What are the antitrust measures in developed countries? (The more detailed the better)

I. Antimonopoly situation in developed countries

(I) Focus on national strategic interests

In the open economy, the goal of antimonopoly policy of major developed countries has been shifted from the maintenance of fair competition at home to the focus on national strategic interests in international competition. This is a reflection of the changes in real economic activities in the policy. Economic globalization has extended the competition among enterprises from the domestic market to the international market, the main competitors of enterprises have changed from their domestic counterparts in the past to foreign enterprises with greater threats, and merger and acquisition activities among enterprises have been extended from among domestic enterprises to among enterprises in different countries. This change in the reality of economic activity has also forced a change in the concept of government intervention in the economy. The economic policies of the major developed countries have shifted from making up for the shortcomings of the domestic market and maintaining fair competition to intervening in the economy on a global scale by applying macro-control policies and emphasizing the importance of national strategic interests. As reflected in the anti-monopoly aspect, the goal of anti-monopoly policy is not only to deal with the relationship between monopoly and competition in the domestic market, but also, and more importantly, to seek a rational allocation of resources on a global scale and to demonstrate the country's advantages in international competition. The focus of the policy objective is to pursue national strategic interests and allow domestic enterprises to gain a larger share of the world market, rather than focusing on protecting the interests of domestic consumers and other producers. At the same time, the Government has become more flexible in the application of antimonopoly policy. Although the specific measures of anti-monopoly policy still do not go beyond administrative, economic and legal means, the important change is that the government follows the principle of giving priority to the overall interests of the country and uses these policy measures flexibly with this as the starting point. Many countries not only relaxed the regulation of monopoly, and even by the government direct active intervention, to promote the expansion of the scale of enterprises and enterprise integration, in order to enhance the competitiveness of domestic enterprises, to seize the high point of the international market. For example, in the United States, after the 1990s, the government relaxed the regulation of mergers and acquisitions. In Japan, the government began to promote the expansion of enterprise scale as early as after the 1950s, and implemented a series of policies to encourage mergers and acquisitions.

(2) Emphasizing the maintenance of economic efficiency

The anti-monopoly policy of developed countries has shifted from emphasizing the maintenance of justice and fairness to the maintenance of economic efficiency. In the past, it was believed that the antitrust law supervised the behavior of enterprises through the state power and prohibited enterprises from abusing monopoly power in order to realize the comprehensive balance and orderly development of the national economy. It not only protects free competition, but also recognizes the important social values of fairness, justice and efficiency embodied in competition. Therefore, the antitrust law emphasizes the suppression of the emergence of economic power and the phenomenon of super-economic predation, and thus upholds the social norms of fairness and justice. However, after the 1970s, the Chicago School challenged this view. They believed that the purpose of antitrust law is to achieve economic efficiency, i.e., to maximize social welfare, and that the goal of government policy should be to protect competition, not simply to protect competitors and maintain the number of competitors. In a competitive market, it is normal for dominant firms to expand in size and for inefficient firms to be eliminated. To judge whether an enterprise has improper market behavior, it cannot be based on whether it harms the interests of other competitors or excludes competitors as a criterion, but on whether it harms economic efficiency. Some economists are of the view that, in a competitive market, there will always be a part of the enterprise that obtains a certain degree of monopoly through its own efforts, which in itself is the result of free competition. If the government intervenes to break up a company, it will have negative economic consequences. Firms would slacken off on product and technological innovation once they reached a certain size. These views have been widely recognized in the U.S. legal and academic circles, and the government's antitrust direction has changed. Such as the United States in the 1970s after the merger of enterprises to hold a more lenient attitude, the anti-trust point is mainly monopoly behavior rather than monopoly state. Monopoly behavior refers to the economic entity to obtain monopoly profits, using various means to build market barriers, exclusion, restriction and obstruction of competition. Monopoly state is also called monopoly structure, this market state or structure can be presented as monopoly, oligopoly, monopoly competition and other different types of structure. Generally speaking, enterprises with monopoly status and large market share are in a better position to implement monopoly behavior, but under strong external constraints (such as antitrust laws) do not necessarily implement monopoly behavior. In recent years, the theory and practice of antitrust in market economy countries are inclined to anti-monopoly behavior, and no longer focus on the size of enterprises and market concentration.

(3) Taking into account the market, technology and law in the anti-monopoly strategy

In the era of industrial economy, enterprises mainly rely on the huge scale of enterprises, strong capital or high market share to build market barriers and form monopoly advantages. In the era of knowledge economy, the establishment and maintenance of the monopoly position of enterprises rely more on technology. Especially in the field of high technology, the key elements for enterprises to win in the competition are knowledge, technology, information and other human capital, and physical capital has taken a back seat. Human capital can flow with the flow of personnel, unlike physical capital, which is fixed in the enterprise and cannot flow with the flow of personnel. Therefore, human capital constitutes a much lower barrier to entry than physical capital. The advent of the knowledge-based economy has made it more difficult for the Government to implement anti-monopoly policies, and thus it has to take into account market, law and technology in its strategy. At the same time, in international market competition, developed countries were able to maintain their dominant position in the world economy because they possessed and monopolized advanced science and technology. In order to better maintain this position, the developed countries use the protection of intellectual property rights as a reason to link intellectual property rights with the world trade system and incorporate them into the world trade system, forcing all developing countries in the World Trade Organization to undertake their international obligations to protect the technologies monopolized by the transnational corporations of the developed countries in the world, so as to seek monopoly of the import markets of the developing countries and domination of the economies of the developing countries, and to plunder and plunder the economies of the developing countries. In order to monopolize the import markets of developing countries and dominate their economies and plunder their natural resources and wealth. In fact, the monopolization of technology was the main means by which the developed countries maintained their dominant position in the world economy after abandoning their policy of strong colonialism. According to traditional economics, the monopoly is not conducive to technological innovation because monopolists make monopoly profits by setting monopoly prices, and this is one of the reasons for the government's anti-monopoly efforts. However, according to the new innovation theory, the market structure of monopolistic competition is most conducive to technological innovation. Because, after technological innovation, enterprises can maintain their dominant position for a period of time, and in order to maintain their monopoly position in the long run, enterprises also need to continue technological innovation, which will ultimately promote technological progress. All these make the government of developed countries in the anti-monopoly strategy, not only to consider the maintenance of fair competition in the market, but also to consider the promotion of technological progress, but also to maintain their own monopoly position in the international market.

(D) constantly enhance the efforts to limit the international monopoly

In the process of promoting economic globalizationq of the International Trade Organization, but also to promote the traditional obstacles and barriers affecting the international fair trade in the past, such as tariffs, quotas, market access, and so on, gradually lowered or disintegrated. However, with the deepening development of international economic liberalization, monopolistic practices that restrict competition have become more and more prominent in the international arena. Multinational enterprises, driven by huge profits, have committed anti-competitive acts, and monopolistic practices such as export cartels, mergers of multinational enterprises and abuse of dominant positions in international markets have become more and more prevalent. These behaviors have undermined the fair international competition order and the economic interests of the countries concerned. How to vigorously regulate international monopolistic practices and maintain a fair competitive order in the world has been a major issue faced by countries around the world, especially by international trade organizations. In order to better coordinate international competition relations, in recent years, developed countries have carried out extensive bilateral and multilateral cooperation in antimonopoly. The United States signed bilateral treaties with Germany in 1976, Australia in 1982 and Canada in 1984 for international cooperation in the application of antitrust laws, and the Agreement on Closer Economic Relations signed between Australia and New Zealand in 1983, as well as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), also provide for cooperation in the application of antitrust laws. 1991 saw the conclusion of the Agreement on Cooperation in the Enforcement of the Antitrust Laws between the European Union and the United States, which provides for detailed cooperation in the enforcement of antitrust laws. The 1991 Agreement on Cooperation in the Enforcement of the Antimonopoly Law between the European Union and the United States provides in detail for notification in antimonopoly, exchange of information, cooperation and consultation in antimonopoly proceedings, positive comity and avoidance of conflicts in antimonopoly proceedings. In this way, a country can give effect to its own antimonopoly law in other countries on the basis of bilateral or multilateral treaties with other countries, and regulate international monopolistic behavior through domestic antimonopoly law.