Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Facebook
Twitter
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Law Firm Events
Law Firm Deadlines
TCLA TV
Members
Leaderboards
Premium Database
Premium Chat
Commercial Awareness
Future Trainee Advice
Forums
Aspiring Lawyers - Interviews & Vacation Schemes
Commercial Awareness Discussion
Commercial Awareness Update - March 2019!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Sara Moon" data-source="post: 10193" data-attributes="member: 525"><p>Hi everyone!</p><p></p><p>Hope you are having a great week and as always, here are this week's commercial write-ups! Enjoy<img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p><strong>Commercial News Update - 13th March 2019</strong></p><p></p><p>Topics covered this week: </p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><strong><u>Calls for reforms of EU competition rules </u>([USER=525]@Sara Moon[/USER] )</strong></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><strong><u>House of Lords Committee wants more tech regulation</u> ([USER=157]@kitk[/USER] )</strong></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><strong><u>The reduction of import tariffs in a no-deal Brexit</u> ([USER=201]@bugsy malone[/USER])</strong></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><strong><u>Italy prepares to endorse China's Belt and Road Initiative</u> ([USER=260]@Abstruser[/USER] )</strong><br /> <br /> <br /> <strong><u>1. Calls for reforms of EU competition rules - [USER=525]@Sara Moon[/USER]</u><br /> The story:</strong><br /> <br /> Since the EU's rejection of the Siemens-Alston railway deal on the grounds that the merger will cut competition and drive up prices for high-speed trains, France and Germany have been calling for reform of the EU's competition law. The EU's competition commissioner Margrethe Vestager, when rejecting the deal, explained that if the deal succeeds, customers will be encouraged to seek for alternative cheaper suppliers, thus inviting foreign competitors like the Chinese CRRC into the market, which was the very thing the deal was trying to prevent. However, French finance minister Bruno Le Maire criticised Ms. Vestager's decision as a mistake and along with German counterpart Peter Altmaier, proposed an overhaul of EU competition law. The proposal included, among others, granting politicians the power to override EU commission decisions and ensuring regulators to make decisions with a global view rather than merely looking at competition within the EU or individual member states. Although the call for reforms of competition rules have frequently emerged at the end of every commission mandate, often by France, according to the Financial Times, the situation this year is different because Germany is backing France and the UK, traditional defenders of strict EU rules, are heading to Brexit.<br /> <br /> Then what is Ms. Vestager's view on suggested reforms? It seems like she is taking a more cautious view of reforming strict EU competition rules. Last week, in an interview with the Financial Times, she warned that member states should be "aware of the consequences" of weakening merger rules. She also emphasised that the overhaul will require a "strategic choice" between going down towards a more American economic model or a more Chinese model. China has adopted state capitalism, supporting state-owned monopolies to achieve the government's global ambitions, while the US has opted to the Chicago School of competition policy, which tolerates concentration of market power on the grounds that market concentration and the existence of dominant market players are not always detrimental to competition. Ms. Vestager's greatest concern on revamping competition rules of the EU is that any change will have consequences on not just within the European bloc, but beyond it, given the EU's influence over the approach other countries take.<br /> <br /> Although Ms. Vestager believes that the current EU competition law framework has served well for years, she did acknowledge the need for "a more nuanced and more pragmatic approach". However, her focus is more on regulating digitalised markets. She said that there is a need to police "data monopolists" who control access to a vast amount of data and set prices, thus undermining competition. <br /> <br /> <strong>Impact on businesses and law firms:</strong><br /> <br /> It seems like the time has come to reform the EU's competition rules. With China pursuing state monopolies and the US being a protectionist nation, EU's strict merger rules that make it difficult for European companies to merge and compete against outsiders, especially Chinese companies, are against protecting the bloc. Although it is uncertain whether Ms. Vestager will ultimately accept Franco-German views of the reform, the EU might update its rules to take into account the global market when making decisions on merger activities, rather than limiting its view to the European bloc, and to adapt to digitalisation of the markets. Since mergers and acquisitions are a key strategies for companies to expand their businesses, both businesses and law firms would have to keep an eye on whether the EU will be reforming its rules. The decision of the EU will not just affect the EU itself but will also impact the approaches other countries take in regard to competition rules. <br /> <br /> <br /> <strong><u>2. House of Lords Committee wants more tech regulation - [USER=157]@kitk[/USER]</u></strong><br /> <br /> <strong>The story:</strong><br /> <br /> Last week, the UK House of Lords Communications Committee released a report, "Regulating in a Digital World", which demanded more regulation of technology companies.<br /> <br /> The report noted that there are currently numerous regulators, such as Ofcom and the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO), which have oversight of the digital world. To counteract such fragmented regulation of technology companies, the report recommended 10 principles to "shape and frame all regulation of the internet". These principles are: parity; accountability; transparency; openness; privacy; ethical design; recognition of childhood; respect for human rights and equality; education and awareness-raising; democratic accountability, proportionality and an evidence-based approach.<br /> <br /> Another proposal of the report is the creation of a new Digital Authority, to coordinate existing regulators of technology companies, examine legislation, make recommendations for improvement and report to a joint committee of both Houses of Parliament.<br /> <br /> The report also called for online services to provide "maximum privacy and safety settings" as the default to allow users more control over their data, the ICO to be able to conduct audits where there are risks associated with using algorithms in decision-making, and online services to be subject to a duty of care enforced by Ofcom that would require moderation of user-generated content.<br /> <br /> <strong>Impact on businesses and law firms:</strong><br /> <br /> Given the wide scope and stringent requirements of the report's recommendations, companies providing digital services are likely to face more restrictions and costs in doing business. It is unclear how this would affect the business models of many technology companies, which provide their services on publicly available platforms. For example, these companies might turn to charge fees for all or some of their services, consolidating the services that they provide, or discontinuing their services. Also, as the regulation of technology companies is set to become more cross-disciplinary, law firms which advise technology companies would need to gain a broader and deeper understanding of how their clients operate to advise them of the legal implications that might arise.<br /> <br /> <strong><u>3. The reduction of import tariffs in a no-deal Brexit - [USER=201]@bugsy malone[/USER]</u><br /> <br /> The story:</strong><br /> <br /> Last week the UK government announced they may cut between 80-90% of tariffs on imported goods if we leave without a Brexit deal.<br /> <br /> It may be argued that tariffs are really about protectionism, and yet, in instances such as steel, they have not worked. For example, the Chinese have been able to dump freely on world markets because they have a glut of steel. In this instance, the EU and its protectionist laws have not been of use.<br /> <br /> The government could use zero import tariffs as a negotiation tactic to try to get the best deal possible from the EU.<br /> <br /> <strong>Impact on businesses and law firms:</strong><br /> <br /> Zero tariffs are likely to worry some UK producers in industries which are sensitive to competition. However, some UK industries will still be protected. For example, textiles, cars, and farming such as beef, lamb and dairy. In February 2019, environment secretary Michael Gove gave concerned farmers reassurances that the government will continue to apply tariffs to food.<br /> <br /> Zero tariffs would be beneficial as it could attract more foreign investment into the UK, as companies find the UK a good stepping stone to making an investment. For example, in the 90s under Margaret Thatcher, car companies came to the UK to use it as a platform into Europe.<br /> <br /> Zero tariffs alsoencourages companies to sell more goods into the UK, giving consumers more choice of goods to buy. Zero tariffs could be a great opportunity to cut the cost of food, clothing and footwear and improve the standard of living for British people. This is why the reduction of tariffs is one of the exciting opportunities Brexit offers.<br /> </li> </ul></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Sara Moon, post: 10193, member: 525"] Hi everyone! Hope you are having a great week and as always, here are this week's commercial write-ups! Enjoy:) [B]Commercial News Update - 13th March 2019[/B] Topics covered this week: [LIST] [*][B][U]Calls for reforms of EU competition rules [/U]([USER=525]@Sara Moon[/USER] )[/B] [*][B][U]House of Lords Committee wants more tech regulation[/U] ([USER=157]@kitk[/USER] )[/B] [*][B][U]The reduction of import tariffs in a no-deal Brexit[/U] ([USER=201]@bugsy malone[/USER])[/B] [*][B][U]Italy prepares to endorse China's Belt and Road Initiative[/U] ([USER=260]@Abstruser[/USER] )[/B] [B][U]1. Calls for reforms of EU competition rules - [USER=525]@Sara Moon[/USER][/U] The story:[/B] Since the EU's rejection of the Siemens-Alston railway deal on the grounds that the merger will cut competition and drive up prices for high-speed trains, France and Germany have been calling for reform of the EU's competition law. The EU's competition commissioner Margrethe Vestager, when rejecting the deal, explained that if the deal succeeds, customers will be encouraged to seek for alternative cheaper suppliers, thus inviting foreign competitors like the Chinese CRRC into the market, which was the very thing the deal was trying to prevent. However, French finance minister Bruno Le Maire criticised Ms. Vestager's decision as a mistake and along with German counterpart Peter Altmaier, proposed an overhaul of EU competition law. The proposal included, among others, granting politicians the power to override EU commission decisions and ensuring regulators to make decisions with a global view rather than merely looking at competition within the EU or individual member states. Although the call for reforms of competition rules have frequently emerged at the end of every commission mandate, often by France, according to the Financial Times, the situation this year is different because Germany is backing France and the UK, traditional defenders of strict EU rules, are heading to Brexit. Then what is Ms. Vestager's view on suggested reforms? It seems like she is taking a more cautious view of reforming strict EU competition rules. Last week, in an interview with the Financial Times, she warned that member states should be "aware of the consequences" of weakening merger rules. She also emphasised that the overhaul will require a "strategic choice" between going down towards a more American economic model or a more Chinese model. China has adopted state capitalism, supporting state-owned monopolies to achieve the government's global ambitions, while the US has opted to the Chicago School of competition policy, which tolerates concentration of market power on the grounds that market concentration and the existence of dominant market players are not always detrimental to competition. Ms. Vestager's greatest concern on revamping competition rules of the EU is that any change will have consequences on not just within the European bloc, but beyond it, given the EU's influence over the approach other countries take. Although Ms. Vestager believes that the current EU competition law framework has served well for years, she did acknowledge the need for "a more nuanced and more pragmatic approach". However, her focus is more on regulating digitalised markets. She said that there is a need to police "data monopolists" who control access to a vast amount of data and set prices, thus undermining competition. [B]Impact on businesses and law firms:[/B] It seems like the time has come to reform the EU's competition rules. With China pursuing state monopolies and the US being a protectionist nation, EU's strict merger rules that make it difficult for European companies to merge and compete against outsiders, especially Chinese companies, are against protecting the bloc. Although it is uncertain whether Ms. Vestager will ultimately accept Franco-German views of the reform, the EU might update its rules to take into account the global market when making decisions on merger activities, rather than limiting its view to the European bloc, and to adapt to digitalisation of the markets. Since mergers and acquisitions are a key strategies for companies to expand their businesses, both businesses and law firms would have to keep an eye on whether the EU will be reforming its rules. The decision of the EU will not just affect the EU itself but will also impact the approaches other countries take in regard to competition rules. [B][U]2. House of Lords Committee wants more tech regulation - [USER=157]@kitk[/USER][/U][/B] [B]The story:[/B] Last week, the UK House of Lords Communications Committee released a report, "Regulating in a Digital World", which demanded more regulation of technology companies. The report noted that there are currently numerous regulators, such as Ofcom and the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO), which have oversight of the digital world. To counteract such fragmented regulation of technology companies, the report recommended 10 principles to "shape and frame all regulation of the internet". These principles are: parity; accountability; transparency; openness; privacy; ethical design; recognition of childhood; respect for human rights and equality; education and awareness-raising; democratic accountability, proportionality and an evidence-based approach. Another proposal of the report is the creation of a new Digital Authority, to coordinate existing regulators of technology companies, examine legislation, make recommendations for improvement and report to a joint committee of both Houses of Parliament. The report also called for online services to provide "maximum privacy and safety settings" as the default to allow users more control over their data, the ICO to be able to conduct audits where there are risks associated with using algorithms in decision-making, and online services to be subject to a duty of care enforced by Ofcom that would require moderation of user-generated content. [B]Impact on businesses and law firms:[/B] Given the wide scope and stringent requirements of the report's recommendations, companies providing digital services are likely to face more restrictions and costs in doing business. It is unclear how this would affect the business models of many technology companies, which provide their services on publicly available platforms. For example, these companies might turn to charge fees for all or some of their services, consolidating the services that they provide, or discontinuing their services. Also, as the regulation of technology companies is set to become more cross-disciplinary, law firms which advise technology companies would need to gain a broader and deeper understanding of how their clients operate to advise them of the legal implications that might arise. [B][U]3. The reduction of import tariffs in a no-deal Brexit - [USER=201]@bugsy malone[/USER][/U] The story:[/B] Last week the UK government announced they may cut between 80-90% of tariffs on imported goods if we leave without a Brexit deal. It may be argued that tariffs are really about protectionism, and yet, in instances such as steel, they have not worked. For example, the Chinese have been able to dump freely on world markets because they have a glut of steel. In this instance, the EU and its protectionist laws have not been of use. The government could use zero import tariffs as a negotiation tactic to try to get the best deal possible from the EU. [B]Impact on businesses and law firms:[/B] Zero tariffs are likely to worry some UK producers in industries which are sensitive to competition. However, some UK industries will still be protected. For example, textiles, cars, and farming such as beef, lamb and dairy. In February 2019, environment secretary Michael Gove gave concerned farmers reassurances that the government will continue to apply tariffs to food. Zero tariffs would be beneficial as it could attract more foreign investment into the UK, as companies find the UK a good stepping stone to making an investment. For example, in the 90s under Margaret Thatcher, car companies came to the UK to use it as a platform into Europe. Zero tariffs alsoencourages companies to sell more goods into the UK, giving consumers more choice of goods to buy. Zero tariffs could be a great opportunity to cut the cost of food, clothing and footwear and improve the standard of living for British people. This is why the reduction of tariffs is one of the exciting opportunities Brexit offers. [/LIST] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Our company is called, "The Corporate ___ Academy". What is the missing word here?
Post reply
Forums
Aspiring Lawyers - Interviews & Vacation Schemes
Commercial Awareness Discussion
Commercial Awareness Update - March 2019!
Top
Bottom
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…