from Section 2 - Smes And Competition Law
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 August 2017
This chapter argues that, while some states in Southeast Asia favourably treat small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), competition enforcement in many other jurisdictions creates difficulties and disadvantages for them. Many different aspects of enforcement contribute to this. Most importantly, some young competition agencies tend to focus their enforcement efforts on SMEs with the presumption that SMEs are more likely to infringe the law due to their lack of understanding. In contrast, state-owned enterprises, which have a variety of opportunities to influence political figures and industry regulators, enjoy a measure of favouritism. SMEs also face difficulties in utilizing competition law to fight larger players, due to their limited financial resources, limited access to proper legal resources, and, sometimes, an inconsistent and non-transparent application of the law by some competition regulators.
Introduction
The treatment of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in competition law and policy has always been a contentious issue. SMEs in many countries have, for years, argued that they are placed at a disadvantage in the enforcement of competition law — if not within overall competition policy — and should thus be excluded from the ambit of the law. Some countries have chosen to exclude them from the ambit of the law, whilst others keep them within though subject to the de minimis test. Where SMEs are excluded from competition law, it usually takes the form of a blanket exclusion (such as occurs in Article 50 of Indonesia's Law No. 5 of 1999), although some partial exclusions may also be found. This chapter will examine some issues facing SMEs that arise from the enforcement of competition law, such as the presumption of a propensity to infringe the law, enforcement favouritism for large enterprises, the failure to create a level-playing field, and some other disadvantages faced by SMEs in enforcing their rights under competition law. For the purpose of this chapter, the notion of enforcement of competition law is used in its widest sense to include the enforcement of competition regulation by sectoral regulators; the term “competition authorities” here includes both sectoral and general regulators. The geographical focus is Southeast Asia.
The Presumption of Propensity
One common enforcement characteristic of competition authorities — and this is particularly true with young authorities — is to focus their enforcement efforts on SMEs.
To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.
To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.
To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.