Targeted Transparency Control of Competitively Significant Links: Heading Towards Regulatory Overkill?

C. Rusu
{"title":"Targeted Transparency Control of Competitively Significant Links: Heading Towards Regulatory Overkill?","authors":"C. Rusu","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2714350","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"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.","PeriodicalId":114900,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Corporate Governance International (Topic)","volume":"96 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-11-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSN: Corporate Governance International (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2714350","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

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.
竞争重要环节的目标透明度控制:走向监管过度?
一段时间以来,欧盟的少数股权问题一直是欧盟委员会议程的重点。事实证明,在欧盟层面处理少数股权交易的执法/监管缺口不仅令竞争法执法者感到不安,也令可能与该体系打交道的市场参与者感到不安。2014年关于更有效的欧盟并购控制的白皮书(White Paper)将这场辩论推向了一个地步,提出了一种更明确的解决少数股权问题的方法:针对具有重要竞争意义的关联建立有针对性的透明度控制体系。虽然这一发展值得赞赏,但可能会提出有关这一拟议制度相称性的问题。除了讨论是否有必要对少数股权进行反垄断干预之外,这篇文章还强调了竞争重要环节的目标透明度控制系统的一些要素,这可能会让比例问题潜入其中。具体而言,该贡献解决了依赖交易各方自我评估可能导致的问题、短信息通知所包含的负担、等待期带来的成本和延误以及事后干预的风险。得出的结论是,比例性确实是一个难以解决的问题。然而,控制体系的相称性是其正确运作的关键,最终也是欧盟内部市场法律范围吸引力的关键。在这方面,白皮书的一些建议似乎需要在相称性方面进行更多的思考。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信