Regardless of the nature of the enterprise, as long as it violates the principle of fair competition, suspected or monopolistic behavior, it will be subject to anti-monopoly investigation and even punishment. There is no exception to antitrust and there is no “exclusionâ€.
After four BMW dealers received the first ticket for the anti-monopoly case in the automobile industry, 12 Japanese auto parts manufacturers were fined 1.235 billion yuan by the relevant departments of China for manipulating the supply price of the products. Not only in the automotive industry, the relevant departments have conducted intensive anti-monopoly investigations on foreign companies such as Microsoft, Accenture and Qualcomm in the past few days. In this regard, many people have praised it, but there are also doubts: Recently, anti-monopoly investigations have targeted the multinational enterprises in China. Is it different treatment and internal and external differences?
In fact, it is an international practice to investigate and deal with corporate monopolistic behavior. Although China's "Anti-Monopoly Law" was introduced later, the identification and investigation of monopolistic behaviors are basically the same in principle as the similar laws of the United States and the European Union. If multinational corporations are suspected of abusing market dominance and harming the rights of consumers and legally operating enterprises in the same industry, it is not only reasonable but also legal for the relevant departments to investigate them according to the Anti-Monopoly Law.
On the other hand, judging from the cases of anti-monopoly investigations in China in recent years, the relevant departments have not made such a difference because of different corporate identities, but have achieved "a bowl of water and flatness." For example, as early as 2011, the National Development and Reform Commission had investigated China Unicom and China Telecom's alleged monopoly on broadband access. Since 2013, in a series of cases, such as the liquid crystal panel price monopoly case, the Maotai Wuliangye price monopoly case, and the milk powder price monopoly case, the enterprises surveyed include both multinational enterprises and domestic-funded enterprises. These facts show that regardless of the nature of the enterprise, as long as it violates the principle of fair competition, suspected or monopolistic behavior, it will be subject to anti-monopoly investigation and even punishment. There is no exception to antitrust and there is no “exclusionâ€.
A detailed analysis shows that multinational corporations have even formed a monopoly in the domestic market, which is closely related to China's foreign investment policy for some time. In the past, in terms of utilizing foreign capital, there were many policies for attracting and encouraging, and there were few supervision and restraint methods. Many multinational corporations therefore enjoyed “super national treatmentâ€. The most typical example is that before 2008, domestic and foreign-funded enterprises implemented differentiated tax policies. Compared with domestic enterprises, many multinational corporations have obvious advantages in capital, technology and brand. Together with the policy dividends enjoyed, it is naturally easier to occupy an advantageous competitive position or even form a monopoly in the industry. However, in the context of the continuous improvement of the market economic system and the increasingly international integration of laws and regulations, market participants are increasingly demanding fair competition and mutually beneficial cooperation. Such “super national treatment†is not sustainable and should not last.
It should be said that the recent anti-monopoly investigation refers to multinational enterprises. The intention is to maintain a fair competition in the market order. To a certain extent, it also reflects the gradual return of foreign-funded enterprises from "super national treatment" to "national treatment." But this is only a change in the specific management style, and has nothing to do with exclusion. For foreign investment, our attitude has always been welcome. In particular, China is currently in the stage of development of economic restructuring and upgrading, and the status of globalization has become an important part of the national economy. The basic national policy of opening up to the outside world will not Change, there will be no "exclusion" for no reason.
Having said that, anti-monopoly investigations are soaring, especially intensive investigations of multinational giants, will it adversely affect the economy and even scare foreign investment? the answer is negative. In mature market economy countries, anti-monopoly law has always been known as the "market constitution." The strengthening of anti-monopoly will not only hinder economic development, but will help build a more fair competition, mutual benefit, transparent and standardized market order, improve the investment and business environment, and make the market environment more legal and fair. Economic development and attracting foreign investment are all beneficial and harmless.
Auto Parts Used For Jinbei Grace
Front Door Frame,Jinbei Grace Rear Door,Jinbei Grace Tailgate,Jinbei Grace Hood
Baoying Shuguang Auto parts Factory , http://www.shuguangautoparts.com