A Comparative Study On Two Types Of Merger Remedies

Merger is an significant method to achieve business targets and improve the efficiency for the company. However,sometimes merger would impediment competition. So,merger control is concluded in the antitrust law. Merger remedies are measures to preserve competition by imposing the parties to reach commitments before merger permission.The merger remedies in our country are similar to U.S. and EU,which are concluded 3 types measures: structural remedies(divestiture assets);conduct remedies(behavior remedies);and hybrid remedies. The legislations in U.S. and EU usually apply structural remedies in horizontal merger and apply conduct remedies in vertical merger. For this reason, the number of cases apply to structural remedies are more than the conduct remedies, because the damages of the horizontal merger are much more than the vertical merger. However, it makes difference in our country. As we know, the Provision on the restriction conditions of concentration of undertakings is the only special provision in our country, which is deemed the 2015 provision. This Provision is trial implementation,however not concerning the different applying ways between the horizontal merger and the vertical merger. Besides, the applying of conduct remedies in the cases are much more than the applying of structural remedies in the practice. Therefore, there are two questions should be studied because of the difference among China and other land:(1)is it reasonable for Commerce department to apply more conduct remedies without concerning about the different types merger;(2) if so, is the provisions about the conduct remedies in 2015 Provision suitable for the merger cases?This purpose of this article is trying to answer the two questions The framework of this thesis with the exception of the introduction and concluding remarks is divided into four parts:The first part of the thesis is the concept of merger remedies. this division mainly introduce the concept of merger remedies and the background of this system. Primarily, find the concept in China,concentration of undertaking,which replace the concept of merger in English. After Clarify the concept of Chinese and foreign law,It would make sense when the refers in the foreign law. And the explaining of this system would be concluded. Secondly, introduce the types of remedies. Thirdly, introduce the legislations and practices of China. the last part contains the legislation and practice of the U.S. and EU.In the next part of this thesis is concerning about the theory of the two kind remedies.in this division introduce the theory foundation and the value of the tow kind remedies, and makes a comparison after the introduction. In the part studies of the two kinds remedies do not concluded this part. So, it is a new aspect to find the difference of the theory foundation, which will helps us to clear which kind of remedy is more responded the spirit of antitrust law.Later on, the third part of this article is to find the features of the two kind of remedies. As for a kind of way to remedied the damage of the competition,it is also very important to know the differences features among the two kind of remedies. They have their own features in the time limits, and the actual functions, and proceedings.The last part of this article are two parts. Firstly, because of the Provisions 2015 is the only special guide in our country. So the content of this provision will deeply influence the applying of two remedies in the cases. So it is very significant to value the Provisions 2015.After the studies of the provision,we could find that it is very weak in the control of conduct remedies. This would lead huge uncertain of the cases applied conducted remedies in so many cases in our country. So the next part of this last part is to discussed how to improve the items of the provisions by learning from the similar guides in the U.S. and EU.After the comparison on the theories and features, I try to answer the questions before. Firstly, the conduct remedies will can be reflected the development and the value of the antitrust law. Therefore, it is reasonable for our country to apply more conduct remedies even if it makes differences with U.S. and EU. Secondly, the 2015 Provision do not limit conduct remedies in detail. It need to be improved to restrict the cases.The nature of two kind types of merger remedies are preserve the competition. However it not means to limit the developments of big company. Competition and merger are both way to improve efficiency. After the comparison between structural and conduct remedies, the conduct remedies which reflected the theory on Chicago School would be more popular in the future. Honesty to say, conduct remedies need a high quality in making and function. There is no denying that we used conduct remedies more in the real cases, the 2015 Provision and the formal Provisions are less abundant in conduct remedies, though. And, it lead easier to avoid the legislations. So, my article is to analysis the questions before. and To find ways to improves remedies legislations in the 2015 Provisions.