Wins Finance Holdings (WINSF) Risk Analysis

We are a Cayman Islands company and our major operations are located in the PRC, and almost all of our assets and subsidiaries are located in the PRC. Most of our directors and senior management reside within the PRC. The assets of these Directors and senior management are also located within the PRC. As a result, it may not be possible to effect service of process upon most of our Directors and senior management outside the PRC. Moreover, the PRC does not have treaties providing for reciprocal recognition and enforcement of court judgments in the United States. As a result, in the PRC, recognition and enforcement of court judgments from the jurisdictions mentioned above may be difficult or impossible in relation to any matter that is not subject to a binding arbitration provision.

In late 2012, the SEC commenced administrative proceedings under Rule 102(e) of its Rules of Practice and also under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 against the mainland Chinese affiliates of the "Big Four" accounting firms (including the mainland Chinese affiliate of our independent registered public accounting firm). A first instance trial of the proceedings in July 2013 in the SEC's internal administrative court resulted in an adverse judgment against the firms. The administrative law judge proposed penalties on the Chinese accounting firms including a temporary suspension of their right to practice before the SEC, although that proposed penalty did not take effect pending review by the Commissioners of the SEC. On February 6, 2015, before a review by the Commissioner had taken place, the Chinese accounting firms reached a settlement with the SEC whereby the proceedings were stayed. Under the settlement, the SEC accepted that future requests by the SEC for the production of documents would normally be made to the CSRC. The Chinese accounting firms would receive requests matching those under Section 106 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and would be required to abide by a detailed set of procedures with respect to such requests, which in substance require them to facilitate production via the CSRC. The CSRC for its part initiated a procedure whereby, under its supervision and subject to its approval, requested classes of documents held by the accounting firms could be sanitized of problematic and sensitive content so as to render them capable of being made available by the CSRC to US regulators. Under the terms of the settlement, the underlying proceeding against the four PRC-based accounting firms was deemed dismissed with prejudice at the end of four years starting from the settlement date, which was on February 6, 2019. Despite the final ending of the proceedings, the presumption is that all parties will continue to apply the same procedures: i.e. the SEC will continue to make its requests for the production of documents to the CSRC, and the CSRC will normally process those requests applying the sanitization procedure. We cannot predict whether, in cases where the CSRC does not authorize production of requested documents to the SEC, the SEC will further challenge the four PRC-based accounting firms' compliance with U.S. law. While these issues raised by the proceedings are not specific to our independent registered public accounting firm or to us, they potentially affect equally all PCAOB-registered audit firms based in China and all businesses based in China (or with substantial operations in China) with securities listed in the United States. In the event that the SEC restarts the administrative proceedings, depending upon the final outcome, public companies in the United States with major PRC operations may find it difficult or impossible to retain auditors in respect of their operations in the PRC, which could result in financial statements being determined to not be in compliance with the requirements of the Exchange Act, including possible delisting. Moreover, although our independent registered public accounting firm was not named as a defendant in the above SEC administrative proceedings, any negative news about any such future proceedings against these accounting firms may cause investor uncertainty regarding China-based, United States-listed companies, and the market price of our shares may be adversely affected. If our independent registered public accounting firm were denied, even temporarily, the ability to practice before the SEC and we were unable to timely find another registered public accounting firm to audit and issue an opinion on our financial statements, our financial statements could be determined not to be in compliance with the requirements of the Exchange Act. Such a determination could ultimately ordinary shares from the Nasdaq or deregistration from the SEC, which would substantially reduce or effectively terminate the trading of our ordinary shares in the United States. Trading in our securities may be prohibited under the Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act if the PCAOB determines that it cannot inspect or fully investigate our auditor. In that case, our securities may no longer be permitted to trade on the over tehvocounter marklet. The delisting of our securities, or the threat of their being delisted, may materially and adversely affect the value of your investment. Additionally, the inability of the PCAOB to conduct inspections may deprive our investors with the benefits of such inspections. The Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act, or the HFCAA, was enacted on December 18, 2020. The HFCAA states if the SEC determines that we have filed audit reports issued by a registered public accounting firm that has not been subject to inspection by the PCAOB for three consecutive years beginning in 2021, the SEC shall prohibit our shares or other securities from being traded on a national securities exchange or in the over the counter trading market in the U.S.. Our current auditor, the independent registered public accounting firm that issues the audit report included elsewhere in this annual report, as an auditor of companies that are traded publicly in the United States and a firm registered with the PCAOB, is subject to laws in the United States pursuant to which the PCAOB conducts regular inspections to assess its compliance with the applicable professional standards. However, if it is later determined that the PCAOB is unable to inspect or investigate completely our auditor because of a position taken by an authority in a foreign jurisdiction, the SEC could prohibit them from being traded on a national securities exchange or in the over the counter trading market in the U.S. If our securities are prohibited from being traded on a national securities exchange or in the over the counter trading market in the U.S. due to the PCAOB not being able to conduct inspections or full investigations of our auditor, it would substantially impair your ability to sell or purchase our securities when you wish to do so, and the risk and uncertainty associated with potential delisting and prohibition could have a negative impact on the price of our securities. Also, such delisting and prohibition could significantly affect the Company's ability to raise capital on acceptable terms, or at all, which could have a material adverse effect on the Company's business, financial condition and prospects. In May 2013, the PCAOB announced that it had entered into a Memorandum of Understanding on Enforcement Cooperation with the 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 in the PRC or by the CSRC or the PRC Ministry of Finance in the United States. 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 the PCAOB and audit Chinese companies that trade on U.S. exchanges. On March 24, 2021, the SEC adopted interim final rules relating to the implementation of certain disclosure and documentation requirements of the HFCAA. We will be required to comply with these rules if the SEC identifies us as having a "non-inspection" year under a process to be subsequently established by the SEC. On June 22, 2021, the U.S. Senate passed a bill which, if passed by the U.S. House of Representatives and signed into law, would reduce the number of consecutive non-inspection years required for triggering the prohibitions under the HFCAA from three years to two. On November 5, 2021, the SEC approved the PCAOB's Rule 6100, Board Determinations Under the Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act. Rule 6100 provides a framework for the PCAOB to use when determining, as contemplated under the HFCAA, whether it is unable to inspect or investigate completely registered public accounting firms located in a foreign jurisdiction because of a position taken by one or more authorities in that jurisdiction. On December 2, 2021, the SEC issued amendments to finalize rules implementing the submission and disclosure requirements in the Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act. The rules apply to registrants that the SEC identifies as having filed an annual report with an audit report issued by a registered public accounting firm that is located in a foreign jurisdiction and that PCAOB is unable to inspect or investigate completely because of a position taken by an authority in foreign jurisdictions. On August 26, 2022, the PCAOB entered into a Statement of Protocol with the China Securities Regulatory Commission and the Ministry of Finance of the PRC and, as summarized in the "Statement on Agreement Governing Inspections and Investigations of Audit Firms Based in China and Hong Kong" published on the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission's official website, the parties agreed to the following: (i) in accordance with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the PCAOB shall have independent discretion to select any issuer audits for inspection or investigation; (ii) the PCAOB shall have direct access to interview or take testimony from all personnel of the audit firms whose issuer engagements are being inspected or investigated; (iii) the PCAOB shall have the unfettered ability to transfer information to the SEC, in accordance with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act; and (iv) the PCAOB inspectors shall have access to complete audit work papers without any redactions, with view-only procedures for certain targeted pieces of information such as personally identifiable information. The PCAOB is required to reassess its determinations as to whether it is able to carry out inspection and investigation completely and without obstruction by the end of 2022. The SEC may propose additional rules or guidance that could impact us if our auditor is not subject to PCAOB inspection. For example, on August 6, 2020, the President's Working Group on Financial Markets, or the PWG, issued the Report on Protecting United States Investors from Significant Risks from Chinese Companies to the then President of the United States. This report recommended the SEC implement five recommendations to address companies from jurisdictions that do not provide the PCAOB with sufficient access to fulfill its statutory mandate. Some of the concepts of these recommendations were implemented with the enactment of the HFCAA. However, some of the recommendations were more stringent than the HFCAA. For example, if a company was not subject to PCAOB inspection, the report recommended that the transition period before a company would be delisted would end on January 1, 2022. The SEC has announced that the SEC staff is preparing a consolidated proposal for the rules regarding the implementation of the HFCAA and to address the recommendations in the PWG report. It is unclear when the SEC will complete its rulemaking and when such rules will become effective and what, if any, of the PWG recommendations will be adopted. The SEC has also announced amendments to various annual report forms to accommodate the certification and disclosure requirements of the HFCAA. There could be additional regulatory or legislative requirements or guidance that could impact us if our auditor is not subject to PCAOB inspection. The implications of these possible regulations in addition to the requirements of the HFCAA are uncertain, and such uncertainty could cause the market price of our securities to be materially and adversely affected. If, for whatever reason, the PCAOB is unable to conduct inspections or full investigations of our auditor, the Company could be delisted or prohibited from being traded over the counter earlier than would be required by the HFCAA. If our securities are unable to be listed on another securities exchange by then, such delisting and prohibition would substantially impair your ability to sell or purchase our securities when you wish to do so, and the risk and uncertainty associated with potential delisting and prohibition could have a negative impact on the price of our securities. Also, such delisting and prohibition could significantly affect the Company's ability to raise capital on acceptable terms, or at all, which would have a material adverse effect on the Company's business, financial condition and prospects. Inspections of audit firms that the PCAOB has conducted 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. If the PCAOB were unable to conduct inspections or full investigations of the Company's auditor, investors in our securities would be deprived of the benefits of such PCAOB inspections. In addition, the inability of the PCAOB to conduct inspections or full investigations of auditors would may make it more difficult to evaluate the effectiveness of the Company's independent registered public accounting firm's audit procedures or quality control procedures as compared to auditors that are subject to the PCAOB inspections, which could cause investors and potential investors in our stock to lose confidence in the audit procedures of our auditor and reported financial information and the quality of our financial statements. The PRC government may intervene or influence our operations at any time or may exert more control over offerings conducted overseas and foreign investment in China based issuers, which could result in a material change in our business operations and/or the value of our securities. Additionally, the governmental and regulatory interference could significantly limit or completely hinder our ability to offer or continue to offer securities to investors and cause the value of such securities to significantly decline or be worthless. Statements by the Chinese government in 2021 have indicated an intent to exert more oversight and control over offerings that are conducted overseas and/or foreign investments in China-based issuers. The PRC has proposed new rules in 2021 that would require companies collecting or holding large amounts of data to undergo a cybersecurity review prior to listing in foreign countries, a move that would significantly tighten oversight over China based internet giants. On November 14, 2021, the Cyberspace Administration of China, or CAC, has publicly solicited opinion on the Regulation on Network Data Security Management (Consultation Draft), which stipulates that data processor that undertakes data processing activities using Internet networks within China shall apply for the cybersecurity review if it conducts data processing activities that will or may have an impact on the national security. The review is mandatory if the data processor controls more than 1 million users' personal information and intends to be listed or traded in a foreign country, or if the data processor that will or may impact the national security seeks to be listed in Hong Kong. As of the date of this report, the Draft Regulation on Network Data Security Management has not been formally adopted. On December 28, 2021, the Cyberspace Administration of China, jointly with 12 departments under the State Council, promulgated the Measures for Cybersecurity Review, which became effective on February 15, 2022. According to the Measures for Cybersecurity Review, operators of critical information infrastructure purchasing network products and services, and data processors carrying out data processing activities that affect or may affect national security, shall conduct cyber security review. An operator, including operators of critical information infrastructure and data processors, who controls more than 1 million users' personal information must report to the Cyber Security Review Office for a cybersecurity review if it intends to be listed or traded in a foreign country. As we are not incolved in the collection of user data, implicate cybersecurity, or involve any other type of restricted industry, we do not believe that we are subject to the CAC or CSRC. Uncertainties still exist, however, due to the possibility that laws, regulations, or policies in the PRC could change rapidly in the future. Any future action by the PRC government expanding the categories of industries and companies whose foreign securities offerings are subject to review by the CSRC or the CAC could significantly limit or completely hinder our ability to remain publicly traded in the U.S.

We may need to raise additional funds in the future to finance internal growth, to make acquisitions or for other reasons. Any required additional financing may not be available on terms acceptable to us, or at all. If we raise additional funds by issuing equity securities, you may experience significant dilution of your ownership interest and the newly issued securities may have rights senior to those of the holders of our ordinary shares. Alternatively, if we raise additional funds by obtaining loans from third parties, the terms of those financing arrangements may include negative covenants or other restrictions on our business that could impair our operational flexibility, and would also require us to fund additional interest expense. If additional financing is not available when required or is not available on acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully commercialize our product or continue our research and development.

Pursuant to the merger agreement with Wins Finance Group Ltd. ("WFG") we issued 16,800,000 or our ordinary shares to the former shareholders of WFG. Pursuant to the merger agreement, the WFG shareholders are restricted from selling any of the ordinary shares that they received as a result of the merger during the twelve-month period after the closing date of the merger, subject to certain exceptions, and the former shareholders of WFG were required to enter into lock-up agreements to such effect. Subject to these restrictions, the Company entered into an amended and restated registration rights agreement at the closing of the merger with the former shareholders of WFG pursuant to which such holders were granted certain demand and "piggy-back" registration rights with respect to their securities. Furthermore, the former shareholders of WFG may sell our ordinary shares pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act, if available, rather than under a registration statement. In these cases, the resales must meet the criteria and conform to the requirements of that rule, including waiting until one year after our filing with the SEC of a Current Report on Form 8-K containing Form 10 type information reflecting the transactions with WFG. Upon expiration of the applicable lock-up periods, and upon effectiveness of any registration statement we file pursuant to the amended and restated registration rights agreement or upon satisfaction of the requirements of Rule 144 under the Securities Act, the former shareholders of WFG may sell large amounts of our ordinary shares in the open market or in privately negotiated transactions, which could have the effect of increasing the volatility in our stock price or putting significant downward pressure on the price of our stock. Also pursuant to the amended and restated registration rights agreement, the initial shareholders of Sino Mercury Acquisition Corp. ("Sino") are entitled to make a demand that we register the resale of their initial shares at any time commencing three months prior to the date on which their shares may be released from escrow. The presence of these additional ordinary shares trading in the public market may have an adverse effect on the market price of our securities.

The trading market for our securities will depend in part on the research and reports that securities or industry analysts publish about us or our business. If one or more of the analysts who covers us downgrades our securities, the price of our securities would likely decline. If one or more of these analysts ceases to cover us or fails to publish regular reports on us, interest in the purchase of our securities could decrease, which could cause the price of our securities and their trading volume to decline.

Our stock price has been and is likely to continue to be volatile. The stock market in general has, and we in particular have, experienced extreme volatility that has often been unrelated to the operating performance of our company. This volatility may be due, in part, to the small number of our ordinary shares which are publicly tradeable. As a result of this volatility, investors may not be able to sell their securities at or above the price at which they purchased such securities. Broad market and industry factors may negatively affect the market price of our ordinary shares, regardless of our actual operating performance. Further, a systemic decline in the financial markets and related factors beyond our control may cause our share price to decline rapidly and unexpectedly.

Beginning in November 2016 and through June 2017, our stock price experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations having nothing to do with the performance of our business. We do not know the cause of such fluctuations, but such fluctuations have resulted in significant adverse consequences to us. Class action litigations have been filed against us due to such fluctuations and the trading halt instituted by Nasdaq, on which we were listed at the time. Although we do not believe that the class action litigations have any merit, we cannot predict the outcome of the litigations, or whether other regulatory agencies (such as the SEC), will proceed against us. If a judgment is entered against us in the class action litigations or if a regulatory agency take action against us, our business may suffer and the value of our ordinary shares may significantly decrease.