Insurance of the PRC, effective on July 1, 2011. On April 3, 1999, the State Council promulgated the Regulations on the Administration of Housing Provident Fund, which was amended on March 24, 2002. Companies registered and operating in China are required under the Law on Social Insurance of the PRC and the Regulations on the Administration of Housing Provident Fund to apply for social insurance registration and housing fund deposit registration within 30 days of their establishment and to pay for their employees different social insurance including pension insurance, medical insurance, work-related injury insurance, unemployment insurance and maternity insurance to the extent required by law. We could be subject to orders by the competent labor authorities for rectification and failure to comply with the orders which may further subject us to administrative fines. See “Regulations — Regulations on Labor Protection”.

As the interpretation and implementation of labor-related laws and regulations are still evolving, we cannot assure you that our employment practices do not and will not violate labor-related laws and regulations in China, which may subject us to labor disputes or government investigations. We cannot assure you that we have complied or will be able to comply with all labor-related law and regulations including those relating to obligations to make social insurance payments and contribute to the housing provident funds. If we are deemed to have violated relevant labor laws and regulations, we could be required to provide additional compensation to our employees and our business, financial condition and results of operations will be adversely affected.

If our preferential tax treatments are revoked, become unavailable or if the calculation of our tax liability is successfully challenged by the PRC tax authorities, we may be required to pay tax, interest and penalties in excess of our tax provisions, and our results of operations could be materially and adversely affected.

The PRC government has provided tax incentives to our VIE entity — United Time Technology Co., Ltd. These incentives include reduced enterprise income tax rates. For example, under the Enterprise Income Tax Law and its implementation rules, the statutory enterprise income tax rate is 25%. However, the income tax of an enterprise that has been determined to be a high and new technology enterprise can be reduced to a preferential rate of 15%, and the certificate of a high and new technology enterprise is valid for three years.

Our VIE entity has obtained the Certificate of High and New Technology Enterprise since November 2, 2015, which is renewed on October 16, 2018 and is thus eligible to enjoy a preferential tax rate of 15% for the periods presented, to the extent it has taxable income under the PRC Enterprise Income Tax Law. Any increase in the enterprise income tax rate applicable to our VIE entity in China, or any discontinuation or retroactive or future reduction of any of the preferential tax treatments currently enjoyed by our VIE entity, could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, in the ordinary course of our business, we are subject to complex income tax and other tax regulations and significant judgment is required in the determination of a provision for income taxes. Although we believe our tax provisions are reasonable, if the PRC tax authorities successfully challenge our position and we are required to pay tax, interest and penalties in excess of our tax provisions, our financial condition and results of operations would be materially and adversely affected.

Discontinuation of any of the government subsidies or imposition of any additional taxes and surcharges could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

Our VIE and UTime GZ have received various financial subsidies from PRC local government authorities. The financial subsidies result from discretionary incentives and policies adopted by PRC local government authorities. Meanwhile, to promote our productions and operations, our VIE and UTime GZ built cooperative relations with government authorities, based on which financial subsidies and a series of other governmental supports are provided for the purpose of facilitation of more tax payment to the local tax authorities. In order to attract investment, the Management Committee of Guizhou Xinpu Economic Development Zone offers preferential policies to UTime GZ, the PRC Subsidiary of our VIE, to establish its operations in Xinpu Economic Development Zone. As of the date of this report, UTime GZ has received subsidies of approximately RMB1.2 million (US$0.2 million) in the form of logistics and employees’ rent subsidies for public rental housing from the Management Committee of Guizhou Xinpu Economic Development Zone. However, local governments may decide to change, withdraw or discontinue such financial subsidies at any time. The discontinuation of such financial subsidies or imposition of any additional taxes could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

If the custodians or authorized users of controlling non-tangible assets of our company, including our corporate chops and seals, fail to fulfill their responsibilities, or misappropriate or misuse these assets, our business and operations could be materially and adversely affected.

Under PRC laws, legal documents for corporate transactions are executed using the chops or seal of the signing entity or with the signature of a legal representative whose designation is registered and filed with the relevant branch of the Administration for Market Regulation.

Although we usually utilize company seals to enter into contracts, the designated legal representatives of our PRC Subsidiary, VIE and UTime GZ have the apparent authority to enter into contracts on behalf of such entities without chops and bind such entities. All designated legal representatives of our PRC Subsidiary, VIE and UTime GZ are members of our senior management team who have signed employment agreements with us or our PRC Subsidiary, VIE and UTime GZ under which they agree to abide by various duties they owe to us. In order to maintain the physical security of our chops and chops of our PRC entities, we generally store these items in secured locations accessible only by the authorized personnel in the legal or finance department of PRC Subsidiary, VIE and UTime GZ. Although we monitor such authorized personnel, there is no assurance such procedures will prevent all instances of abuse or negligence. Accordingly, if any of our authorized personnel misuse or misappropriate our corporate chops or seals, we could encounter difficulties in maintaining control over the relevant entities and experience significant disruption to our operations. If a designated legal representative obtains control of the chops in an effort to obtain control over PRC Subsidiary, VIE and UTime GZ, we or our PRC Subsidiary, VIE and UTime GZ would need to pass a new shareholder or board resolution to designate a new legal representative and we would need to take legal action to seek the return of the chops with the relevant authorities, or otherwise seek legal redress for the violation of the representative’s fiduciary duties to us, which could involve significant time and resources and divert management attention away from our regular business. In addition, the affected entity may not be able to recover corporate assets that are sold or transferred out of our control in the event of such a misappropriation if a transferee relies on the apparent authority of the representative and acts in good faith.

We face certain risks relating to the real properties that we lease.

We lease real properties from third parties primarily for our office and processing workshops being used in China, and most of our lease agreements for these properties have not been registered with the PRC governmental authorities as required by PRC laws. Although the failure to do so does not in itself invalidate the leases, we may be ordered by the PRC government authorities to rectify such noncompliance and, if such noncompliance were not rectified within a given period of time, we may be subject to fines imposed by PRC government authorities ranging from RMB1,000 and RMB10,000 for each lease agreement that has not been registered with the relevant PRC governmental authorities.

Most of the proof of ownership or proof of right to lease in relation to our leased real properties have not been provided to us by the relevant lessors. Therefore, we cannot assure you that such lessors are entitled to lease the relevant real properties to us. If the lessors are not entitled to lease the real properties to us and the owners of such real properties decline to ratify the lease agreements between us and the respective lessors, we may not be able to enforce our rights to keep leasing such properties under the respective lease agreements against the owners. As of the date of this report, we are not aware of any claim or challenge brought by any third parties concerning the use of our leased properties. If our lease agreements are claimed as null and void by third parties who are the real owners of such leased real properties, we could be required to vacate the properties, in the event of which we could only initiate the claim against the lessors under relevant lease agreements for indemnities for their breach of the relevant leasing agreements.

Furthermore, the registered office of UTime SZ is 64D-403, Tian Zhan Building F2, Tian’an Che Kung Temple Industrial Zone, Xiangmi Lake, Futian District, Shenzhen, while the principal executive office is located at 7^th Floor, Building 5A, Shenzhen Software Industry Base, Nanshan District, Shenzhen. According to PRC laws, rules and regulations, a company shall register its main office as registered office. Where a company fails to undergo the relevant modification registration in accordance with relevant regulations for any modification of the contents of company registration, the company registration authority shall order the company to register within a prescribed time limit, and, if the company fails to do so, impose a fine of not less than RMB10,000 but not more than RMB100,000 on the company.

We cannot assure you that suitable alternative locations are readily available on commercially reasonable terms, or at all, and if we are unable to relocate our offices or processing workshops in a timely manner, our operations may be interrupted.

Risks Related to Doing Business in India

Our business activities in India could be subject to Indian competition laws, and any violation or alleged violation thereof may negatively impact our operations.

The Competition Commission of India (“CCI”) is the market regulator in India and the Competition Act, 2002 specifically provides that any agreement which restricts the production, supply, distribution, acquisition or control of goods or provision of services, which causes or is likely to cause an appreciable adverse effect on competition (AAEC) within India, is prohibited and void. Anti-competitive agreements may include horizontal and vertical agreements. The definition of the term ‘agreement’ envisaged under the Competition Act, 2002 is wide enough to include any tacit or explicit practice, any arrangement, understanding or action in concert. Any company entering into such kind of agreements may come under the investigation by CCI, and if found violating provisions of the Competition Act, 2002, may be subjected to prosecution and penalty which may extend to 10% of the turnover of preceding 3 financial years. Therefore, any exclusive supply or exclusive distribution agreement(s) may lead to competition law concerns.

Further, any combinations, such as merger, amalgamation, acquisition or similar arrangement, which meet a certain asset/turnover threshold as prescribed in the Competition Act, 2002 mandates CCI approval which involves complex filing requirements. CCI has extra territorial jurisdiction, to investigate, order inquiry and pass order, in respect of the acts taken place outside India which has or may have appreciable adverse effect in India.

Therefore, our business activities of are also subject to the provisions of the Competition Act, 2002 and any violation or alleged violation thereof may seriously impact our operations and business and our parent companies.

Our business is substantially affected by prevailing economic, political and other prevailing conditions in India, and any downshift or perceived downshift in the Indian economy could negatively impact our business.

Do Mobile is a company incorporated in India, and the substantial portion of our assets and employees are located in India. Therefore, we are highly dependent on prevailing economic conditions in India and its operational results are significantly affected by factors influencing the Indian economy. Factors that may adversely affect the Indian economy, and hence results of our operations, may include:

Any downshift or perceived downshift in the Indian economy could negatively impact our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Introduction of 5G compatible mobile handsets and other new technologies may be expensive, and if we are unable to provide 5G compatible mobile handsets, our business will suffer.

In the Indian market, 5^th Generation (5G) cellular network technology is being unveiled and once 5G tenders are issued, mobile manufacturing companies are required to update the technology to make 5G compatible mobile handsets. Updating to 5G technology will be a costly affair for us. In order to remain in business and ahead of competition, we will need to upgrade their handsets or otherwise integrate 5G capabilities into its products and services so as to provide 5G services. If we are not able to provide 5G compatible mobile handsets, then its market share will get significantly eroded, thus having material adverse effect on its operations and revenues.

We are subject to supervision and regulation by the Reserve Bank of India (or “RBI”) and the Department of Telecommunication, and any non-compliance may adversely impact our business.

Do Mobile is a wholly owned subsidiary of a foreign company. The foreign investment in India is regulated by the Reserve Bank of India and business of telecommunication is regulated by the Department of Telecommunication. Currently, the business of Do Mobile falls within the meaning of “manufacturing sector.” Foreign investment in manufacturing sector is automatically permitted and an Indian company can sell its products, without obtaining any government permission. Any change in legislative and regulatory requirements may impact the business activity of Do Mobile and may also lead to higher cost of compliance. This may adversely impact our business.

Our operating results may be adversely affected by law and regulations to which we are subject.

We are required to comply with central, state, local and foreign laws and regulations governing the protection of the environment and occupational health and safety, including laws stringent norms prescribed by Bureau of Indian Standards and Department of Telecommunication. We cannot assure you that we will at all times be in complete compliance with such laws, regulations and norms. If we violate or fail to comply with the requirements, we could be fined or otherwise sanctioned by regulators. In some instances, such a fine or sanction could be material. In addition, these requirements may become more stringent over time and we cannot assure you that we will not incur material costs or liabilities in the future. These could include new regulations that we may be unable to comply with and this will impact our business.

Moreover, there are number of taxes and other levies imposed at the level of the Central Government and State Government in India. These include: (i) income tax; (ii) goods and service tax; (iii) state duty; (iv) stamp duty charges; and (v) other taxes and surcharges. These tax rates may increase in future creating more financial burden on us and may affect our overall tax efficiency. Additional tax exposure could adversely affect its business and results of operations.

Non-compliance with the Indian labor law requirements may invite criminal and civil actions against us in India.

India has stringent labor legislation that protects the interests of workers, including legislation that govern relationships with employees, in such areas as minimum wage and maximum working hours, overtime, working conditions, and hiring and terminating of employees. Do Mobile is irregular in labor law compliances, primarily relating to maintenance of statutory records and registers. Do Mobile has not obtained any registration under applicable Shops and Establishment Act, wherever applicable. Furthermore, Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, mandatorily requires companies to have a defined policy on Prevention of Sexual Harassment at Workplace and must set up an Internal Complaints Committee to redress grievances related to sexual harassment. Do Mobile neither has any defined written policy on Prevention of Sexual Harassment nor have constituted any Internal Complaints Committee to redress the issues relating to sexual harassment at workplace. Any non-compliance of applicable labor laws, will expose Do Mobile and its key managerial personnel to penalties and fines which may impact our operations and growth.

Do Mobile is subject to new certification regulations for mobile handsets introduced by the Department of Telecommunications, Government of India, which could delay the launch of our new products and negatively impact our operations.

The Department of Telecommunication, Government of India (“DOT”) is a nodal regulator to regulate the telecommunication industry in India. DOT issues several regulations and guidelines to govern the telecommunication market. Since Do Mobile is involved in marketing and selling of mobile handset, the business activity of Do Mobile falls within the ambit of telecommunication.

Recently, the Telecommunication Engineering Centre of DOT has notified the Procedure for Mandatory Testing and Certification of Telecommunication (“Certification Procedures”) vide its notification dated October 2, 2018 as per the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 and the Indian Telegraph Rules, 1951. The Certification Procedure has been enforced in phases. Phase-I came into effect from October 1, 2019 for the telecom equipment covered under Simplified Certification Scheme prescribed by the Government of India (i.e. SCS) which inter alia included two wire telecom equipment, modem, G3 fax machine, ISDN CPE and in respect of certain telecom equipment under General Certification Scheme prescribed by the Government of India (i.e. GCS) which inter alia included cord-less phones and PABX. Thereafter, Phase II was enforced from October 1, 2020 and covered equipment which inter alia covered transmission terminal equipment, PON (passive optical network) family of broadband equipment and feedback devises.

In accordance with the Certification Procedures, every original equipment manufacturer, importer and dealer of the telecom equipment (i.e., mobile phones) engaged in sale or import of any telecom equipment in India is required to mandatorily obtain a certificate from Telecommunication Engineering Centre and mark or affix the equipment with the appropriate certification label. Additionally, in order to obtain the Certification, it is mandatory that the equipment needs to be tested only from a designated Conformance Assessment Body (“CAB”) or recognized CAB of Mutual Recognition Agreement partner country. The Certification Procedure mandates the certification of mobile handsets manufactured by mobile manufacturers and mobile manufacturer cannot sell the mobile handsets without such certification.

Do Mobile is not engaged in manufacturing mobile handsets and outsources such manufacture to third-party manufacturers. We believe the Certification Procedure will be applicable to such third-party manufacturers. The cost of obtaining the certification will result in an increase of the cost of mobile handsets and thus, may impact sales of mobile handsets of Do Mobile. Therefore, we will be required to more carefully assess the market when launching new models of our products and the new certification regulations could delay the launch of new products, which impacts our operations and revenue negatively.

Do Mobile is non-compliant with respect to certain issuances of its share capital and may be subject to regulatory action by the Registrar of Companies and Ministry of Corporate Affairs, which could adversely affect our business operations and profitability.

Do Mobile, being an Indian company, is required to comply with certain procedures with respect to its share capital. However, there have been some lapses on the part of Do Mobile with respect to its share capital. Procedural lapses include but are not limited to:

Do Mobile may be subject to regulatory action by the Registrar of Companies and Ministry of Corporate Affairs on account of the aforesaid non-compliances in relation to issuance of its share capital, thus exposing it to certain fines and penalties. Directors and key management of Do Mobile are also liable for such non-compliance and may be subjected to fines and penalties.

While no penalties have been imposed on Do Mobile for the aforesaid non-compliance thus far, Do Mobile cannot assure that any regulatory authorities will not impose any penalty on Do Mobile or will not take any penal action with respect to the aforesaid non-compliance. If any adverse actions are taken against Do Mobile, results of operations and profitability of Do Mobile could be adversely affected.

Do Mobile is delayed in complying with reporting guidelines under the provisions of the Foreign Exchange Management (Non-debt Instruments) Rules, 2019 (which replaced erstwhile Foreign Exchange Management (Transfer or issue of security by a person resident outside India) Regulations, 2017) and may be subject to regulatory action by the Reserve Bank of India, which could adversely affect our business and operations.

Under the extant provisions of Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 read with Foreign Exchange Management (Non-debt Instruments) Rules, 2019, every Indian company receiving foreign direct investment for issuance of shares shall within a period of 30 days from the date of issue of shares to the foreign entity file a form FC-GPR (now part of Single Entity Master Form) with the Reserve Bank of India. There has been some delay on the part of Do Mobile in complying with aforesaid filing of form FC-GPR within the stipulated timelines. Also, in terms of the Foreign Exchange Management (Non-debt Instruments) Rules, 2019, an Indian company receiving foreign direct investment must file an annual report titled ‘Foreign Liabilities and Assets’ (“FLA”) on or before July 15 of each year. Do Mobile has not filed its FLA for the financial year 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20 with the Reserve Bank of India. While no penalties have been imposed on Do Mobile for the aforesaid non-compliances thus far; there cannot be any assurance that Reserve Bank of India will not impose any penalty on Do Mobile or will not take any penal action in relation aforesaid non-compliances. If any penalties or other penal measures are enforced, this could adversely affect our business and operations.

Any foreign direct investment in Do Mobile from an entity of a country, which shares a land border with India or the beneficial owner of an investment into India who is situated in or is a citizen of any such country, shall invest only with governmental approval. Any delay in obtaining such governmental approval could adversely affect business operations and cash flow position of Do Mobile.

Do Mobile liquidity and its working capital requirements are mainly met through foreign direct investment. Do Mobile’s potential investors are either based out of China, or such investments are from persons or entities whose ultimate beneficial ownership is situated in or is from a citizen of such countries which share land borders with India including China. Additionally, as per current corporate structure, Mr. Bao Minfei, who is a citizen of China, holds ultimate beneficial ownership in Do Mobile indirectly through various subsidiaries. The Government of India vide Notification S.O. 1278 (E) dated April 22, 2020 (i.e., Foreign Exchange Management (Non-debt Instruments) Amendment Rules, 2020) introduced a crucial amendment in the provisions of the FEMA Rules and has now stipulated that any investment by an entity of a country, which shares land border with India, or where the beneficial owner of an investment into India is situated in or is a citizen of any such country, can be made only upon seeking prior approval of the Government of India. These restrictions will also apply in the case of transfer of ownership. Although Mr. Bao’s existing beneficial ownership in Do Mobile is not subject to approval, any new investment in Do Mobile by a Chinese entity or Chinese citizen or entities that are beneficially owned by Chinese entities or citizens, will be subject to prior approval of the Government of India. The Government of India will grant approval depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case. Any delay in receipt of such approvals, will adversely impact operations and cash flow position of Do Mobile and will put Do Mobile in a challenging position.

Risks Related to Our Ordinary Shares and Our Initial Public Offering

Prior to our April 2021 initial public offering, there had been no prior public market for our ordinary shares, and an active, liquid and orderly trading market for our ordinary shares may not develop or be maintained in the United States, which could limit your ability to sell our ordinary shares.

We cannot assure you that an active U.S. public market for our ordinary shares will be sustained after our initial public offering. If an active market does not continue, the value of our ordinary shares may be impaired and you may experience difficulty selling the ordinary shares that you purchase in our initial public offering.

Our ordinary share price may be volatile after the offering and, as a result, you could lose a significant portion or all of your investment.

The market price of the ordinary shares on Nasdaq may fluctuate after listing as a result of several factors, including the following:

Furthermore, the stock markets often experience significant price and volume fluctuations that have affected and continue to affect the market prices of equity securities of many companies. These fluctuations often have been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of those companies. These broad market and industry fluctuations, as well as general economic, political and market conditions such as recessions or interest rate changes may cause the market price of ordinary shares to decline.

Sales of a substantial number of our ordinary shares in the public market by our existing shareholders could cause our share price to fall.

Sales of a substantial number of our ordinary shares in the public market, or the perception that these sales might occur, could depress the market price of our ordinary shares and could impair our ability to raise capital through the sale of additional equity securities. We are unable to predict the effect that sales may have on the prevailing market price of our ordinary shares. All of the ordinary shares owned by our directors, officers and existing shareholders are subject to lock-up agreements with the underwriters in our initial public offering that restrict the shareholders’ ability to transfer our ordinary shares until after October 3, 2021. Substantially all of our outstanding ordinary shares will become eligible for unrestricted sale upon expiration of the lock-up period. In addition, ordinary shares issued or issuable upon exercise of options and warrants vested as of the expiration of the lock-up period will be eligible for sale at that time. Sales of ordinary shares by these shareholders could have a material adverse effect on the trading price of our ordinary shares.

There are no assurance that our securities, including our ordinary shares, will continue to be listed or, if listed, that we will be able to comply with the continued listing standards of Nasdaq, which could limit investors’ ability to make transactions in our securities and subject us to additional trading restrictions.

Even though our ordinary shares are currently listed on the NASDAQ, we cannot assure you that we will be able to meet NASDAQ’s continued listing requirement or maintain other listing standards. If our ordinary shares are delisted by NASDAQ, and we are not able to list our securities on another national securities exchange, we expect our securities could be quoted on an over-the-counter market. If this were to occur, then, we could face significant material adverse consequences, including:

The National Securities Markets Improvement Act of 1996, which is a federal statute, prevents or preempts the states from regulating the sale of certain securities, which are referred to as “covered securities.” If our ordinary shares remain listed on NASDAQ, our ordinary shares will be covered securities. Although the states are preempted from regulating the sale of our securities, the federal statute does allow the states to investigate companies if there is a suspicion of fraud, and, if there is a finding of fraudulent activity, then the states can regulate or bar the sale of covered securities in a particular case. If our securities were no longer listed on NASDAQ and therefore not “covered securities”, we would be subject to regulation in each state in which we offer our securities.

Future issuance of our ordinary shares could cause dilution of ownership interests and adversely affect our stock price.

We may choose to raise additional capital due to market conditions or strategic considerations even if we believe we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans. To the extent that additional capital is raised through the sale of our equity or convertible debt securities, the issuance of such securities could result in further dilution to our shareholders or result in downward pressure on the price of our ordinary shares

Shares eligible for future sale may depress our stock price.

As of the date of this report, we had 8,267,793 ordinary shares outstanding. All of the ordinary shares of held by affiliates are restricted or control securities under Rule 144 promulgated under the Securities Act. Sales of ordinary shares under Rule 144 or another exemption under the Securities Act or pursuant to a registration statement could have a material adverse effect on the price of the ordinary shares and could impair our ability to raise additional capital through the sale of equity securities.

We may issue preferred shares to investor that grant them superior rights than holders of our ordinary shares without obtaining shareholder approval.

Our amended and restated memorandum and articles of association authorize our board of directors to issue one or more series of preferred shares and set the terms of the preferred shares without seeking any further approval from our shareholders. Any preferred shares that are issued may rank ahead of our ordinary shares, in terms of dividends, liquidation rights and voting rights.

If securities or industry analysts do not publish or cease publishing research reports about us, if they adversely change their recommendations regarding our ordinary shares or if our operating results do not meet their expectations, the price of our ordinary shares could decline.

The trading market for our ordinary shares 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 currently publish limited research on us. If there is limited or no securities or industry analyst coverage of our company, the market price and trading volume of our ordinary shares would likely be negatively impacted. Moreover, if any of the analysts who may cover us downgrade our ordinary shares, provide more favorable relative recommendations about our competitors or if our operating results or prospects do not meet their expectations, the market price of our ordinary shares could decline. If any of the analysts who may cover us were to cease coverage or fail to regularly publish reports on us, we could lose visibility in the financial markets, which in turn could cause our share price or trading volume to decline.

As a foreign private issuer, we are subject to different U.S. securities laws and NASDAQ governance standards than domestic U.S. issuers. This may afford less protection to holders of our ordinary shares, and you may not receive corporate and company information and disclosure that you are accustomed to receiving or in a manner in which you are accustomed to receiving it.

As a foreign private issuer, the rules governing the information that we disclose differ from those governing U.S. corporations pursuant to the Exchange Act. Although we intend to report quarterly financial results and report certain material events, we are not required to file quarterly reports on Form 10-Q or provide current reports on Form 8-K disclosing significant events within four days of their occurrence and our quarterly or current reports may contain less information than required for domestic issuers. In addition, we are exempt from the SEC’s proxy rules, and proxy statements that we distribute will not be subject to review by the SEC. Our exemption from Section 16 rules regarding sales of ordinary shares by insiders means that you will have less data in this regard than shareholders of U.S. companies that are subject to the Exchange Act. As a result, you may not have all the data that you are accustomed to having when making investment decisions with respect to U.S. public companies.

As a foreign private issuer, we are exempt from complying with certain corporate governance requirements of the NASDAQ applicable to a U.S. issuer. As the corporate governance standards applicable to us are different than those applicable to domestic U.S. issuers, you may not have the same protections afforded under U.S. law and the Nasdaq Stock Market rules as shareholders of companies that do not have such exemptions.

We may lose our foreign private issuer status in the future, which could result in significant additional costs and expenses.

We could cease to be a foreign private issuer if a majority of our outstanding voting securities are directly or indirectly held of record by U.S. residents and we fail to meet additional requirements necessary to avoid loss of foreign private issuer status. The regulatory and compliance costs to us under U.S. securities laws as a U.S. domestic issuer may be significantly higher than costs we incur as a foreign private issuer, which could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial results.

As an “emerging growth company” under the JOBS Act, we are allowed to postpone the date by which we must comply with some of the laws and regulations intended to protect investors and to reduce the amount of information we provide in our reports filed with the SEC, which could undermine investor confidence in our company and adversely affect the market price of our ordinary shares.

For so long as we remain an “emerging growth company” as defined in the JOBS Act, we have taken and intend to continue to take advantage of certain exemptions from various requirements that are applicable to public companies that are not “emerging growth companies” including:

We have taken and intend to continue to take advantage of certain of these exemptions until we are no longer an “emerging growth company.” We will remain an emerging growth company until the earlier of: (1) the last day of the fiscal year (a) following the fifth anniversary of the completion of our initial public offering, (b) in which we have total annual gross revenue of at least $1.07 billion, or (c) in which we are deemed to be a large accelerated filer, which means the market value of our ordinary shares that is held by non-affiliates exceeds $700 million as of the last business day of our most recently completed second fiscal quarter, and (2) the date on which we have issued more than $1 billion in non-convertible debt during the prior three-year period.

We have incurred and will continue to incur increased costs as a result of becoming a public company in the United States.

As a newly public company in the United States upon the completion of our IPO on April 8, 2021, we have incurred and will continue to incur significant legal, accounting, insurance and other expenses that we have not incurred when we were a private company, including costs associated with U.S. public company reporting requirements. We also have incurred and will incur costs associated with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and the Dodd Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and related rules implemented by the SEC and the NASDAQ.

If we are classified as a passive foreign investment company, United States taxpayers who own our ordinary shares may have adverse United States federal income tax consequences.

A non-U.S. corporation such as ourselves will be classified as a passive foreign investment company (“PFIC”) for any taxable year if, for such year, either

Passive income generally includes dividends, interest, rents and royalties (other than rents or royalties derived from the active conduct of a trade or business) and gains from the disposition of passive assets.

If we are determined to be a PFIC for any taxable year (or portion thereof) that is included in the holding period of a U.S. taxpayer who holds our ordinary shares, the U.S. taxpayer may be subject to increased U.S. federal income tax liability and may be subject to additional reporting requirements.

Taking the amount of cash we raised in our initial public offering into account, together with any other assets held for the production of passive income, it is possible that, for our 2021 taxable year or for any subsequent year, more than 50% of our assets may be assets which produce passive income. We will make this determination following the end of any particular tax year. Although the law in this regard is unclear, we treat our consolidated affiliated entities as being owned by us for United States federal income tax purposes, not only because we exercise effective control over the operation of such entities but also because we are entitled to substantially all of their economic benefits. For purposes of the PFIC analysis, in general, a non-U.S. corporation is deemed to own its pro rata share of the gross income and assets of any entity in which it is considered to own at least 25% of the equity by value.

For a more detailed discussion of the application of the PFIC rules to us and the consequences to U.S. taxpayers if we were determined to be a PFIC, see “Taxation — Material U.S. Federal Income Tax Considerations — Passive Foreign Investment Company”.