Huang Yong: Antitrust and create a fair competition environment
(Source: "People's Daily"2014year11month3Day23version)
Anti-monopoly law has always been known as the "market constitution". Strengthening anti-monopoly will not only not hinder economic development, but will help build a more fair competition, mutual benefit, transparent and standardized market order, improve the investment and business environment, and make the market environment more legal and fair.
The modern antitrust system contains three pillars
19At the end of the century, during the Civil War and post-war reconstruction, some American capitalists accumulated huge wealth at an incredible speed and built a number of industrial empires that had an important impact on the U.S. and even the world economy through mergers and expansion, such as Carnegie Steel Group and Rockefeller Standard Oil Company. Industrial tycoons merged competing companies in the same industry in the form of trusts to manipulate product market prices and divide the market scope.
Some insightful people believe that through trusts, industrial giants have gradually gained full control over important industries including railways and oil, and used monopoly behavior to attack competitors and distort the market. The accompanying concentration of economic power poses a potential threat to democratic politics. Against this background, the Sherman Antitrust Act (referred to as the "Sherman Act"), named after Senator Sherman, was enacted189010434_10539191410835_10972
The EU also developed a complete antitrust law system in the decades after World War II to195711738_11849
Case1
Price manipulation, auto parts cartel faces heavy fines from the United States and Europe
201013313_133699In March, the Ministry of Justice announced that Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Mitsuba Electric, etc.9A Japanese auto parts manufacturer manipulates prices on seat belts, radiators, air conditioning systems and power steering components, among other products.
This year2In August, Japanese tire manufacturer Bridgestone reached an agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice, admitting that it violated the U.S. Sherman Act by manipulating the sales prices of auto parts and paying4.25$100 million fine. Recently, the Ministry of Justice once again announced that it has30Multiple auto parts company executives and27Parts manufacturers pleaded guilty and the total fine exceeded23billion US dollars, among which Japanese manufacturers, as industry giants, have become the "hardest hit area" of this investigation.
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said in the penalty statement that the price-fixing conspiracy affected the value of sales to U.S. automakers50More than 16860_16886|More than 100 million US dollars in auto parts, which in turn affects the purchases of American consumers2500More than 10,000 cars. It is precisely because these monopolistic behaviors make American consumers and businesses pay high prices for the products and services in their daily lives that the U.S. Department of Justice spends great efforts to crack down.
After the United States, the European Union has since2012An antitrust investigation into auto parts manufacturers has been launched since 2009, and the intensity and scale of the investigation are no less than those in the United States. Almunia, the European Commission's vice president for competition policy, said that if auto parts cartels are not challenged, they may harm competition in the automotive industry and artificially increase the price of cars for EU consumers. He hopes the fine will help restore competition in the industry.
Last year7In March, the European Commission imposed sanctions on Japanese Yazaki, German LEONI, and Japanese Yazaki’s European subsidiariesS—YSystem Technology Co., Ltd. and Furukawa Electric Co., Ltd. were punished for this reason4Companies are suspected of forming an auto parts cartel and manipulating product prices. this year3month,6Parts suppliers confessed to conspiring to form an automotive bearing cartel, including5Homes have been punished by the European Commission, including2European suppliers and3Japanese suppliers.
Case2
Suppressing opponents, Microsoft is accused of abusing its market dominance
1992In 2012, the U.S. Federal w88 Commission launched a long-term investigation into Microsoft's alleged abuse of its market dominance323138_231481995When the investigation reached an impasse, Netscape (Netscape) by launching navigator(Navigator) The rapid rise of browsers. Subsequently, Microsoft developedIEBrowser, competed with Netscape for the PC browser market. To suppress Netscape, Microsoft is pre-installing Windows for computer manufacturers95Bundled by exclusive contract when operating systemIE, resulting in a sharp decline in Netscape's market share.
1997year10In March, the Department of Justice filed a lawsuit in the federal court in the District of Columbia, accusing Microsoft of violating antitrust laws. The judge rejected the Justice Department's request and announced a temporary ban on Microsoft from integrating Windows withIEBundled sale. The following year, the Ministry of Justice and20The attorneys general of several states jointly filed a lawsuit against Microsoft6A monopoly accusation, which is vividly called the "trial of the century."2000In 2014, the court issued a first-instance judgment: Microsoft stopped operating in Windows95's bundled on saleIE, must not be tiedIEAs window95Conditions to the license agreement. Microsoft will be split into two parts, one specializing in computer operating systems and the otherIEand other software,10The two parts cannot be merged within the year. Microsoft immediately appealed, and the Federal Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled2001The court rejected some of the rulings to break up Microsoft, but for other accusations, the court required Microsoft and the Department of Justice to negotiate and come up with a solution. Ultimately, Microsoft spent18Billion dollars in settlements with states.
Although Microsoft has settled lawsuits in the United States, it remains mired in antitrust litigation elsewhere in the world. since1998After receiving a complaint from Sun Microelectronics in the United States and after several years of investigation,200430793_308544.97100 million euros (approximately40.1billion yuan) in huge fines.2006In 2017, the European Commission imposed another total fine on Microsoft2.8A fine of 100 million euros. Since then, Microsoft has bundled security software, desktop search tools, etc.IEThe browser has been severely punished by the EU many times.
Case3
Hindering competition, GE merger was rejected by the European Commission
2000year10In August, General Electric announced its bid400Acquisition of avionics giant Honeywell International for more than 100 million US dollars. The sales of these two companies last year respectively reached an astonishing1300billion dollars and250billion US dollars, so the transaction is regarded as the largest acquisition in General Electric's history. A merger would double the size of GE's already huge aircraft engine and services businesses and further develop its plastics, chemicals and industrial holdings. Although the boards of directors of both companies and Honeywell shareholders approved the merger agreement, the merger is still subject to approval by the antitrust authorities of the United States, Canada and the European Union under relevant laws.200135572_35600
According to regulations, the European Commission has the right to regulate the combined global annual sales of42billion US dollars, overall sales in Europe exceed2150Merger transactions involving US$36675_36747|will intervene, even if the target is an American company. During the review process, GE revised the merger plan many times in order to obtain approval, but even if it promised to abandon the merger and acquisition of Honeywell, the annual revenue of its subsidiaries amounted to22The aerospace industry sector worth US$100 million cannot meet the requirements of the European Commission.2001year7In August, the European Commission formally banned the merger because GE's acquisition of Honeywell would give GE a monopoly position in different markets and may use the aircraft leasing business to monopolize the aircraft engine and avionics markets, seriously hindering market competition in the aviation industry and causing consumers to pay higher prices. General Electric's acquisition of Honeywell was ultimately aborted.
The basic spirit is to protect the competitive landscape rather than competitors
Looking at antitrust incidents in the United States and the European Union, it can be seen that the basic spirit of antitrust law is to protect the competitive landscape, not to protect competitors. In the early stages of the implementation of antitrust laws, the U.S. Congress hoped that antitrust laws would “prevent the concentration of the U.S. economy by preserving a large number of small-scale competitors in commercial activities.”195539081_39299
In the middle of the last century, when the U.S. antitrust law was implemented, market structure was regarded as the key to determining whether a monopoly was constituted. It was believed that it was precisely because of the large scale of enterprises, high concentration, large market share, and difficulty in entry that monopolies were more likely to occur. Supported by this point of view,1984Year, AT&T (AT&T) was split into a company specializing in long-distance telephone servicesAT&TCompany and7A local phone company, a sensation. With the development of social economy, people gradually agree that, except for a very small number of behaviors that obviously restrict competition, whether a company's behavior is illegal needs to be comprehensively evaluated by combining law, economics and industry analysis.
As a policy tool for the state to regulate economic activities, from a legislative perspective, in order to adapt to the complexity, diversity, and variability of economic life, the systems and norms of antitrust laws in the United States and Europe are generally relatively principled. While clearly prohibiting various monopolistic behaviors, most of them leave room for exceptions or immunity systems; many norms are not either/or, simple judgments of right or wrong, but require rational analysis of effects.
From the perspective of law enforcement, the degree of leniency and severity of antitrust law enforcement is closely related to the stage and level of national economic development as well as market competition conditions. The identification and punishment of monopolistic behavior require comprehensive consideration of multiple factors and a balance between various policy objectives such as industrial policy, social public policy, and national interests, so as to maximize social interests and consumer interests.
The implementation of antitrust laws is guaranteed by independent, professional and authoritative law enforcement agencies and courts. U.S. antitrust enforcement forces include the Federal w88 Commission, the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice, and state governments. Federal w88 Commission Total1000Multiple professionals, the Department of Justice also has an assistant secretary in charge of the Antitrust Bureau, as well as hundreds of lawyers and economists to assist.
The staff size and allocation of the EU Competition Directorate are also similar to those of the United States. Equip a strong law enforcement force and set up independent agencies to support professional law enforcement. At the same time, through legal, economics, industry analysis and rigorous law enforcement procedures, we can minimize the government's unreasonable interference in economic activities and prevent the abuse of public power to avoid distorting competition. Not only that, the courts are also powerful guardians of antitrust laws. The U.S. Department of Justice, damaged companies, or ordinary consumers can file lawsuits against suspected monopolies. The EU Court of First Instance and the EU Court of Justice can also serve as avenues for injured businesses or consumers to seek compensation.
(The author of this article is a member of the Expert Advisory Group of the Anti-Monopoly Commission of the State Council)
News link:
http://paper.people.com.cn/rmrb/html/2014-11/03/nw.D110000renmrb_20141103_1-23.htm
Reprinted by Xinhuanet:http://news.xinhuanet.com/world/2014-11/03/c_127170074.htm
Reprinted by NetEase:http://news.163.com/14/1103/03/AA3LJ0DM00014AED.html
Reprinted by People’s Daily Online:http://sz.people.com.cn/n/2014/1103/c202846-22791087.html
