OECD Competition Law and Policy’s Post

Pleasure to record a conversation with Ori Schwartz, the Head of Competition Division at the OECD: 📽 https://lnkd.in/ex_emC-E In this conversation we looked at the most vibrant topics which are currently under the scrutiny of the OECD Competition Division. We started with looking at the more organisational issues. Ori Schwartz explained the goals of the Competition Division within the OECD and beyond, reverting to the latest development, main observations about the evolution of competition policy, co-existence of very diverse visions on its future. Among other themes addressed in this conversation we have been looking at the following: 🔎 The OECD Competition Division: its mission, thematic focus, composition and the way how the work is organised 🔎 Harmonising diverse views of the OECD Member Countries 🔎 Main topics and priority settings 🔎 Increasing role of broader public interest considerations 🔎 The ways of synchronising different positions 🔎 Roundtable on competition and industrial policy 🔎 Mission of the OECD Competition Division in comparison (and collaboration with) the ICN 🔎 Role of non-public actors (businesses, civic society, academics) 🔎 Cooperation with academics 🔎 Recommendations to students We discussed also many other issues. NEW video 📹 https://lnkd.in/ex_emC-E OECD - OCDE OECD Competition Law and Policy In the previous 69th episode (published last Tuesday) we discussed with three leading competition policy reporters Javier Espinoza (Financial Times), Samuel Stolton (Bloomberg News) and Lewis Crofts (MLex) the impact of the elections to the European Parliament on European regulatory policy in the area of digital markets and the latest development with the DMA. The recording: https://lnkd.in/eiGMiDMY Our next 71st episode will be released next Tuesday: a conversation with Prof. Albert Sanchez-Graells on competition-related aspects of public procurement and his new OUP book. A chronological list of all 70 episodes is available in the first comment to the video.

https://npcobserver.com/ China’s National People’s Congress (NPC 全国人民代表大会) The basic for investing in China and understanding Chinese's Economy (Always remind that China is a multi-ethnic country with transcription of the name in Tibetain རྒྱལ་ཡོངས་མི་དམངས་འཐུས་མི་ཚོགས་ཆེན་, in Moglian ᠪᠦᠬᠦ ᠤᠯᠤᠰ ᠤᠨ ᠠᠷᠠᠳ ᠤᠨ ᠲᠦᠯᠤᠭᠡᠯᠡᠭᠴᠢᠳ ᠤᠨ ᠶᠡᠭᠡ ᠬᠤᠷᠠᠯ, in Uygur مەملىكەتلىك خەلق قۇرۇلتىيى) : China’s National People’s Congress (NPC 全国人民代表大会) officially unveiled the target on Tuesday as its $18 trillion economy is facing serious headwinds with economic growth target for 2024 at 5 percent, far below the double-digit growth that for decades powered the world’s second-largest economy but still ambitious. The NPC's has the sole power to "enact and amend basic criminal and civil laws, basic laws governing the State organs, and other basic laws", to elect and appoint top-level positions in the Chinese state including the president, premier, minister, and ministers. To do this, the NPC acts in accordance with the Constitution and laws of the People's Republic in regards to its legislative activities. When the congress is in recess, its Standing Committee enacts all legislation presented to it by the CCP Central Committee, the State Council, the Central Military Commission, other government organs or by the deputies themselves either of the standing committee or those of the committees within the NPC. According to preliminary data published by the National Bureau of Statistics of China in January 2024, the growth of real gross domestic product (GDP) in China amounted to 5.2 percent in 2023. For 2024, the IMF expects a GDP growth rate of around 4.6 percent.

If you have not yet made it through the 188 pages of the Competition and Markets Authority's Guidance on the Digital Markets Competition and Consumers Act 2024 (or the 452 pages of the Act itself) then never fear - grab a coffee and you can watch (or just listen) to our discussion on some of the main features of the new regime. Many thanks to Oles Andriychuk and the Digital Markets Research Hub for the invitation, and to my panelists Lara Dimitrova Stoimenova and Max von Thun-Hohenstein Yoshioka for their excellent contributions. #DMCCA #digitalmarkets #coffeebreakcontent ********************************************************************** The UK has finally adopted its long-awaited legislation establishing a new pro-competition regime for digital markets. To discuss the main features of the Digital Markets Competition and Consumers Act we organised a panel ( 📹 https://lnkd.in/e-su58-9) with three remarkable participants. Lara Dimitrova Stoimenova – Managing Director of Sigma Economics (ex-Ofcom & CMA) Sarah Long – Partner at Euclid Law Firm Max von Thun-Hohenstein Yoshioka - Director of Europe & Transatlantic Partnerships at the Open Markets Institute Among the topics receiving attention of the speakers are the following: ✔ Open-endedness of goals: bug or feature? ✔ Comparing legislative processes in the EU (the DMA) & the UK (the DMCCA) ✔ The CMA consultation on new digital markets competition guidance ✔ Is the requirement of having so many mandatory consultations good or bad for a new regime? ✔ What potential implications should the CMA be mindful of when consulting on the new guidance bearing in mind the life of Art 102 Guidance Paper ✔ Formally, unlike the DMA, the DMCCA is not a new start but a continuation of competition policy: implications ✔ The elegance of the formula "the CMA [...] will apply this guidance flexibly and may depart from the approach described where there is an appropriate and reasonable justification for doing so" ✔ The level of judicial scrutiny and the role of judicial authorities in the new architecture. ✔ Discussing (the relationship between the) two autonomous procedures: "Conduct Requirements" & "Pro-Competition Interventions" ✔ Changes in merger control ✔ Final offer mechanism (DMCCA) vs. FRAND terms (DMA) ✔ Recommendations to students New video 🎬 https://lnkd.in/e-su58-9

Some news stories appear to suggest that a proposed amendment to the Constitution will make the President "able" or "allow[ed]" to take up certain offices in "foreign and international organisations" <https://lnkd.in/gKHfkmFs>. In my view, such a statement (taken in isolation) would not be entirely accurate, because it would suggest that the President is presently unable to do so. The President has *always* been free to take up certain other roles, including roles in foreign non-commercial organisations. He is free to do this because anybody is free to do this. Becoming President doesn't take away your freedoms generally. Becoming President does take away some freedoms. These are listed in Article 19A of the Constitution <https://lnkd.in/g2EV_www>. For example, the President cannot join a political party or "actively engage in any commercial enterprise". The fact that this list exists only underscores that the President is free to do anything not on that list. What the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (Amendment No 3) Bill 2023 <https://lnkd.in/gCCFQ6-a> would do is to *limit* the President's ability to "accept and hold an office in a foreign or international organisation". The President would only be able to do so if "the Cabinet advises the President that it is in the national interest for the President to accept and hold that office" and the President, in his discretion, agrees. The Cabinet will also be able to require the President to relinquish such an office. The Cabinet would also have the power to tell the President not to "sa[y] or d[o] anything in the performance of the functions of [such an] office". Currently -- despite what some think -- the President only has to act in accordance with the Cabinet's advice relating to certain constitutional functions, not generally. So it was perfectly lawful for Tharman to become President while continuing to play roles in various organisations (such as the "advisory board for the UN Human Development Report"). While the Bill, if passed, would purport to be "deemed to have come into operation on 14 September 2023" -- the date Tharman was sworn in -- this really makes no difference. The Cabinet will not have the power to direct the President as described above with retroactive effect. Some time ago, some conspiracy theorists alleged that Tharman would be unable to be a President loyal to Singapore because of his roles in other organisations. In this regard, for various reasons which I might set out in a paper, there is a significant deal of sense that has not been made. But if people who hold that view are truly concerned, instead of complaining even more about the new Bill, they should be welcoming it. (For completeness, the Bill would do something similar for Ministers -- except substitute "Prime Minister" for "Cabinet".)

New article by institute member Nikoleta Yordanova and Aleksandra Khokhlova, Anastasia Ershova, Fabian David Schmidt & Goran Glavaš in West European Politics: 'Curb EU enthusiasm: how politicisation shapes bureaucratic responsiveness' International institutions are often challenged for being detached from the citizens. Focusing on the European Union, this article studies whether this is the case and, if so, when the European Commission responds to public opinion when pursuing policy integration. It argues that the Commission has legitimacy incentives encouraging it to be responsive but politicisation can suppress responsiveness by transmitting competing demands on the Commission from the member states’ citizens. To test these arguments, the contribution applied automated text analysis to estimate the European Union (EU) authority expansion entailed in the Commission’s legislative proposals between 2009 and 2019 and analysed its correspondence with public preferences over EU policy action across the EU states, measured using the Eurobarometer. The results lend support to the hypotheses and suggest that politicisation can undermine the responsiveness of international institutions. Read the full article here: https://lnkd.in/eYkpyDbE

Commitment Decisions in the Era of Ex-Ante Regulations CIRC - CUTS Institute for Regulation and Competition welcomes you to join what promises to be a riveting colloquy with Professor Stavros Makris of the University of Glasgow. The topic for the webinar is ‘Commitment Decisions in the Era of Ex-Ante Regulations.’ Dr. Stavros Makris in his PhD research developed the idea of EU competition law as responsive law and explored the European Commission’s commitments practice under this lens. Dr. Makris will discuss the role of commitment decisions at a time when jurisdictions around the world, including India, are contemplating ex-ante regulation for the digital economy. His knowledge of the commitments and ex-ante regulation regimes in the European Union makes him one of the world’s most important expert voices on the subject. You don’t want to miss out! Register here: https://lnkd.in/dD-rAdFV #exante #commitment #commitments #settlement #settlements #competitionlaw #antitrust #antitrustlaw #dma #dsa #dca #digitalEconomy #economy #platforms #platform #platformeconomy

The introductory piece to our upcoming special issue explains origins of populist host-country government policies and the impact of such policies on FDI and international trade. Read the editorial by Christopher Hartwell, Barclay James, Thomas Lindner, Jakob Müllner & Paul M. Vaaler here:

Places are now full with global presence from all continents, we are now closing our registration link. If you didn't get a chance to register contact the wonderful Mitchell Parker, he may be able to squeeze you in or send you a link of the recording. #publicnetworth #publicassets #publicdebt #publicfinance Dag Detter John Crompton Ian Ball Willem H. Buiter Jacob Soll ---------------------------------- We invite our LinkedIn network to join our roundtable webinar, where you will have the opportunity to to talk to the authors; Dag Detter, Willem H. Buiter CBE, John Crompton and Jacob Soll. Ian Ball, won't be joining us as he is in New Zealand, but will be missed! You will also have an opportunity to participate in the break-out rooms with journalist Martin Wolf CBE from the Financial Times and Simon Nixon, previously Chief European Commentator at The Wall Street Journal. Net Based fiscal rules requires governments to manage state-enterprises and real estate to that of market valuations. Introducing professional management of the portfolio of public assets consolidated within a holding company. A Public Wealth Fund will maximise the Government's portfolio’s value and dividends, thereby improving the government’s fiscal space and financial sustainability. An exciting roundtable with cross party attendees , the private sector are critical to the conversation. This is an opportunity for the: #bondmarket #managementconsultants #lawyers and #professionalservices to contribute and be part of the solution. Register today on: bit.ly/ColligoLabs Places are limited

We are fast approaching elections here in the UK, US, India and many other countries. Please check out and if it is of interest, attend this round table on exploring new approaches to funding our public services. The question of how we value public sector assets is an important one.... especially considering the dire situation we now find ourselves in after a long period of austerity and a more challenging economic climate. If indeed many public sector assets are dramatically undervalued there maybe an opportunity to explore different ways of obtaining longer term funding for the much needed holistic regeneration and improvement of our public services.... which will be foundational to the much needed improvement of the health and wellbeing of our citizens.