Erhvervs-, Vækst- og Eksportudvalget 2016-17
ERU Alm.del Bilag 91
Offentligt
1710400_0001.png
NOTE
13. december 2016
European Commission
Directorate-General for Competition
Ref.: HT.3053
1049 Bruxelles / Brussel
Belgique /België
Comments of the Danish Government on procedural and jurisdic-
tional aspects of EU merger control
General remarks
The Danish Government welcomes this opportunity to comment on the
European Commission’s Consultation on evaluation of aspects of EU
Merger control.
The Danish Government is generally in favour of creating more lenient
procedures for investment, while also maintaining the purpose in the
Merger legislation designed to ensure, that undertakings merging will not
be at the expense of competitors or consumers.
Simplification
The Danish Government supports the idea of excluding certain non-
problematic transactions from the scope of the European Commission’s
merger review. This could for example simplify the procedure for under-
takings in the EEA that establish businesses outside the EEA. Before a
simplification is introduced, especially if a number of mergers notified
today will be exempted from the merger notification procedure, the Dan-
ish Government would welcome a deeper analysis on the scope and the
consequences of the exclusion.
Jurisdictional thresholds
The Danish Government would welcome a thorough analysis of the pos-
sible effects of and sector specific need for an introduction of other and
lower thresholds for specific industries, such as the digital industry and
the pharmaceutical industry.
The Danish Government finds that the current merger legislation to a
large extent ensures that a merger will not significantly impede effective
competition. According to the Danish Competition Act, a merger must be
notified when the participating undertakings have a combined turnover of
at least DKK 900 Million (approx. EUR 120 Million) in Denmark and at
ERU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 91: Notat om regeringens svar på Europa-Kommissionens høring om fusionskontrolreglerne (fusionsforordning 139/2004), fra erhvervsministeren
least two of the undertakings each have an annual turnover of DKK 100
Million (approx. EUR 13,4 Million) in Denmark. Transactions involving
small and medium sized enterprises must therefore be notified under the
Danish Competition Act, and are referred to the European Commission
under article 22 (139/2004), if the merger affects the trade between
Member States and threatens to significantly affect competition.
In 2015, sector specific merger control on telecommunications was intro-
duced in Denmark. This merger control entails that a merger between two
or more commercial providers of electronic communications networks,
which involves public electronic communications networks and in which
the merging undertakings have a combined aggregate annual turnover in
Denmark of at least DKK 900 Million (approx. EUR 120 Million) must
be reported to the Danish Business Authority, which refers the case to the
Danish Competition and Consumer Authority. The reason for the intro-
duction of sector specific merger control in this area was to ensure effec-
tive merger legislation in relation to the specific competitive conditions
existing in the telecommunications market.
Simplification and functioning of the case referral system
The Danish Government is generally in favour of making case referrals
between Member States and the European Commission more business-
friendly and effective. An abolishment of the two step procedure under
article 4 (5) will create more efficiency for the merging undertakings
when a case is referred to the European Commission.
An expansion of the European Commission’s jurisdiction to the entire
EEA if it accepts a referral request under article 22 (139/2004) will create
a simpler procedure as the European Commission will assess the case
instead of a number of National Competition Authorities. The second part
which entails the requirement to renounce jurisdiction over the entire
EEA, if one or several Member States oppose the referral request, will
establish a certainty for the undertakings in a situation in which one or
more National Competition Authorities have found that there is no com-
munity effect and that the merger can therefore be examined in the rele-
vant Member States.
The Danish Government supports the removal of the requirement under
Article 4(4) of the Merger Regulation pursuant to which the parties have
to assert that the transaction may significantly affect competition in a
market.
Technical aspects
The Danish Government is in favour of clarifying the Merger Regulation
with the aim of creating more simplicity in the merger notification pro-
cess.
2
ERU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 91: Notat om regeringens svar på Europa-Kommissionens høring om fusionskontrolreglerne (fusionsforordning 139/2004), fra erhvervsministeren
The Danish Government finds, that the following proposals are relevant
amendments;
Amending Article 5(4) of the Merger Regulation to clarify the
methodology for turnover calculation of joint ventures
Clarification that “parking transactions” should be assessed as
part of the acquisition of control by the ultimate acquirer
The European Commission contemplates amending article 5(2)(2) of the
EU Merger Regulation (139/2004) so as to include certain concentrations
between the same parties within a two year period with the aim to capture
real circumvention, including situations where the first concentration was
notified and cleared by a national competition authority. The Danish
Government would like to note that the scope of the concentrations,
which will be included, preferably should be limited to a very few trans-
actions. Those transactions are to have the ambition to circumvent the
Merger Control, as it will lead to the same concentration being assessed
twice - first in the Member States, and a year or two later at the European
Commission in relation to another concentration which include the same
undertakings.
The Danish Government also notes that the European Commission con-
templates amending the EU Merger Regulation (139/2004) so that it can
revoke a decision to refer a concentration to a Member State if it has
based the decision on incorrect or misleading information for which one
of the parties is responsible. While the Danish Government appreciates
the European Commission wishes to regulate such a situation, it must
also take into account that Member States in the meantime might have
approved the concentration under its national merger control rules. The
European Commission should consider how to best solve any issues aris-
ing from such situations.
3