DOCSLIB.ORG

The Inside Track on Competition Law and Regulatory Change 2018 An

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

An Acuris Company The inside track on competition law and regulatory change 2018 Global Trends Monitor PaRR-Global.com An Acuris Company Table of Contents Edited by Sylwester Gumienny Raymond Barrett Research Editor & Managing Editor Introduction 01 USA 37 APAC 04 2017 Year in Review Most Active Jurisdictions, Sectors & Fines PaRR Statistics: M&A China 07 Sectors 2017 Year in Review 2018 Outlook PaRR Statistics: M&A Americas (excluding USA) 41 Sectors & Fines Sectors & fines Most active regional enforcers 2018 Outlook 2018 Outlook EMEA 44 APAC 22 Most Active Jurisdictions, Sectors & Fines APAC 2017 Year in Review EU & NCAs PaRR Statistics: M&A in India 2017 Year in Review Sectors PaRR Statistics: M&A Americas 32 PaRR Statistics: Abuse of Dominance Most Active Jurisdictions, Sectors & Fines 2018 Outlook – EU NCAs Sectors 2018 Outlook PaRR-Global.com PaRR Global Trends Monitor 2018 Introduction 3 Introduction Raymond Barrett, Managing Editor PaRR Further information If 2017 was a year of surprises, 2018 promises While the US is still debating the merits of Another spectre looming on the horizon Get in touch or read more to be the year when a “new normal” takes “hipster antitrust”, the rest of the world has is protectionism. In Washington, Brussels, shape. Billion-dollar antitrust fines no longer moved ahead and grasped the nettle. The Berlin and Canberra there are moves afoot to have the same shock value as before. Vertical European Commission’s Margrethe Vestager reassess how foreign investment is screened, Raymond Barrett deals that in the past would have received oversaw a EUR 2.42bn fine against Google to account for more opaque concerns a cursory review are being challenged. Tech for abusing its dominance in online search, such as national security. Elsewhere, cries Cross navigation content giants with cutting–edge patent portfolios have while a probe of its Android operating system of discriminatory enforcement are heard, requires an internet connection. seen their entire business model questioned. is also expected to yield a hefty fine this year. whereby nation states stand accused of using Amidst this climate of change, impartial and Meanwhile, China, South Korea and Taiwan competition law as a tool of industrial policy. actionable insight from the regulatory capitals have all looked at Qualcomm’s patent licensing The idea that the antitrust and merger control of the globe has never been more valuable. in recent years—they did not like what they saw. worlds are somehow immune from these forces is wishful thinking. Therefore, it is my pleasure to share with you Numerous jurisdictions across the globe once again this year’s edition of PaRR’s Global have recently passed competition laws and We hope you find our report useful and, as Trends Monitor. Our global team has dissected are in the process of setting up enforcement always, your feedback is most welcome. the major developments and data points of agencies and a doctrine of active intervention the past twelve months while flagging many appears to be the ascendant philosophy. of the most pressing issues in the year ahead. Companies accustomed to relatively The digital economy is by far the dominant restrained enforcement must be conscious concern of antitrust enforcers around the that these new agencies will be keen to globe. From binge watching TV shows online to follow the lead of their more established the role of data in a merger review, the growth counterparts. Inaction is unlikely. of e-commerce and related industries has left antitrust enforcers with more questions than answers. Advocates of change insist that the old ways of looking at markets and competition are outmoded and need revision. PaRR-Global.com PaRR Global Trends Monitor 2018 APAC 4 Most Active Jurisdictions APAC - Most Active Jurisdictions* Y/Y Change 0 0 0 0 -2 1 1 -1 -5 2 1. China 2. India 3. Australia 4. South Korea 5. Hong Kong 6. Japan 7. Indonesia 8. Philippines 9. Taiwan 10. Malaysia * Competition rules are enforced in a variety of different ways Y/Y Change across the globe, and the level of fines imposed or number of 0 0 3 -1 2 -2 1 -1 2 0 investigations opened in a given jurisdiction is often used as a benchmark measure to indicate the strength of enforcement. Our ranking of enforcers considers other factors too: settlements, commitments, market studies and investigations as well—to a certain extent— as private actions, which are supposed to complement public enforcement, particularly in Europe. As fines are important, 11. New 12. Singapore 13. Pakistan 14. Thailand 15. Vietnam 16. Cambodia 17. Myanmar 18. Bangladesh 19. Sri Lanka 20. Nepal we present these separately. Zealand Together with the other factors they map out antitrust risk across the world. PaRR-Global.com PaRR Global Trends Monitor 2018 APAC 5 Sectors in Focus in 2017 APAC -Sectors in Focus in 2017* Top 10 Sectors in Focus Telecomm- Computer Telecomm- Consumer: Consumer: Construction Automotive Transportation unications Semi- unications Medical Media Foods Retail Hardware Conductor Carriers * Graph represents 2017 antitrust enforcement (excluding merger control) by industry. PaRR-Global.com PaRR Global Trends Monitor 2018 APAC 6 Fines Fines Fines for 2017 Fines Since 2014 Australia, Singapore, China, Japan & Taiwan Japan $1,000 China $66,380,000 $92,500,000 $800 Taiwan $777,800,000 $600 Millions $400 $200 Australia $26,900,000 0 2014 2015 2016 2017 *2017 does not include fines imposed in Singapore PaRR-Global.com PaRR Global Trends Monitor 2018 China 7 2017 Year in Review China 2017 Year in Review Further information In January, the Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) fined Canon Get in touch or read more for failing to notify its acquisition of Toshiba Medical Systems. In February, the government Apple’s local unit sued Qualcomm the same month, accusing Yuxuan Li the chipmaker of abusing its dominance and unfair patent announced new heads for MOFCOM licensing practices. and the National Development and Cross navigation content In February, the government announced new heads for requires an internet connection. MOFCOM and the National Development and Reform Reform Commission (NDRC). Commission (NDRC). The NDRC said in March that 11 shipping firms had reduced In July, the Auto Sales Management Measures were enforced. their terminal handling charges. A Lanzhou court reportedly found Nestle’s employees in In April, MOFCOM announced penalties against Cummins’ local the province of Gansu guilty of illicitly obtaining personal unit and its Chinese joint venture partner for failure to notify. information from hospital staff. The agency also green-lighted ChemChina’s USD 43bn JD.com and VIP.com criticized Alibaba’s Tmall for allegedly acquisition of Switzerland-based Syngenta. abusing its dominance. MOFCOM fined Meinian Onehealth Healthcare for failing to The NDRC fined two drugmakers for abuse of dominance in the notify its acquisition of Ciming Health Checkup. market for isoniazid active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs). In May, MOFCOM conditionally approved Dow and DuPont’s The regulator of Luoyang city fined a pharmaceutical company USD 130bn merger of equals. for bribing a public hospital. In June, the Cybersecurity Law took effect. Meanwhile, government agencies published a catalog of key network devices and special security products that require inspection. The Beijing municipal unit fined the local property management association and its members for implementing price monopoly agreements. PaRR-Global.com PaRR Global Trends Monitor 2018 China 8 2017 Year in Review The NDRC released industry association pricing guidance to MOFCOM cleared with conditions, in two separate orders, the help plug the gaps in the Anti-monopoly Law and Price Law. combination of Agrium and PotashCorp, and Danish shipping giant Maersk Line’s takeover of Hamburg Süd. The Zhejiang Provincial Price Bureau fined 17 paper manufacturers for colluding to hike the prices of whiteboard Meanwhile, several local ports committed to rectifying their sheet rolls. anticompetitive practices following an investigation by the NDRC. In August, the NDRC penalized 23 Shanxi power generators and the industry group for anticompetitive conduct. Also in November, the agency proposed to ‘comprehensively’ deepen price reforms in monopolistic industries, and published The Guangdong high court upheld a ruling against the price guidance on APIs and drugs prone to shortages. local education department, bringing to an end China’s first administrative monopoly case. MOFCOM conditionally approved Advanced Semiconductor Engineering’s acquisition of Siliconware Precision Industries. MOFCOM cleared with conditions Broadcom’s takeover of Brocade Communications Systems. In December, MOFCOM cleared Becton Dickinson’s USD 24bn takeover of C.R. Bard subject to conditions. In September, the NDRC fined 18 PVC manufacturers USD 69m for entering into agreements to hike product prices. The Hainan price bureau won a review appeal against a ruling in an RPM penalty case against Hainan Yutai Scientific Feed. The Beijing cyberspace administrator imposed penalties on Sina Weibo and Baidu for not fulfilling their obligations in regard to user content. Separately, its Guangdong counterpart fined Tencent over similar breaches. The NDRC published rules for the government’s pricing In September, the NDRC fined 18 PVC activities. manufacturers USD 69m for entering In October, MOFCOM conditionally approved HP’s USD 1.05bn acquisition of Samsung Electronics’ printing division. into agreements to hike product
Recommended publications
  • FTC Nominee Expected to Oppose Broad Privacy Rules

    FTC Nominee Expected to Oppose Broad Privacy Rules

    Portfolio Media. Inc. | 860 Broadway, 6th Floor | New York, NY 10003 | www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 | Fax: +1 646 783 7161 | [email protected] FTC Nominee Expected To Oppose Broad Privacy Rules By Bibeka Shrestha Law360, New York (September 2, 2011) -- If confirmed, Federal Trade Commission nominee Maureen Ohlhausen would likely call for greater transparency about privacy practices but fight comprehensive restrictions on the collection and use of consumer information, according to privacy experts. Should the Senate greenlight President Barack Obama's pick, Ohlhausen would leave her partner position at Wilkinson Barker Knauer LLP's privacy, data protection and cybersecurity practice to join the FTC's five-member board as its second Republican commissioner for a seven-year term starting Sept. 26. Ohlhausen would replace Republican Commissioner William Kovacic, who has served on the commission since January 2006. Experts say it would be surprising for the technology policy heavyweight to meekly sign on to FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz's privacy agenda, which seeks to set a minimum standard of conduct for companies across the board that collect personal information, rather than focusing on specific sectors like the financial industry. "As a general matter, I do not think that she would not support 'substantive' regulation — restrictions on what companies can collect and disclose or how they can use the information that they collect," said Andrew Smith, a Morrison & Foerster LLP partner who worked closely with Ohlhausen while at the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection. Leibowitz has sought to move past the notice-and-choice mechanism espoused under the George W.
  • Congressional Record United States Th of America PROCEEDINGS and DEBATES of the 115 CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION

    Congressional Record United States Th of America PROCEEDINGS and DEBATES of the 115 CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION

    E PL UR UM IB N U U S Congressional Record United States th of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 115 CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION Vol. 164 WASHINGTON, WEDNESDAY, MAY 9, 2018 No. 75 House of Representatives The House met at 10 a.m. and was housing. Now, in my district, in the ownership is out of the question. Even called to order by the Speaker pro tem- East Bay in northern California, the as a dedicated public servant, I can’t pore (Mr. COMER). average renter in Oakland would be afford to work in urban schools in the f forced to spend a staggering—mind Bay area. you, staggering—70 percent of their in- A former student wrote me: I had to DESIGNATION OF SPEAKER PRO come on housing if they were to move withdraw from classes at UC Berkeley TEMPORE today. That is 70 percent. Clearly, the so I could find stable housing and The SPEAKER pro tempore laid be- affordable housing crisis is off the scale enough income to afford my monthly fore the House the following commu- in my district. rent. nication from the Speaker: In April, I sent an email to my con- Mr. Speaker, our community, our WASHINGTON, DC, stituents asking for their stories and country, cannot function without May 9, 2018. suggestions on how to address this very nurses, teachers, or young people living I hereby appoint the Honorable JAMES important issue. Today I would like to in decent affordable housing. We need COMER to act as Speaker pro tempore on this share just a few of those stories which to solve this crisis before it is too late.
  • William E. Kovacic an Antitrust Tribute Liber Amicorum - Volume II

    William E. Kovacic an Antitrust Tribute Liber Amicorum - Volume II

    Editors Nicolas Charbit Elisa Ramundo Assistant Editors Anna M. Pavlik - Jessica Rebarber William E. Kovacic An Antitrust Tribute Liber Amicorum - Volume II Donald I. Baker, Jonathan B. Baker, Caron Beaton-Wells, Margaret Bloom, John DeQ. Briggs, George S. Cary, Andy C.M. Chen, Daniel A. Crane, Elaine Ewing, Eleanor M. Fox, Damien Geradin, Laurie-Anne Grelier, Omar Guerrero Rodríguez, Doris Hildebrand, Merit E. Janow, Joseph Kattan PC, Bruno Lasserre, Robert C. Marshall, Leslie M. Marx, Robert Ian McEwin, Andreas Mundt, Ali Nikpay, Maureen K. Ohlhausen, Julián Peña, Alan Ramírez Casazza, Patrick Rey, Simon Roberts, Jacques Steenbergen, John Terzaken, Thibaud Vergé, Florian Wagner-von Papp, Wouter P.J. Wils, Marc Winerman, Chris Wood, Joshua D. Wright. William E. Kovacic An Antitrust Tribute Liber Amicorum - Volume II Editors Nicolas Charbit Elisa Ramundo Assistant Editors Anna M. Pavlik - Jessica Rebarber © Institute of Competition Law, 2014 All rights reserved. No photocopying: copyright licenses do not apply. The information provided in this publication is general and may not apply in a specific situation. Legal advice should always be sought before taking any legal action based on the information provided. The publisher accepts no responsibility for any acts or omissions contained herein. Enquiries concerning reproduction should be sent to the Institute of Competition Law, at the address below. Copyright © 2014 by Institute of Competition Law 60 Broad Street, Suite 3502, NY 10004 www.concurrences.com [email protected] Printed in the United States of America First Printing, 2014 ISBN 978-1-939007-43-8 LCCN 2014940897 Publisher’s Cataloging-in-Publication (Provided by Quality Books, Inc.) William E.
  • DOJ's Antitrust Division

    DOJ's Antitrust Division

    THE COURAGE TO LEARN A RETROSPECTIVE ON ANTITRUST AND COMPETITION POLICY DURING THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION AND FRAMEWORK FOR A NEW, STRUCTURALIST APPROACH Krista Brown Lucas Kunce Reed Showalter Matt Buck Sarah Miller Matt Stoller Pat Garofalo Kalen Pruss Olivia Webb January 2021 economicliberties.us ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS For generously reviewing drafts and providing expert insight, Economic Liberties thanks Jeff Chester, Brandi Collins-Dexter, Eric Cramer, Joshua Davis, Jonathan Kanter, Lina Khan, John Kwoka, Frank Pasquale, Hal Singer, Shaoul Sussman, Zephyr Teachout, and Tommaso Valletti. For invaluable help in drafting and editing the Agriculture section, we thank Claire Kelloway. Any mistakes are our own. 2 THE COURAGE TO LEARN TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary 7 Introduction 8 Why Did Enforcers Fail Under the Obama Administration? 19 “Consumer Welfare” and the Creation of America’s Concentration Crisis 21 PART I: THE ANTITRUST AGENCIES DURING 24 THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION The 2008 Opportunity 25 DOJ and FTC Enforcement Against Single-Firm Conduct and Monopolization 30 Settlements 31 IDEXX 31 Intel 32 Pool Corp 32 Litigated Victory 33 McWane 33 DOJ and FTC Enforcement Against Anticompetitive Mergers 33 Significant Merger Challenges 40 Anheuser-Busch InBev and Grupo Modelo 41 Anheuser-Busch InBev and MillerCoors 42 Anthem and Cigna 42 Aetna and Humana 43 AT&T and T-Mobile 43 Comcast and Time Warner 44 H&R Block and TaxACT 45 Office Depot and Staples 46 Sysco and US Foods 47 The Failure of Settlement Strategies for Mergers 48 Hertz and Dollar
  • The Federal Trade Commission As an Independent Agency: Autonomy, Legitimacy, and Effectiveness

    The Federal Trade Commission As an Independent Agency: Autonomy, Legitimacy, and Effectiveness

    A9_KOVACIC & WINERMAN.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) 6/11/2015 8:15 PM The Federal Trade Commission as an Independent Agency: Autonomy, Legitimacy, and Effectiveness William E. Kovacic & Marc Winerman I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................... 2086 II. THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE COMPETITION AGENCY TO THE POLITICAL PROCESS: DESIGN TRADEOFFS ................................... 2088 III. THE SOURCES OF POLITICAL PRESSURE ...................................... 2091 A. IMPLICATIONS FOR LAW DRAFTING AND INSTITUTIONAL DESIGN ................................................................................. 2092 B. THE FTC’S CHARTER ............................................................ 2092 IV. THE MEANING OF INDEPENDENCE .............................................. 2096 V. ORGANIZATIONAL CHOICES THAT CAN DETERMINE INDEPENDENCE ........................................................................... 2098 VI. UNIVERSAL PRESSURE POINTS FOR POLITICAL CONTROL OR INFLUENCE .................................................................................. 2100 A. THE APPOINTMENTS PROCESS ................................................ 2101 B. FUNDING ............................................................................... 2103 C. LEGISLATIVE CHANGES .......................................................... 2104 D. ROUTINE OVERSIGHT ............................................................ 2104 E. SETTING THE FORM OF JUDICIAL REVIEW ................................ 2105 Global Competition Professor
  • What Do/Should Agency Leaders Maximize? William E. Kovacic

    What Do/Should Agency Leaders Maximize? William E. Kovacic

    Consume or Invest: What Do/Should Agency Leaders Maximize? William E. Kovacic & David A. Hyman1 Abstract In the regulatory state, agency leaders face a fundamental choice: should they “consume,” or should they “invest?” “Consume” means launching high profile cases and rulemaking projects. “Invest” means developing and nurturing the necessary infrastructure for the agency to handle whatever the future may bring. The former brings headlines, while the latter will be completely ignored. Unsurprisingly, consumption is routinely prioritized, and investment is deferred, downgraded, or overlooked entirely. This essay outlines the incentives for agency leadership to behave in this way and explores the resulting agency costs (pun intended). The U.S. Federal Trade Commission’s health care portfolio provides a useful case study of how one agency managed and minimized these costs. Our essay concludes with several proposals that should help encourage agency leadership to strike a better balance between consumption and investment. 1 Kovacic is Global Competition Professor of Law and Policy, George Washington University Law School and Non-executive Director, United Kingdom Competition and Markets Authority. From 2006 to 2011, the author served as a member of the Federal Trade Commission and chaired the agency from March 2008 to March 2009. Hyman is H. Ross and Helen Workman Chair in Law and Professor of Medicine, University of Illinois. From 2001-2004, he served as Special Counsel at the Federal Trade Commission. The views expressed here are the authors’ alone. 2 Consume or Invest [7-Jan-16 Consume or Invest: What Do/Should Agency Leaders Maximize? “[P]art of public service is planting trees under whose shade you’ll never sit.”2 I.
  • EPIC Statement 1 FTC Oversight House Energy & Commerce May 6

    EPIC Statement 1 FTC Oversight House Energy & Commerce May 6

    May 6, 2019 The Honorable Janice D. Schakowsky, Chair The Honorable Cathy McMorris Rodgers, Ranking Member U.S. House Committee on Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Consumer Protection & Commerce 2125 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Chairwoman Schakowsky and Ranking Member McMorris Rodgers: We write to you regarding the hearing on “Oversight of the Federal Trade Commission: Strengthening Protections for Americans’ Privacy and Data Security.”1 For more than two decades, EPIC has worked to establish the authority of the Federal Trade Commission to safeguard the privacy of American consumers.2 But it is our view today that the FTC does not function as an effective privacy agency, and that the Committee should support the establishment of a Data Protection Agency in the United States.3 The Federal Trade Commission helps to safeguard consumers and to promote competition, but the FTC is not an effective data protection agency. Even when the FTC reaches a consent agreement with a privacy-violating company, the Commission rarely enforces the Consent Order terms.4 Over a year has passed since the FTC reopened its investigation into Facebook following the unlawful transfer of 50 million Facebook user records to Cambridge Analytica.5 The Commission has done nothing. EPIC, through a FOIA request, recently learned that the FTC has over 26,000 1 Oversight of the Federal Trade Commission: Strengthening Protections for Americans’ Privacy and Data Security, 116th Cong. (2019), H. Comm. on Energy & Commerce, SuBcomm. on Consumer Protection & Commerce (May 8, 2019), https://energycommerce.house.gov/committee-activity/hearings/hearing-on- oversight-of-the-federal-trade-commission-strengthening.
  • Nominations to the Federal Trade Commission Hearing

    Nominations to the Federal Trade Commission Hearing

    S. HRG. 115–761 NOMINATIONS TO THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION HEARING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION FEBRUARY 14, 2018 Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation ( Available online: http://www.govinfo.gov U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 39–877 PDF WASHINGTON : 2020 VerDate Nov 24 2008 07:54 Mar 02, 2020 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 S:\GPO\DOCS\39877.TXT JACKIE SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION JOHN THUNE, South Dakota, Chairman ROGER WICKER, Mississippi BILL NELSON, Florida, Ranking ROY BLUNT, Missouri MARIA CANTWELL, Washington TED CRUZ, Texas AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota DEB FISCHER, Nebraska RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut JERRY MORAN, Kansas BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts DEAN HELLER, Nevada TOM UDALL, New Mexico JAMES INHOFE, Oklahoma GARY PETERS, Michigan MIKE LEE, Utah TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia MAGGIE HASSAN, New Hampshire CORY GARDNER, Colorado CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada TODD YOUNG, Indiana JON TESTER, Montana NICK ROSSI, Staff Director ADRIAN ARNAKIS, Deputy Staff Director JASON VAN BEEK, General Counsel KIM LIPSKY, Democratic Staff Director CHRIS DAY, Democratic Deputy Staff Director RENAE BLACK, Senior Counsel (II) VerDate Nov 24 2008 07:54 Mar 02, 2020 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 S:\GPO\DOCS\39877.TXT JACKIE C O N T E N T S Page Hearing held on February 14, 2018 ....................................................................... 1 Statement of Senator Thune ..................................................................................

  • Nominations to the Us Department of Commerce and the Federal Trade

    S. HRG. 112–469 NOMINATIONS TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION HEARING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION NOVEMBER 15, 2011 Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation ( U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 74–999 PDF WASHINGTON : 2012 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001 VerDate Nov 24 2008 09:37 Jul 18, 2012 Jkt 074999 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 S:\GPO\DOCS\74999.TXT SCOM1 PsN: JACKIE SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia, Chairman DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas, Ranking JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine BARBARA BOXER, California JIM DEMINT, South Carolina BILL NELSON, Florida JOHN THUNE, South Dakota MARIA CANTWELL, Washington ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia MARK PRYOR, Arkansas ROY BLUNT, Missouri CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota PATRICK J. TOOMEY, Pennsylvania TOM UDALL, New Mexico MARCO RUBIO, Florida MARK WARNER, Virginia KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire MARK BEGICH, Alaska DEAN HELLER, Nevada ELLEN L. DONESKI, Staff Director JAMES REID, Deputy Staff Director TODD BERTOSON, Republican Staff Director JARROD THOMPSON, Republican Deputy Staff Director REBECCA SEIDEL, Republican General Counsel and Chief Investigator (II) VerDate Nov 24 2008 09:37 Jul 18, 2012 Jkt 074999 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 S:\GPO\DOCS\74999.TXT SCOM1 PsN: JACKIE C O N T E N T S Page Hearing held on November 15, 2011 .....................................................................
  • The Federal Trade Commission at 100: Into Our 2Nd Century

    The Federal Trade Commission at 100: Into Our 2Nd Century

    The Federal Trade Commission at 100: Into Our 2nd Century The Continuing Pursuit of Better Practices January 2009 A Report by Federal Trade Commission Chairman William E. Kovacic This Report represents the views of FTC Chairman Kovacic and does not necessarily represent the views of the Commission or any individual Commissioner. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to acknowledge the invaluable help of the several members of the FTC staff for this project. First, I sincerely thank Maureen Ohlhausen, who took the lead on this project from beginning to end. I also thank Greg Luib, James Cooper, Gus Chiarello, Paul Pautler, and Maria Coppola Tineo for their superb drafting work. Alden Abbott, Andrew Heimert, Stacy Feuer, Yael Weinman, and Carol Jennings also made significant contributions to this project. The following FTC staff members also helped bring this project to fruition: Hui Ling Goh, Dina Kallay, Russ Damtoft, Michael Shore, Richard McKewen, Hugh Stevenson, Elizabeth Kraus, John Parisi, Pablo Zylberglait, Deirdre Shanahan, Deon Woods-Bell, and Cynthia Lagdameo in the Office of International Affairs; Eileen Harrington, Lois Greisman, Betsy Broder, Callie Ward, Deborah Clark, and Erin Malick in the Bureau of Consumer Protection; David Wales and Ken Glazer in the Bureau of Competition; Dennis Murphy in the Bureau of Economics; Jeanne Bumpus in the Office of Congressional Relations; Steve Baker in the Midwest Regional Office; Len Gordon in the Northeast Regional Office; Chris Grengs in the Office of Policy Planning; and paralegals Jessica Chen, Andrew Hasty, Sage Graham, Rajan Trehan, and Vishwa Banker. I also greatly appreciate the work of Henry Butler, Andreas Reindl, and Michael Salinger in coordinating and participating in our roundtables in Chicago, New York, and Boston, respectively.
  • Hearings on Competition and Consumer Protection in the 21St Century: Opening Session September 14, 2018

    Hearings on Competition and Consumer Protection in the 21St Century: Opening Session September 14, 2018

    CLIENT NEWSFLASH Hearings on Competition and Consumer Protection in the 21st Century: Opening Session September 14, 2018 The Federal Trade Commission’s (“FTC”) Hearings on Competition and Consumer Protection kicked off yesterday. FTC Chairman Joseph Simons opened the hearings, noting two major challenges in competition law: First, the U.S. economy appears to be growing more consolidated and less competitive, even as economics-driven enforcement may be leading to less vigorous enforcement by antitrust agencies. Second, some are challenging the nature of antitrust law itself and are urging the enforcement agencies to consider other policy goals besides competition, such as job protection or equality. In addressing these challenges, Simons stressed the importance of bipartisan, fact-based policymaking. He hearkened back to similar hearings held in 1995 under then-Chairman Robert Pitofsky, and he expressed the hope that by engaging a broad range of stakeholders, the current hearings would help develop a consensus on how new enforcement challenges should be addressed and on what initiatives the Commission should prioritize. The day’s first panel addressed the current landscape of competition and consumer protection law and policy. Panelists included Timothy Muris, FTC Chairman under George W. Bush; Jason Furman, Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors under President Obama; and Jim Rill, Assistant Attorney General of Antitrust at DOJ under President George H.W. Bush. The panelists united over appreciation for the bipartisanship that the FTC has displayed in recent years and expressed general agreement with Chairman Simons’ call for rigorous, non-ideological enforcement. But the panelists diverged on whether increasing concentration across industries meant a new approach to antitrust enforcement is needed.
  • The Latent Power of the Federal Trade Commission

    The Latent Power of the Federal Trade Commission

    39083 ple_19-3 Sheet No. 68 Side A 05/11/2017 10:58:06 4_VAHEESAN_TO PRINTER.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) 5/9/17 5:34 PM RESURRECTING “A COMPREHENSIVE CHARTER OF ECONOMIC LIBERTY”: THE LATENT POWER OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION Sandeep Vaheesan* After decades of virtual invisibility, monopoly and oligopoly are attracting the attention of leading political and public figures again. Corporate control of markets is now seen as an important source of economic and political ills in American society. These ills include not just higher prices for consumers, but also increased economic inequality and a compromised democracy. This corporate domination of economy and politics was not inevitable, dictated by impersonal forces such as “globalization” or “technology.” On the contrary, it is the result of conscious policy choices initiated in the late 1970s and 1980s that succeeded in focusing antitrust law on the narrow concept of economic efficiency and establishing legal standards friendly to powerful businesses. The weakened antitrust laws have given large corporations freedom to dominate markets through mergers, exclusionary conduct, and restrictive trade practices. The Supreme Court has the power to undo these changes, but an antitrust revival through the common law process is doubtful and, at best, sure to be protracted. When favorable political circumstances exist, advocates of renewed antitrust enforcement should instead look to the 39083 ple_19-3 Sheet No. 68 Side A 05/11/2017 10:58:06 Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”). The FTC has broad policymaking authority under modern administrative law and has quasi-legislative power delegated to it by Congress. The FTC can resurrect antitrust law under the FTC Act’s prohibition on unfair methods of competition.