Anti-monopoly law enforcement insists on equal treatment
She Ying
Recently, the State Administration for Market Regulation announced in one go 13 cases of concentration of business operators that were not declared according to law, involving a number of enterprises.
In this regard, the focus of the online interpretation articles has focused on several "Internet" enterprises and "private" enterprises.
This deliberate focus is a misinterpretation of anti-monopoly enforcement, and it deviates from the original intention of protecting fair competition in the market and safeguarding the interests of consumers.
What the interpretation articles circulating on the Internet did not say is that among the companies punished this time are Guiyang Radio and Television Media Group with a background of state-owned assets, and Guiyang Xingli Department Store Group, which is engaged in traditional industries.
If you look a little longer, since 2021, the State Administration of Market Supervision has announced more than 130 anti-monopoly cases. The fines include not only state-owned enterprises such as FAW Group and Shaanxi Water Affairs Group, but also the Shanghai Tourism Industry Association and the Hainan Fire Protection Association. and other industry organizations, as well as foreign companies such as Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Co., Ltd.; from the perspective of the fields involved in the case, there are not only emerging Internet businesses, but also traditional industries such as logistics, retail, manufacturing, medicine, and public services.
During the "13th Five-Year Plan" period, in addition to investigating and dealing with 179 various market monopoly cases, the national market supervision departments also investigated and dealt with 269 cases of abuse of administrative power to exclude and restrict competition in the fields of construction and transportation.
This fully shows that my country's anti-monopoly law enforcement is treated equally, neither too big to fail nor to let it go because of the small; there is no law that will not blame the new, nor will the old law be blamed; Private enterprises; even government agencies have no privileges.
Adhering to the "two unswerving", insisting on equal emphasis on regulatory norms and promoting development is the consistent purpose of anti-monopoly and anti-unfair competition supervision and law enforcement, and this has never changed.
There are objective reasons why the public feels that Internet companies encounter anti-monopoly more frequently.
On the one hand, because these companies have businesses all over the country and are closely related to the lives of ordinary people, they have attracted more attention.
When some media reports, they tend to put big companies in the headlines for the sake of traffic, which also gives the public an illusion that anti-monopoly is targeting Internet companies.
And because most of the Internet companies are private companies, they are unilaterally magnified and misinterpreted as anti-monopoly only using private companies to "surge".
On the other hand, in the past ten years or so, the Internet industry has expanded rapidly under the impetus of capital. Compared with traditional industries, there have been many acquisitions and mergers and acquisitions, and there are also many irregularities in operation, such as the long-criticized "Second Choice" One", "Pinch-tip M&A", "Exclusive copyright", etc.
Coupled with the fact that the anti-monopoly enforcement power was scattered in multiple departments, "everyone manages" has become "everyone is difficult to manage".
After the institutional reform in 2018, the anti-monopoly law enforcement power was unified to the market supervision department, and it clenched its fingers into fists to carry out law enforcement against various monopolistic behaviors that were strongly reflected in the market, which "suddenly" caused a shock.
Regulation is to regulate development, and regulation development is for better development.
After several years of "arguing by case", various market players have a clearer understanding of compliance management. Under a fair competition environment, companies have more entrepreneurial opportunities, stronger innovation momentum, and more choices for consumers , the protection of rights and interests is strengthened.
The anti-monopoly regulatory authorities announced the decision with great fanfare to make the "traffic light" of market competition brighter and shine further.
All kinds of market players and the general public should have an accurate, complete and comprehensive understanding of anti-monopoly law enforcement, jump out of old thinking, and look forward to the future.