Shi Jianzhong, Professor of China University of Political Science and Law: Strengthen anti-monopoly supervision and promote the development of platform economy in regulation
The platform economy is the result of digital technology and business model innovation, and is a typical form of the digital economy.
The platform economy uses data as a key production factor and modern networks as an important carrier. Driven by the continuous advancement of information and communication technology, it improves economic efficiency, optimizes the economic structure, and represents the development direction of advanced productivity.
As the most important subject of the platform economy, the impact of platform companies on economic and social life surpasses all types of companies and business models.
In recent years, in the fierce competition, in the field of platform economy, such as forced "choice of two", "big data to kill", "self-preferential treatment", "strangling mergers and acquisitions" and other behaviors that harm competition, innovation and consumer interests have frequently occurred, triggering society Widely concerned in all aspects.
The platform economy is the product of innovation, and platform companies should continue to lead and promote innovation, rather than hinder and end innovation.
Innovative prosperity requires an effective competition mechanism and fair competition order.
On April 10, the State Administration for Market Regulation imposed administrative penalties on Alibaba Group’s implementation of the "two-choice-one" monopoly and fined 18.228 billion yuan.
This case is the first major and typical monopoly case in the field of platform economy in my country, marking that the anti-monopoly law enforcement in the field of platform economy has entered a new stage, and it has released a clear policy signal that the state encourages and promotes the development of platform economy while strengthening anti-monopoly. Supervision, to effectively prevent and stop platform companies from abusing their advantages in data, technology, and capital to damage competition, innovation, and consumer interests, and to standardize and guide the sustainable, healthy and innovative development of the platform economy.
The investigation and handling of this case has important symbolic significance and demonstration effect.
1. It embodies the principle of legal supervision
Competition is the soul of the market economy and drives the continuous innovation of enterprises.
To play the role of anti-monopoly supervision is to uphold the basic position of competition policy, strengthen anti-monopoly law enforcement, create a fair competition market environment, and promote the platform economy to achieve innovation through orderly competition.
As an important part of the market economy system, the innovative development of the platform economy is inseparable from the "Anti-Monopoly Law." Moreover, the more mature the platform economy, the more innovative, the more scientific and effective anti-monopoly law enforcement is required.
For competitive platforms, platform companies should keep to the bottom line of laws such as the Anti-Monopoly Law; for platform operators, platform companies should fulfill the basic obligations given by laws such as the E-Commerce Law; for consumers, platform companies should respect the law Consumer Rights.
However, the mandatory "choice of two" imposed by platform companies on merchants deprived merchants of the opportunity to conduct business on multiple platforms at the same time, stifling competition between platforms, within brands, and between brands.
When the supply-side competition mechanism is damaged, the market innovation drive will be affected, and the interests of consumers will eventually be damaged.
Alibaba Group abuses its dominant position in the online retail platform service market in China, and requires operators on the platform not to engage in business activities on other competitive platforms or participate in promotional activities on other competitive platforms. The adoption of a variety of rewards and punishments to ensure the implementation of "choose one out of two" is a typical restricted transaction behavior clearly prohibited by the Anti-Monopoly Law.
The State Administration of Market Supervision and Administration filed investigations in accordance with the law and imposed administrative penalties. This fully reflects the principle of legal supervision of the platform economy and sends a clear signal to the market that the field of platform economy is not outside the anti-monopoly law.
Based on the basic principle of equality before the law, my country’s "Anti-Monopoly Law" treats Internet companies and traditional companies equally, and applies equally to domestic and foreign companies, state-owned companies, and private companies. The purpose is to ensure fair participation of various market entities in the market. Competition and create a business environment of fair competition.
The investigation and handling of this case does not negate the important role and significance of the platform economy for my country’s economic and social development, but to promote faster and better development of the platform economy through legal regulations, and to provide innovative impetus and market vitality for the high-quality development of my country’s economy .
This case marks that my country's anti-monopoly law enforcement in the field of platform economy has entered a stage of normalization.
Normalized legal supervision will further maintain the authority of the law, set clear red lines for the market, prompt platform companies to regulate market behavior, and force platform companies to focus on active innovation, fair competition, and better service to consumers.
2. Reflects the concept of prudential supervision
The new technologies that support the platform economy are changing with each passing day, and the platform economy has complex business types and dynamic competition dynamics.
The operating behavior of platform companies is not fixed, and it is difficult to carry out categorical analysis.
In order to avoid “premature” and “excessive” law enforcement harming the industry’s innovation and the improvement of the level of competition, it is necessary to go through a necessary “observation period” to support the development of the platform economy. After more than 20 years of development, China’s platform companies have "Children" have entered the "youth" period, and the business model and transaction structure of platform companies have been preliminarily finalized. The implementation of "two options and one", "big data killing", "self-preferential treatment", and "strangling mergers and acquisitions" and other behaviors have an impact on competition and innovation. The damage to consumer rights and interests can be clearly and clearly identified. At this stage of the development of China’s platform economy, it is not only necessary but also feasible to initiate anti-monopoly law enforcement.
As we all know, high-quality development cannot do without innovation, and innovation cannot do without competition.
In order to encourage and promote innovation, we need to maintain fair competition; promote prosperity and innovation, and force the continuous improvement of the level of competition.
Only through the benign interaction of competition and innovation can high-quality development be achieved.
Therefore, anti-monopoly law enforcement in the field of platform economy is an inherent requirement for improving the socialist market economy system and promoting high-quality development.
However, it is worth noting that innovation means breaking or even subverting the established order, structure and mechanism.
Any innovation will have an impact on the existing competition mechanism and order.
Therefore, anti-monopoly law enforcement in the field of platform economy still needs to uphold the concept of prudential supervision.
In the past two years, the response to monopoly issues in the platform economy has been concentrated. On the basis of full research and demonstration, the anti-monopoly law enforcement agency first investigated and dealt with the “two-choice-one” issue that was strongly reflected in various quarters, which demonstrated prudence. The concept of supervision.
At the same time, it can be seen from the penalty decision in this case that the legal and economic analysis of the "two-choice-one" behavior has been fully researched and demonstrated during the processing of this case, which also embodies the concept of prudential supervision.
The "Anti-Monopoly Law" certainly applies to the field of platform economy, but it is quite complicated. It is undoubtedly a scientific and rational choice to adhere to the concept of prudence while actively enforcing the law.
3. It embodies the regulatory thinking of both development and regulation
The Central Economic Work Conference proposed that "the state supports the innovation and development of platform enterprises" and sent a clear signal of "support". At the same time, it proposed "regulate development in accordance with the law and improve digital rules" and released the requirements of "standardization".
To sum it up, it means to pay equal attention to support and regulation.
The innovative development of the platform economy requires a market order of fair competition, and this public product cannot be provided by the market itself.
Maintaining market order requires the government's tangible hands, and the government's role needs to be better brought into play.
Therefore, promoting the high-quality development of the platform economy requires not only a good interaction between competition and innovation, but also a better combination of effective markets and promising governments.
Initiating anti-monopoly law enforcement in a timely manner can not only effectively stop monopolistic behaviors, restore competition mechanisms and order in the relevant market, maintain and stimulate innovation and vitality, and protect the interests of consumers, but it can also generate deterrence and demonstration effects through investigations, and realize investigations. One case and the good effect of standardizing an industry are necessary legal tools to maintain a fair competition market order in the field of platform economy.
The State Administration of Market Supervision fined Alibaba Group 4% of its sales in China in 2019, totaling 18.228 billion yuan.
According to the "Anti-Monopoly Law", if a business operator abuses its dominant market position, the anti-monopoly law enforcement agency shall impose a fine of 1%-10% of the previous year's sales.
The Alibaba Group’s “choose one” behavior began in 2015, involving a wide range of areas and a long duration.
The 4% fine ratio is relatively moderate, which not only reflects the principle of equating legal compliance and excessive fines, reflects the country’s attitude and determination to strengthen anti-monopoly supervision of platform enterprises, but also reflects the policy goal of supporting platform economic development, and fully reflects the development of the platform. The principle of paying equal attention to norms.
At the same time, the State Administration for Market Regulation also formulated the "Administrative Instructions", requiring Alibaba Group to implement comprehensive rectifications around the strict implementation of platform corporate responsibilities, strengthening internal control and compliance management, maintaining fair competition, and protecting the legitimate rights and interests of businesses and consumers on the platform. , Embodies the principle of combining punishment with education.
At the same time, it should be noted that the platform economy has always been in the development process of conflicting innovation and competition. Therefore, anti-monopoly law enforcement in the field of platform economy needs to pay special attention to leaving room for the rule of law for innovation under the framework of the current Anti-Monopoly Law.
Operators should carry out business activities within the scope permitted by law, design transaction procedures and business models, and must take into account competition, innovation and consumer interests.
This law enforcement will undoubtedly help deepen the understanding of the competitive behavior of platform companies and their consequences.
Anti-monopoly law enforcement agencies should be more active and effective in classifying supervision and law enforcement, and support and standardize the development of platform enterprises.
In the practice of law enforcement, we must fully grasp the relationship between support and regulation. The purpose of legal regulation is to promote the development of the platform economy. Anti-monopoly supervision must ensure that the market can play a decisive role in allocating resources and maintain an open, inclusive, and shared environment for the platform economy. , Allowing platform companies to win development opportunities in fair market competition, allowing the market to always have the possibility of the next Alibaba, and responding to the actual needs of platform economic development with scientific and effective anti-monopoly supervision.
4. It embodies the style of scientific and efficient supervision
The competition in the platform economy is innovative and highly dynamic.
Anti-monopoly law enforcement needs to grasp the characteristics of rapid technological and business model changes in the field of platform economy, short innovation cycles and dynamic competition, and conduct necessary analysis of competition effects.
The platform economy is an integrated economy, which integrates many legal relationships through information communication and digital technology.
Consumers only need to press a few keys to make online consumption, which will trigger the creation, change or termination of many legal relationships such as platform service legal relations, commodity sales or service legal relations, capital flow legal relations, and logistics service legal relations.
Anti-monopoly law enforcement needs to accurately deconstruct these legal relationships.
Due to the particularity of the platform economy and its competitive behavior.
For the scientific definition of the relevant market, the comprehensive identification of market dominance, the law-based evidence collection of illegal acts, the full analysis of the effects of competition, and the balance of administrative penalties with leniency and strictness, the anti-monopoly law enforcement agency needs to be based on the development of the platform economy, the law of development and its own characteristics , Combining the specific circumstances of the case, strengthen competition analysis and legal argumentation, and enhance the pertinence and scientific nature of anti-monopoly law enforcement.
Anti-monopoly law enforcement in the field of platform economy puts forward higher requirements on law enforcement capabilities, and puts forward scientific and efficient requirements on law enforcement work style to ensure the quality and efficiency of law enforcement.
This law enforcement review reviewed the law enforcement capabilities and work style of my country's anti-monopoly law enforcement team, enriched the anti-monopoly law enforcement experience in the platform economy, and provided a Chinese solution for the global governance of the platform economy.
The platform economy is an effective model that conforms to and drives high-quality economic development.
Innovation is the most important driving force and the most critical factor for the high-quality development of the platform economy and the entire economy.
If there is no innovation, competition is a low-level competition for stock interests.
Only when innovation becomes the driving force of development can the competition of incremental benefits be promoted and high-quality economic development can be achieved.
Therefore, we need to adhere to the equal emphasis on innovation, competition and consumer interests, strengthen anti-monopoly law enforcement in the field of platform economy, promote the development of platform economy in the standard, and let competition guide and encourage platform enterprises to continuously carry out technological innovation and model innovation, and improve through innovation. Competitive levels, build a new development pattern, achieve high-quality economic development, and allow consumers to share the benefits of high-quality economic development.
(Author Shi Jianzhong, Vice President and Professor of China University of Political Science and Law)