Antimonopoly Regulation and Competition Protection

Goals of Antimonopoly Regulation

Competition policy (antitrust / competition policy) pursues several interconnected objectives:

1. Economic efficiency: Competition lowers prices and stimulates innovation
2. Distribution of benefits: Monopoly profits are redistributed from consumers to producers
3. Political goals: Preventing the concentration of economic power, which can grow into political power

Main Types of Antimonopoly Violations

Horizontal Agreements (Cartels)

Agreements between competitors on prices, market division, production volumes.

“Hard” (per se illegal): In most jurisdictions, these are illegal without proof of harm:

• Price fixing
• Market allocation
• Bid rigging
• Production restriction

Examples of cartels and fines:

• Lysine cartel (1990s): Archer Daniels Midland and other amino acid producers → $100 million fine (1996)
• Cathode Ray Tube cartel: Samsung, LG, Philips → €1.47 billion fine from EU (2012)
• Auto parts cartel: 9 Japanese companies → $2 billion fine in the USA
• Libor manipulation: Deutsche Bank, Barclays, Citigroup, JPMorgan → >$6 billion total

Leniency programs: The first cartel participant who voluntarily reports the violation receives immunity from fines. The second — 50% discount, the third — less. Creates a “prisoner's dilemma” within the cartel → a strong incentive towards self-reporting.

Abuse of Dominant Position

A company holding a dominant position (market dominance) is obliged not to use it to oust competitors or exploit buyers.

Examples:

• Microsoft vs. EU (2004): forced inclusion of Windows Media Player in Windows → €497 million fine
• Intel vs. EU (2009): discounts to distributors if they did not sell AMD chips → €1.06 billion fine
• Google Shopping (EU, 2017): preference for its own shopping service → €2.42 billion fine
• Google AdSense (EU, 2019): restriction of competing advertising → €1.49 billion fine
• Apple App Store (EU, DMA 2023): forcing developers to use only the App Store → ongoing investigation

Key question: what is “dominance”?

• EU: presumption of dominance with market share >50%; possible at 40–50%; unlikely at <40%
• Definition of the market (product market + geographic market) — critically important and often disputed issue

Mergers and Acquisitions: Control of Concentration

Large mergers require prior approval from antimonopoly authorities (merger clearance).

EU Merger Regulation: Mandatory notification when the combined global turnover >€5 billion AND European turnover of each party >€250 million.

HSR Act (USA): Prior notification to FTC/DoJ for deals over $119.5 million (2023 threshold).

Types of decisions:

• Unconditional approval
• Approval with conditions (remedies): sale of part of the business, technology licensing, behavioral commitments
• Prohibition (rare, but occurs)

Blocked deals:

• Siemens/Alstom (2019): the EU blocked the creation of a “European champion” in railway engineering
• Illumina/Grail (2021–2022): the EU banned the acquisition of a competing DNA-testing company
• Adobe/Figma (2023): parties withdrew the application after signals of prohibition from EU and DoJ

Antimonopoly Regulation in the UAE

UAE Federal Competition Law (2012, updated 2022):

• Bans anticompetitive agreements and abuse of dominance
• Regulator: UAE Ministry of Economy (Competition Committee)
• Merger notification thresholds: combined turnover >AED 300 million

Exceptions:

• State enterprises and sectors of strategic character
• DIFC and ADGM have their own competition regimes

Practice: Antimonopoly enforcement in the UAE is less developed than in the EU or USA. Main cases are price fixing in retail, tariff cartels.