Is European Competition Law Protectionist? A Quantitative Analysis of the Commission’s Decisions

ICLE Antitrust & Consumer Protection Program Issue Brief 2019-03-25

11 Pages Posted: 2 Dec 2020

See all articles by Dirk Auer

Dirk Auer

International Center for Law & Economics (ICLE)

Geoffrey A. Manne

International Center for Law & Economics (ICLE)

Date Written: March 25, 2019

Abstract

In March of 2019, the European Commission slapped another fine upon Google for infringing European competition rules (€1.49 billion this time). This brought Google’s contribution to the EU budget to a dizzying total of €8.25 billion. Given this massive number, and the geographic location of Google’s headquarters, it is perhaps not surprising that some commentators have raised concerns about potential protectionism on the Commission’s part.

This is nothing new. Critics have long argued that European competition law has been used to shield European industries from their large American rivals. From the notorious decision to block the GE/Honeywell merger in 2001, to more recent enforcement activities in the tech sector, every European intervention against a US company tends to usher in a fresh wave of accusations.

But is there any merit to these claims of protectionism? A quick look at the monetary penalties assessed by recent decisions of the European Commission reveals that its enforcement activities (under article 101 and 102 TFEU, excluding cartels) have disproportionately affected US companies. Since the entry into force of Regulation 1/2003 (the main piece of legislation that implements the competition provisions of the EU treaties), US companies have been fined a total of €10.91 billion by the European Commission, compared to €1.17 billion for their European counterparts.

However, as we explain, the harsh fines inflicted upon US firms are not necessarily evidence of protectionism.

Instead, they are likely a result of the Commission’s decision to focus significant attention on the tech sector. Because the vast majority of large tech firms are US-based, all else equal, it is to be expected that the majority of investigations and enforcement actions would involve US firms. At the same time, the Commission’s tech-industry focus may tend to lead to larger fines when infringements are found.

Nevertheless, some caution is warranted with this conclusion. It bears noting that the Commission is hardly structured to be immune to domestic political influences that may tend toward protectionism. The decision to prioritize enforcement in the tech sector is not taken in a vacuum. Whether this policy preference is down to legitimate concerns about high-tech markets or to (potentially unconscious) protectionism is almost impossible to tell.

Suggested Citation

Auer, Dirk and Manne, Geoffrey, Is European Competition Law Protectionist? A Quantitative Analysis of the Commission’s Decisions (March 25, 2019). ICLE Antitrust & Consumer Protection Program Issue Brief 2019-03-25, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3709918 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3709918

Dirk Auer (Contact Author)

International Center for Law & Economics (ICLE) ( email )

5005 SW Meadows Rd.
Suite 300
Lake Oswego, OR 97035
United States

HOME PAGE: http://https://laweconcenter.org/author/dirkauer/

Geoffrey Manne

International Center for Law & Economics (ICLE) ( email )

1104 NW 15th Ave.
Suite 300
Portland, OR 97209
United States
503-770-0076 (Phone)

HOME PAGE: http://www.laweconcenter.org

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
83
Abstract Views
380
rank
397,726
PlumX Metrics