Targeted Transparency Control of Competitively Significant Links: Heading Towards Regulatory Overkill?
Posted by Social Science Research Network
Catalin S. Rusu (Radboud University)
Abstract: The minority shareholdings problem in the EU has been headlining the Commission’s agenda for some time now. The matter of an enforcement/regulatory gap in handling minority stakes transactions at EU level proves to be disconcerting not only for competition law enforcers, but also for the market players that are likely to deal with the system. The 2014 White Paper on more effective EU merger control has taken the debate to the point of putting forward a clearer method of tackling minority shareholdings: a targeted transparency control system of competitively significant links. While this development is to be appreciated, questions relating this proposed system’s proportionality may be raised. Going beyond the discussion of whether antitrust intervention is warranted at all for minority shareholdings, this contribution highlights some elements of the targeted transparency control system of competitively significant links, which may allow for proportionality concerns to creep in. Specifically, the contribution addresses the problems that may result from relying on the transaction parties’ self-assessment, the burdens embedded in the short information notice, the costs and delays brought about by the waiting period, and the risks of ex-post intervention. The conclusion is drawn that proportionality is indeed a concern difficult to settle. Yet, the control system’s proportionality is key to its correct functioning, and at the end of the day, to the attractiveness of the EU Internal Market’s legal ambit. In this respect, some of the White Paper’s proposals seem to require more thought on the proportionality end.
Featured News
Judge Appoints Law Firms to Lead Consumer Antitrust Litigation Against Apple
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Epic Health Systems Seeks Dismissal of Antitrust Suit Filed by Particle Health
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Qualcomm Secures Partial Victory in Licensing Dispute with Arm, Jury Splits on Key Issues
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Google Proposes Revised Revenue-Sharing Limits Amid Antitrust Battle
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Japan’s Antitrust Authority Expected to Sanction Google Over Monopoly Practices
Dec 22, 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