思考的燃料?CMA本地合并评估的发展

Q4 Social Sciences Competition Law Journal Pub Date : 2021-12-28 DOI:10.4337/clj.2021.04.01
D. Gore
{"title":"思考的燃料?CMA本地合并评估的发展","authors":"D. Gore","doi":"10.4337/clj.2021.04.01","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article considers ongoing developments in the Competition and Markets Authority's approach to local merger assessment as highlighted by its recent EG/Asda Phase I decision. The CMA appears to be moving away from its traditional two-stage approach of applying initial competition filters augmented by detailed local assessment of cases identified by those filters, and towards a binary system determined solely on the basis of mechanical rules. This shift has been justified on the grounds of procedural efficiency and as providing a more systematic approach to local merger review. This article demonstrates that the CMA's decisional practice shows that the move away from two-stage filtering is not justified by efficiency considerations, and that the emerging approach of using mechanical rules reduces the quality of merger control by disregarding relevant evidence at the expense of relatively crude structural thresholds. Whereas merger control over the past two decades has generally moved away from thresholds based on numbers of firms or market shares, the CMA's adoption of mechanical decision rules appears to be moving back towards such an approach for the Phase I assessment of local mergers. The new approach may be related to a more general CMA shift towards avoiding the risk of under-intervention in merger review, even if this is at the expense of increasing over-intervention. While the new approach to local merger review may be expected to generate greater intervention, however it will not address any perceived risk of under-intervention.","PeriodicalId":36415,"journal":{"name":"Competition Law Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Fuel for thought? Developments in CMA local merger assessment\",\"authors\":\"D. Gore\",\"doi\":\"10.4337/clj.2021.04.01\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article considers ongoing developments in the Competition and Markets Authority's approach to local merger assessment as highlighted by its recent EG/Asda Phase I decision. The CMA appears to be moving away from its traditional two-stage approach of applying initial competition filters augmented by detailed local assessment of cases identified by those filters, and towards a binary system determined solely on the basis of mechanical rules. This shift has been justified on the grounds of procedural efficiency and as providing a more systematic approach to local merger review. This article demonstrates that the CMA's decisional practice shows that the move away from two-stage filtering is not justified by efficiency considerations, and that the emerging approach of using mechanical rules reduces the quality of merger control by disregarding relevant evidence at the expense of relatively crude structural thresholds. Whereas merger control over the past two decades has generally moved away from thresholds based on numbers of firms or market shares, the CMA's adoption of mechanical decision rules appears to be moving back towards such an approach for the Phase I assessment of local mergers. The new approach may be related to a more general CMA shift towards avoiding the risk of under-intervention in merger review, even if this is at the expense of increasing over-intervention. While the new approach to local merger review may be expected to generate greater intervention, however it will not address any perceived risk of under-intervention.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36415,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Competition Law Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Competition Law Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4337/clj.2021.04.01\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Competition Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4337/clj.2021.04.01","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文考虑了竞争与市场管理局(Competition and Markets Authority)对当地合并评估方法的持续发展,正如其最近的EG/Asda第一阶段决定所强调的那样。CMA似乎正在摆脱其传统的两阶段方法,即应用初始竞争滤波器,并通过对这些滤波器识别的案例进行详细的局部评估来增强,转向完全基于机械规则确定的二进制系统。这种转变是合理的,理由是程序效率高,为地方合并审查提供了一种更系统的方法。这篇文章表明,CMA的决策实践表明,从效率考虑来看,放弃两阶段过滤是不合理的,而且新出现的使用机械规则的方法无视相关证据,以牺牲相对粗糙的结构阈值为代价,降低了合并控制的质量。尽管在过去二十年中,合并控制通常已经偏离了基于公司数量或市场份额的阈值,但CMA采用的机械决策规则似乎又回到了对本地合并进行第一阶段评估的方法。新方法可能与CMA更普遍地转向避免合并审查中干预不足的风险有关,即使这是以增加过度干预为代价的。虽然本地合并审查的新方法可能会产生更大的干预,但它不会解决任何干预不足的风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Fuel for thought? Developments in CMA local merger assessment
This article considers ongoing developments in the Competition and Markets Authority's approach to local merger assessment as highlighted by its recent EG/Asda Phase I decision. The CMA appears to be moving away from its traditional two-stage approach of applying initial competition filters augmented by detailed local assessment of cases identified by those filters, and towards a binary system determined solely on the basis of mechanical rules. This shift has been justified on the grounds of procedural efficiency and as providing a more systematic approach to local merger review. This article demonstrates that the CMA's decisional practice shows that the move away from two-stage filtering is not justified by efficiency considerations, and that the emerging approach of using mechanical rules reduces the quality of merger control by disregarding relevant evidence at the expense of relatively crude structural thresholds. Whereas merger control over the past two decades has generally moved away from thresholds based on numbers of firms or market shares, the CMA's adoption of mechanical decision rules appears to be moving back towards such an approach for the Phase I assessment of local mergers. The new approach may be related to a more general CMA shift towards avoiding the risk of under-intervention in merger review, even if this is at the expense of increasing over-intervention. While the new approach to local merger review may be expected to generate greater intervention, however it will not address any perceived risk of under-intervention.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Competition Law Journal
Competition Law Journal Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
15
期刊最新文献
If the Competition and Markets Authority were an emoji: merger clearance lessons from Meta/Giphy Economists on trial: how to make expert duties, meetings, and hot tubs work The UK and EU competition rules for research and development agreements: falling out of lockstep The assessment and communication of the benefits of competition interventions by the Competition and Markets Authority The risks of a form-based approach to exclusionary abuses of dominance – an economic perspective
×
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