Transnational giants are not enough to manipulate China-style anti-monopoly firepower

Ye Bihua April 13, according to Bloomberg News, Unilever and Procter and Gamble have agreed to pay fines to close an investigation into the EU allegations that the two companies conspired to manipulate the price of detergent. Unilever and Procter and Gamble will be fined by European Union antitrust authorities in Wednesday for manipulating washing powder prices, the report said.　　The laundry detergent brand is the Secret (OMO), Surf, Tide, Gain and Times (ERA), and Baoying (Persil).　　Earlier, in the domestic union Unilever, Procter and Gamble, Libai and Venus four Japanese giants also "coincide" to its daily product prices, the average price increase of about 10%, but ultimately in the NDRC's "interview" after the postponement of the price hike plan. Price manipulation if the eventual settlement with companies such as Unilever would be the fourth time the European Union would start a fine settlement procedure for similar cases.　　By the end of 2010, the European Commission had issued a total of 12 billion euros for price union manipulation of market prices. The European Commission has the highest possible penalty for violating EU antitrust regulations by 10% of its current revenue. Unilever's annual revenue reached $55.352 billion trillion, while the company's revenues amounted to $79.697 billion.　　This means that, once price manipulation is established, Unilever and Procter and Gamble will face fines of up to $5.5 billion and $8 billion respectively. The other protagonist in the case of Germany, Han Gao, although also involved, but as a tainted witness, the EU to provide monopoly evidence, may escape the fine.　　A spokesman for the European Commission, Fernando Torres, said the total fines could be reduced by 10% if companies were to "turn themselves in" and admit to participating in the price union. "Many of the manufacturers in our industry are facing an EU antitrust investigation," said Paul Fox, a spokesman for Procter and Gamble. "But he declined to comment further. In March this year, L ' Oreal, Procter and Gamble and Henkel, which occupies 70% per cent of the Spanish shampoo and hair care sector, were also referred to by the Spanish National Competition Commission for manipulating prices between 1989 and 2008 and, finally, the Spanish branch of L ' Oreal was punished by 23.2 million euros,　　The Spanish branch of Procter and Gamble was fined € 12 million. In China, foreign-owned Japanese giants also occupy a pivotal position in the domestic industry. China's cosmetics network released by the industry Blue Book shows that 2010 China's daily market sales are expected to reach 206.817 billion yuan, an increase of 10.9%.　　Foreign brands occupy a market share of more than 70%.　　Does price manipulation also exist at home? "The price manipulation is far more severe in the country than abroad," he said. "Engaged in marketing Li Zhiqi think. However, China Hairdressing and Beauty Association consultant Jung Junguang that the day of the industry is large, homogeneity of the characteristics of serious, enterprises generally will not be allied to price manipulation. "Most are price manipulation at the dealer level. "For example, the ex-factory price of 75 percent-78 percent, but to the terminal prices are not necessarily, which with the dealer's roasted seeds and nuts have a certain relationship。　　China-style anti-price Monopoly January 4, the National Development and Reform Commission issued the "anti-price monopoly provisions" and "anti-price monopoly administrative law enforcement procedures", prohibit the operator alliance monopoly manipulation of prices, the new provisions from February 1, 2011 to formally implement. On that day, the NDRC also informed the Fuyang Paper Industry Association of Zhejiang province to organize the operators of the industry to achieve changes or fixed prices of the monopoly agreement, the maximum penalty of 500,000 yuan.　　But since then, there have been rare cases of price-monopoly. Li Zhiqi that this is related to the evidence and recognition of the anti-monopoly, "generally speaking, this kind of communication is relatively recessive, often in the outside is only a tacit understanding, not in the market to do marketing people, you can hardly grasp this evidence."　　He also believes that the phenomenon of price manipulation is also prevalent in the convenience of food, wine, dairy and other aspects.　　Senior dairy expert Wang Dingmian told reporters that over the years, he and some people in the industry have been tracking foreign milk giants manipulating prices, but ultimately can not find conclusive evidence. According to Wang Dingmian, since 2005, a few big foreign baby milk powder to launch a round of price hikes every one or two years, in recent years, the frequency of such price increases have also been encrypted signs. Each price hike, is a foreign baby milk powder giant first launched, after a few months, other foreign milk giant also completed the price increases, the range is also similar. "Each price increase, we have many times calculation, drilling, including feed, supply, international milk source futures changes, tariffs, transportation, crude oil and other factors, found that there may be 1-2 links to the cost of the price of a different move, but comprehensive view, is not enough to achieve the price of milk powder companies to improve the In addition, Guangdong Kwong Shin law firm lawyer Zhang Qing that the price monopoly or manipulation in the evidence and cognizance of the difficulty is: first of all, the price changes in the range of the lack of a detailed identification criteria. For example, significantly higher or significantly below, the obvious standard is how much, how to determine the rate of change in commodity prices and costs, secondly, the determination of market dominance is vague, leaving the administrative organs of the operational space is too large; Finally, some large manufacturers of certain products to the national unified retail prices, whether suspected price operation, because the geographical　　, transportation and other costs, the actual cost of retail sales in each region will be inconsistent, so the unified retail price is open to discussion. Symptoms and root causes in Li Zhiqi view, "some enterprises to the industry too large share of possession, in fact, has killed a lot of enterprise vitality." "The current antitrust laws in the United States are mainly composed of the Sherman Act, the Clayton Act and the Federal Trade Commission Act and special laws that are compatible and relevant to these laws," Zhang Qing said.　　In the antitrust behavior cognizance, manipulating the price is an important factor. Zhang Qing also said that compared with foreign countries, one of our country is not enough civil punishment, only to provide a simple civil compensation, but no punitive compensation system, the second is no criminal liability, so that the law on price monopoly agreement, especially horizontal price monopoly of this "serious violationLaw "," itself illegal "behavior lacks strong enough to regulate power, four is lack of detailed operational guidelines.　　21 airline operators, including Japan Airlines, Qantas Airways and British Airways, have been conspiring to increase their collective prices in the United States, with the US authorities punishing a total of more than 1.7 billion dollars. At the same time, "interview" is also considered as one of the means to curb price manipulation.　　But the industry reacted differently.　　The National Development and Reform Commission recently interviewed 17 trade associations such as the National Federation of Industry and Commerce, China Food Industry Association, department Store Business Association and Dairy Industry Association. Jung Junguang, consultant of China Hairdressing and Beauty Association, argues that there is a need for state control of speculation. But Li Zhiqi refers to the interview is only a palliative, "some enterprises are indeed because of the reasons for the industrial chain or cost reasons, there is rising demand, should be the price of the issue to the market to solve." ”