The Study On Anti-Monopoly Regulations Of Enterprise Concentration

For mergers, has a lot of theory on a research. In efficiency theory seemed mergers have to get a larger economy or cooperative effect. In market forces theory seemed new merge against the interests of a monopoly. In agency theory seemed mergers can solve the problem of agency by eliminating the manager. Or Merger is the manager does not wise to buy one because it was too positive or chased the motive power. Thus, mergers seemed a simple, practical a rich in content. For the limited space, is mainly discussed in the corner of the law relating to mergers question. Specific mainly from the following three aspects of the analysis:The first to define relevant market based on mergers regulation system entities analysis. Market definition was not itself, but it is identification of the core of the competitive restraints. It is the analysis by the market structure and the market competitiveness is also the premise that the monopoly law enforcement agencies of the work difficult. Because the market size to define. If the market to define the scope of the big, a study by the possibility of merging of enterprises were more. On the contrary, it may be banned. I think, in that respect, At present, our various industries there is a small scale and decentralized business and market concentration of the production of the characteristics of low. Against monopoly law enforcement agencies in the concrete action should be the same as the Euro ideas. To define the scope of the market, and on this basis, market share and the concentration .According to the scientific enterprise data evaluation of the possible impact of the competition, and then be made by or against the decision.Second, the mergers Antitrust Law standard of review, the rule is different. Our Antitrust Law the lack of a definite set of rules just let the law enforcement agencies to judge the likely effect of competition or analysis on the market share and market concentration if they think the merger of efficiency in the competition, you can pass on the contrary, and they may be prohibited. So, for law enforcement agencies a lot of discretion, the merging parties were unfair.Third, our Antitrust Law on mergers exemptions respect of specific provisions are not enough. On the one hand, did not explain what are the cases of mergers of a more obvious unfavorable influence. In law practice is not conducive to the monopoly on market in the body of law enforcement agencies. On the other hand, there is no right to determine "public interest, to judge the standard. The public interest is a very broad concept of different subject, different organs, different policy in public interest to a different understanding and knowledge. So in the law and law enforcement would be a conflict could lead to two different kinds of consequences, One is the provisions of the content may not perform ; second, executive can be arbitrary and one-sidedness.This article points are :With the developed countries to mergers rule in contrast to the point of departure from legal, the related economic theory, the mergers rule issue, analysis and study. Make our legislation against monopoly of the three important issues, a lack of relevant market to define the burden of proof or evidence with the provisions of this type of; second, the waiver system for the rule was not specific; three is for enterprises merger of the declaration. For these three questions of the handier-capped, relevant legislative proposals to make our Antitrust Law the mergers of more transparent, fair and better safeguard the socialist market economy, competition order to promote economic development...