Disclaimer: This site has been first put up 15 years ago. Since then I would probably do a couple things differently, but because I've noticed this site had been linked from news outlets, PhD theses and peer rewieved papers and because I really hate the concept of "digital dark age" I've decided to put it back up. There's no chance it can produce any harm now.
| Identifier: | 04TAIPEI3961 |
|---|---|
| Wikileaks: | View 04TAIPEI3961 at Wikileaks.org |
| Origin: | American Institute Taiwan, Taipei |
| Created: | 2004-12-14 00:47:00 |
| Classification: | UNCLASSIFIED |
| Tags: | KIPR ECON ETRD TW |
| Redacted: | This cable was not redacted by Wikileaks. |
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 TAIPEI 003961 SIPDIS STATE PASS TO AIT/W, DOJ, AND USTR STATE FOR EAP/RSP/TC DOJ FOR DELRAHIM USTR FOR KI/FREEMAN E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: KIPR, ECON, ETRD, TW SUBJECT: Bilateral Consultations on Competition Law and Antitrust Seminar Summary ------- 1. (U) In order to share information and open channels for future cooperation on antitrust issues, AIT and the US Department of Justice met with officials from the Taiwan Fair Trade Commission (TFTC) in Taipei, November 15-16. DOJ and TFTC officials compared antitrust developments in the US and Taiwan and committed to establish an intellectual property rights (IPR) and competition working group under the auspices of AIT and TECRO. In a separate session, which included private US attorneys as well as other Taiwan agencies and academics, the two sides gave presentations on the importance of antitrust enforcement to economic development. DOJ also participated in a competition law seminar hosted by the US-Taiwan Business Council and the Taiwan Semiconductor Industry Association (TSIA). End Summary. DOJ Focuses on Increasing Penalties While Providing Amnesty --------------------------------------------- -------------- 2. (U) On November 15, 2004 Deputy Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim, Special Counsel Stuart Chemtob, and DOJ Attorney Andrew Finch met with TFTC representatives for 3 hours of consultations at TFTC headquarters. The U.S. presentation focused on a dual approach of simultaneously increasing penalties for cartel behavior and the benefits of the amnesty program. DOJ reported that the US has increased the maximum penalty from 3 years in jail to 10 years in jail and the maximum criminal fine from US$10 million to US$100 million. The amnesty program, which offers amnesty to the first company from a cartel that comes forward with information, now also provides for reduced civil penalties for amnesty recipients. The amnesty program is the single most effective tool for breaking up cartels. Mr. Delrahim also stressed that an effective antitrust policy should not discriminate based upon nationality. He cited several examples of US companies investigated by DOJ for anticompetitive practices against foreign firms. Taiwan Still Developing its Antitrust Enforcement Program --------------------------------------------- ------------ 3. (U) Taiwan is also exploring an amnesty program and expressed interest in the lessons learned from the DOJ, but TFTC Chairman Hwang Tzong-Leh noted that TFTC does not share the US DOJ's ability to prosecute antitrust violators. This limits TFTC's ability to put pressure on and negotiate deals with violators. Taiwan's amnesty law is still being discussed in the legislature. TFTC Vice Chairman Chen Chi- yuan stated that TFTC's focus over the next three years would be examination of enforcement procedures and legislation in order to create a consistent enforcement policy. He pointed out that this is necessary because Taiwan has a very short antitrust law history compared to the US. Chairman Chen also mentioned that Taiwan prefers to educate the business community rather than regulate them. He particularly stressed that dissemination of information in forums such as seminars are as important as enforcement actions. 4. (U) The two groups also discussed their different procedures for evaluating mergers. In 2002 Taiwan amended the requirement that two firms intending to merge submit a pre-merger application. Now, they require a pre-merger notification, meaning that if TFTC does not request more information within 30 days, the merger would be automatically approved. TFTC's policy also uses market share as a benchmark for determining which merger applications will require more requests for information. When Chemtob questioned this policy, TFTC responded that other measures such as assets and sales volume are absolute numbers and do not reflect the relative nature of monopolies. TFTC prefers flexible standards that promote competition. Chemtob stated DOJ also prefers flexible standards that promote competition, but does not consider market share to be the primary determiner of anticompetitive practice. TFTC asked DOJ whether it placed a greater priority on a short time frame for evaluating merger applications in order to improve efficiency or on accuracy of the data in order to catch more offenders. They also asked whether DOJ used a large database of information to evaluate which cases constituted compliance problems. DOJ responded that it evaluates mergers on a case-by-case basis. Out of 1454 merger notifications in FY 2004, it had to scrutinize only about 75 cases, and only in 15 cases (one percent) did they issue a second request for information. Agreement to Establish IPR and Competition Working Group --------------------------------------------- ----------- 5. (U) Mr. Delrahim proposed establishing an intellectual property and competition working group with the TFTC in order to help it distinguish IPR rights from anti- competitive practices, based on sound economic policy. He said that DOJ has already established working groups with the Japan Fair Trade Commission (JFTC) and the Korea Fair Trade Commission (KFTC). Delrahim proposed establishing a similar dialogue with Taiwan to include issues such as standard setting and unilateral refusals for licensing. He suggested that the working group include both economists and attorneys. Chemtob said the US Federal Trade Commission would participate in the working group. Vice Chairman Chen agreed that a working group would be an important venue to exchange ideas in the IP and competition area and to receive advice from DOJ. He stated that the International Competition Network (ICN) was also a good forum to discuss issues such as these, as the US and Taiwan are both members. Seminars Highlight Need for Antitrust Education in Taiwan --------------------------------------------- ----------- 6. (U) The afternoon session on November 15 was open to officials from several Taiwan ministries as well as professors and students from local Universities. DAAG Delrahim spoke about the antitrust enforcement priorities in the United States, citing cartels as the highest priority, followed by mergers, and lastly, monopolistic behavior. He stressed the importance of international cooperation in anti-cartel enforcement and praised the establishment of the ICN and intellectual property and competition working groups to promote convergence on policy and enforcement. The audience asked why Taiwan, which had much smaller companies than the US, should be worried about antitrust issues. Mr. Delrahim explained that antitrust investigation should be primarily concerned with preserving the competitive environment, not the size or even the market share of the firms involved. 7. (U) Commissioner Yu said that the Taiwan Fair Trade Law distinguishes anti-trust issues, such as mergers and monopolies, from unfair competition issues, such as false advertising, illegal multilevel sales, fraud, and counterfeiting. In the last 12 years Taiwan has handed out over NT$1.3 billion in fines and has punished over 3,666 companies. He reiterated the TFTC view that punishment should not be the primary tool. Taiwan instead favors education, through universities, mass media, and information dissemination to the companies so that they can effectively self-regulate. 8. (U) The US-Taiwan Business Council and TSIA organized presentations to industry representatives November 16 in Hsinchu. The key points discussed included cooperation between governments on investigations, which DOJ praised, and the inconsistency of penalties and time frame for investigations, which private firms complained about. The private attorneys also raised questions about how patent pools (groups of companies combining large numbers of related patents for licensing arrangements) were hindering smaller firms from innovating and, conversely, how patent "trolls" (companies who buy up large numbers of patents without intending to market them and then sue when another company markets a product, allegedly based on such patents) were hindering innovation by larger firms. In the last session, companies asked how they could protect themselves from antitrust suits. Finch stressed that an effective compliance program must communicate the severity of possible penalties for anti-competitive activity, before it starts to occur. Conclusion ------- 9. (U) This conference built on the relationship established by last year's meetings in Washington. TFTC appreciated the opportunity to personally discuss the development of Taiwan's enforcement program with DOJ. More importantly, they were able to establish a channel for regular communication between Taiwan and US officials. The public seminars directly addressed TFTC's focus of educating firms about antitrust laws rather than regulating them. Participants agreed that this kind of education program would help prevent compliance problems in the future and requested more education programs on this relatively new area of Taiwan law. Paal
Latest source of this page is cablebrowser-2, released 2011-10-04