Posted by Social Science Research Network
Commercial Divisions of Public Entities and the Limits of EU Competition Law
By Jasper P. Sluijs (Utrecht University School of Law)
Competitive behavior of public entities is generally approached in the literature as concerning the traditional State-owned enterprises pursuing public interest or political economy objectives. However, increasingly we see examples of commercial divisions of public entities aiming to generate revenue—think of a commercial branch of a forestry service selling timber to construction firms to supplement its tax-based revenues. Because these commercial divisions enjoy various competitive advantages over their private competitors, their behavior may distort competition and market entry. A survey of Member States demonstrates that commercial divisions of public entities have become prevalent throughout the EU.
Whereas anticompetitive behavior by commercial divisions is generally approached by means of competition law principles across EU Member States, this article demonstrates that competition law may not apply because these commercial divisions may not qualify as ‘undertakings’ under competition law. For the commercial divisions that would be considered undertakings, abuse of dominance might be established on a substantive level. However, competition authorities face numerous procedural and institutional challenges when enforcing against commercial divisions of public entities.
The article then establishes two problematic consequences of the current approach to commercial divisions of public entities in the EU. First, an unequal playing field follows from the different treatment of private and public competitors in the application and enforcement of competition law. Second, the various competition law-inspired approaches towards commercial divisions of public entities hamper the internal market. The article concludes by suggesting possible remedies to these consequences: harmonization of competition law relating to anticompetitive behavior by commercial divisions, or enacting a standalone regulatory framework beyond competition law. Before resorting to these remedies, however, more research is necessary to appreciate and quantify the possible distortion of competition by commercial divisions of public entities, compile best-practice regulatory responses and further study effects on matters related to rule of law.
Featured News
Electrolux Fined €44.5 Million in French Antitrust Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Indian Antitrust Body Raids Alcohol Giants Amid Price Collusion Probe
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Attorneys Seek $525 Million in Fees in NCAA Settlement Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Italy’s Competition Watchdog Ends Investigation into Booking.com
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Minnesota Judge Approves $2.4 Million Hormel Settlement in Antitrust Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – CRESSE Insights
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Effective Interoperability in Mobile Ecosystems: EU Competition Law Versus Regulation
Dec 19, 2024 by
Giuseppe Colangelo
The Use of Empirical Evidence in Antitrust: Trends, Challenges, and a Path Forward
Dec 19, 2024 by
Eliana Garces
Some Empirical Evidence on the Role of Presumptions and Evidentiary Standards on Antitrust (Under)Enforcement: Is the EC’s New Communication on Art.102 in the Right Direction?
Dec 19, 2024 by
Yannis Katsoulacos
The EC’s Draft Guidelines on the Application of Article 102 TFEU: An Economic Perspective
Dec 19, 2024 by
Benoit Durand