Until the early 2010s, government subsidies in Europe were on a downward trend, partly because of the increasing prevalence and enforcement of competition and state aid rules.
The European Union often concludes international trade agreements, which contain shared competences with the Member States (the so-called mixed competences agreements), thus they require ratification from the national and/or regional parliaments in order to be enforced.
Free market liberals will have shuddered at the news that European Commission officials have drawn up far-reaching plans for a new €100 billion fund to promote European technology giants.
As the world’s leading international financial centre, London faces fascinating opportunities as well as some significant challenges in coming years. This is as a result of Brexit, increased international competition from other global financial centres, such as New York, and the changing face of finance itself.
Let’s say it loud and clear: There is hope for EU competition policy! After months of negative headlines and high-profile probes of the European digital sector, one was delighted to read a decidedly more forward-looking take on the approach competition regulators should have towards online platforms.
Here in EPICENTER, our authors have consistently opposed the Commission’s proposal for a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base – better known in EU policy circles by its rather Soviet-looking acronym, CCCTB.
In light of recent cases in the digital sector, competition policy needs to change. Market share figures tend to underestimate the prevalence of competitive forces, and recent DG COMP probes have consistently ignored the possibility of innovation coming from outside the relevant market. Without a substantive change in outlook, it is likely that competition will be harmed by intervention.