self-assessment results of icn survey- randoph tritell - us ftc - june 2016 oecd discussion
TRANSCRIPT
Self-Assessment Results ICN Survey 2016
Randolph W. TritellU.S. Federal Trade Commission
Presentation for OECD Competition Committee, Working Party 3
June 15, 2016
www.internationalcompetitionnetwork.org
ICN Guiding Principles
1. Sovereignty2. Transparency3. Non-discrimination
on the basis of nationality
4. Procedural fairness
5. Efficient, timely, and effective review
6. Coordination7. Convergence8. Protection of
confidential information
ICN Recommended Practices
1. Nexus between the merger’s effects and the reviewing jurisdiction
2. Clear and objective notification thresholds
3. Timing of merger notification
4. Merger review periods
5. Initial notification requirements
6. Conduct of merger investigations
7. Procedural fairness
8. Transparency
9. Confidentiality
10. Interagency coordination
11. Review of merger control provisions
12. Remedies
13. Competition agency powers
ICN Recommended Practices
2011 Review
• 27: Conform• 57: Do Not Conform
27/84 27/84 agenciesagencies
ICN Recommended Practices
2011 Review
• Some jurisdictions fall into multiple categories.
• Some jurisdictions implemented changes but did not achieve full conformity.
ICN Self-Assessment Survey 2016
• Goal: assess implementation of almost all of the ICN Recommended Practices and identify areas for future work
• As of June 6, 2016, 80 of the 100 jurisdictions surveyed completed the assessment.
– Not every question has been answered by every survey recipient.
– Five additional respondents partially completed the survey.
ICN Self-Assessment Survey 2016
• Do you require a substantial local nexus?
• 81 out of 85 Agencies Responded• Yes: 74• No: 7
74/81 74/81 agenciesagencies
Notification obligation: buyer only
• Can the local activities of the acquirer alone trigger notification?
• 79 out of 85 Agencies Responded• Yes: 30 • No: 49
30/80 30/80 agenciesagencies
Calculating thresholds: Target
• When calculating the sales or assets of the business being acquired, does your jurisdiction count only the sales and/or assets of what is being acquired (i.e., not sales and/or assets of the entire selling entity or group)?
• 80 out of 85 Agencies Responded• Yes: 57• No: 23
57/80 57/80 agenciesagencies
Notification Criteria• Do the merger notification thresholds use objectively quantifiable
criteria (e.g. sales and/or assets) and not other criteria, such as market share, market power, or other potential transaction-related effects?
• 81 out of 85 Agencies Responded• Yes: 57• No: 24
57/81 57/81 agenciesagencies
ICN Members with Merger Control: Two party /
target
Blue map: ICN members with merger control. Red map: ICN members with two party / target thresholds
ICN Self-Assessment Survey 2016: Conforming
Changes• In the last five years, 10 jurisdictions self-reported reforms to bring
their notification thresholds into conformity:
1. Argentina
2. COMESA
3. Greece
4. India
5. Italy
6. Kenya
7. Kosovo
8. Pakistan
9. Panama
10.Turkey
Two Party / Target Objective Thresholds
Number of Jurisdictions
Number of Jurisdictions
with Two Party / Target
Thresholds
Number of Jurisdictions without Two
Party / Target Thresholds
OECD Members & Observers
46 25 21
Non-OECDJurisdictions
39 9 30
Total 85 34 51
(60%)(40%)
ICN Self-Assessment Survey 2016
Two party / target thresholdsOECD Members & Observers
Other thresholdOECD Members & Observers
Belgium Ireland
Bulgaria Italy
Canada Japan
Czech Republic Korea
Denmark Lithuania
Estonia Norway
European Union Romania
Finland South Africa
France Sweden
Germany Switzerland
Greece Turkey
Hungary United States
Iceland
Australia Peru
Austria Poland
Brazil Portugal
Colombia Russia
India Slovak Republic
Indonesia Slovenia
Latvia Spain
Malta Taiwan
Mexico United Kingdom
Netherlands Ukraine
New Zealand
ICN Self-Assessment Survey 2016
Two party / target thresholds Non-OECD Members & Observers
Other thresholdNon-OECD Members & Observers
Argentina Kenya
COMESA Kosovo
Croatia Pakistan
Faroe Islands Panama
Guernsey
Albania Honduras Nicaragua
Armenia Israel Senegal
Barbados Jamaica Serbia
Botswana Jordan Singapore
Ecuador Macedonia Seychelles
EFTA Malawi Tanzania
El Salvador Mauritius Tunisia
Gambia Moldova Vietnam
Georgia Montenegro Zambia
Greenland Namibia Zimbabwe
ICN Self-Assessment Survey 2016
• Nine non-OECD members and observers self-reported two party / target thresholds.
1. Argentina
2. COMESA
3. Croatia
4. Faroe Islands
5. Guernsey
6. Kenya
7. Kosovo
8. Pakistan
9. Panama
ICN Self-Assessment Survey 2016: Role of RPs
in Reform• Have you used the ICN’s Recommended Practices in reviewing your
merger notification and review regime?
• 80 out of 85 Agencies Responded• Yes: 52• No: 28
52/80 52/80 agenciesagencies
Future ICN Role
• Should the ICN take a more active role in promoting the ICN Recommended Practices? – Ninety-one percent of respondents, 73 agencies, said yes.
73/80 73/80 agenciesagencies
ICN Support for Domestic Reforms
• How should the ICN take a more active role?– Assist members that welcome external support for domestic
reforms (e.g. amendments to laws or new regulations)
– 46 agencies (58%) replied yes
46 agencies46 agencies
Merger Working Group: Technical Assistance
• How should the ICN take a more active role?– In-depth technical assistance from the Merger Working Group
– 42 agencies (53%) replied yes
42 agencies42 agencies
ICN Monitoring and Recommendation
• How should the ICN take a more active role?– ICN member reports on member compliance and jurisdiction-
specific recommendations for potential improvements
– 34 agencies (43%) replied yes
34 agencies34 agencies
Self-Assessment Results ICN Survey 2016
www.internationalcompetitionnetwork.org
Randolph W. TritellU.S. Federal Trade Commission
Presentation for OECD Competition Committee, Working Party 3
June 15, 2016