Two Steps Forward and One Step Back?: US, EU and China’s Bilateral Antitrust Cooperation and International Trade

IF 0.7 Q2 LAW World Competition Pub Date : 2022-02-01 DOI:10.54648/woco2022003
Xiaoye Wang, Qianlan Wu
{"title":"Two Steps Forward and One Step Back?: US, EU and China’s Bilateral Antitrust Cooperation and International Trade","authors":"Xiaoye Wang, Qianlan Wu","doi":"10.54648/woco2022003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Greater antitrust enforcement is argued to have positive correlations with the promotion of international trade. By 2019, the US, the EU and China, as global trade powers, have formed and strengthened bilateral antitrust cooperation to seek greater enforcement. However, the impact of such development on international trade has remained underexamined. The article argues that irrespective of their different legal forces, the US-EU, US-China and EU-China antitrust cooperation share convergences at the optimum and minimum levels. Based on the case study of the US, the EU and China’s regulations of the international Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) panel cartel, the article illustrates that as the effects doctrine continues to serve as the main normative value underpinning antitrust cooperation, matured competition regimes lack the incentive to share information with new regimes, competition regimes converge to apply comity restrictively and the consultation mechanism plays a limited role in holding the sides accountable under bilateral cooperation. Consequently, international antitrust remains fragmented, positing restraints to trade. The article calls for reconsideration of the effects doctrine as part of the transnational normative repertoire shaping bilateral antitrust cooperation and for devising policy tools to guarantee minimum information exchange among agencies.\nUS, EU, China, International Antitrust, Bilateral Cooperation, Exchange of Information, Confidentiality, Comity, Consultation","PeriodicalId":43861,"journal":{"name":"World Competition","volume":"24 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Competition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/woco2022003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Greater antitrust enforcement is argued to have positive correlations with the promotion of international trade. By 2019, the US, the EU and China, as global trade powers, have formed and strengthened bilateral antitrust cooperation to seek greater enforcement. However, the impact of such development on international trade has remained underexamined. The article argues that irrespective of their different legal forces, the US-EU, US-China and EU-China antitrust cooperation share convergences at the optimum and minimum levels. Based on the case study of the US, the EU and China’s regulations of the international Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) panel cartel, the article illustrates that as the effects doctrine continues to serve as the main normative value underpinning antitrust cooperation, matured competition regimes lack the incentive to share information with new regimes, competition regimes converge to apply comity restrictively and the consultation mechanism plays a limited role in holding the sides accountable under bilateral cooperation. Consequently, international antitrust remains fragmented, positing restraints to trade. The article calls for reconsideration of the effects doctrine as part of the transnational normative repertoire shaping bilateral antitrust cooperation and for devising policy tools to guarantee minimum information exchange among agencies. US, EU, China, International Antitrust, Bilateral Cooperation, Exchange of Information, Confidentiality, Comity, Consultation
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
前进两步后退一步?美国、欧盟和中国的双边反垄断合作与国际贸易
更大的反垄断执法被认为与促进国际贸易有正相关。到2019年,美国、欧盟和中国作为全球贸易大国,已经形成并加强了双边反垄断合作,以寻求更大的执法力度。然而,这种发展对国际贸易的影响仍未得到充分审查。本文认为,尽管美欧、美中和欧中反垄断合作的法律力量不同,但它们在最优和最低水平上都存在趋同。本文通过对美国、欧盟和中国对国际液晶显示器(LCD)面板卡特尔监管的案例研究,说明由于效果原则继续作为支撑反垄断合作的主要规范价值,成熟的竞争制度缺乏与新制度共享信息的激励;竞争机制趋同于限制性地适用礼让,磋商机制在双边合作中对双方问责的作用有限。因此,国际反垄断仍然是碎片化的,对贸易构成了限制。文章呼吁重新考虑效果原则,将其作为影响双边反垄断合作的跨国规范的一部分,并制定政策工具以保证各机构之间最低限度的信息交换。美国、欧盟、中国、国际反垄断、双边合作、信息交流、保密、礼让、协商
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
25.00%
发文量
18
期刊介绍: Information not localized
期刊最新文献
The Decriminalization of Cartel Activity in Kuwait: A Regulatory Framework Collective or Collusive Agreements? World Competition Book Review: Regulation 1/2003 and EU Antitrust Enforcement: A Systematic Guide Kris Dekeyser, Céline Gauer, Johannes Laitenberger, Nils Wahl, Wouter Wils & Luca Prete (Alphen aan den Rijn: Wolters Kluwer 2023) Big Data Requests: The Commission’s Powers to Collect Documents in Investigations Under Articles 101 and 102 TFEU
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1