A prominent U.S. lobby group representing tech giants Google, Amazon and Apple has called on India to reassess its proposed competition law, arguing that new regulations on data use and preferential treatment of partners could lead to higher costs for users.
This appeal was made in a letter from the U.S.-India Business Council (USIBC), a part of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, to India’s Corporate Affairs Ministry on May 15.
The Indian government’s move comes in response to the increasing market dominance of a few large digital companies in the country. In February, a government panel recommended imposing new obligations on these firms through a proposed “Digital Competition Bill” designed to complement existing regulations. The panel criticized the current enforcement mechanisms as “time-consuming,” according to a Reuters report.
Read more: Google Accuses India’s Competition Commission of Protecting Amazon
The proposed India competition law is modeled after the European Union’s landmark Digital Markets Act of 2022. It targets major firms with a global turnover exceeding $30 billion and at least 10 million local users, thereby encompassing some of the world’s largest tech companies. Key provisions of the proposed bill include prohibiting companies from exploiting non-public user data and from giving preferential treatment to their own services over those of competitors. It also aims to lift restrictions on downloading third-party apps.
USIBC’s letter, which has not been made public but was seen by Reuters, argues that the proposed Indian law goes “much further in scope” than the EU’s regulations. The group contends that the strategies employed by tech companies to launch new features and enhance user security could be severely impacted. They warn that these measures, if implemented, could hamper innovation and result in higher costs for consumers.
Source: Reuters
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