| Summary: | 碩士 === 中原大學 === 財經法律研究所 === 96 === In recent years domestic enterprises in abundance went forward to mainland China, not only eyeing on its huge market and inexpensive labor costs, but also responding to the needs for long-term development involving business adjustments or transformation. Enterprises today must seek to develop beyond the border to achieve the goal of sustaining operation. On the other hand, the open economy and enhanced foreign relationship policy adopted by mainland in the recent decade prompt the government to take charge the corresponding issues in economic and trade laws. Its scope certainly includes aspects on fair trades and free competition.
When analyzing patterns enterprises adopted in advancing to mainland, strategic alliance is generally regarded as the main approach. Seeking to maintain their competitive edges industries or manufacturers often form temporary relations of cooperation by combining each other’s competitive powers and aim to achieve a multiplication effect to the overall competitive advantages. However, strategic alliance often causes the reduction of actual or potential competitors and thus results in the hindrance, limiting or twist of market competition. This is damaging to the interests of consumers and the competitiveness or even the chance of survival of small enterprises. Government alike ought to inaugurate and implement competition laws in order to maintain the normal market competition and trade order.
Speaking of the legal systems on market competition at both sides of the Taiwan Straits, Taiwan announced the Fair Trade Law on February 4, 1991, and accordingly had it revised on January 15, 2002. The Fair Trade Law regulates both business behaviors that limit competition as well as activities of unfair competition. Mainland on the other hand, adopts a different legislation pattern by inaugurating separate laws to regulate behaviors that limit competition and activities of unfair competition. The Anti-improper Competition Law was inaugurated in September 2, 1993, and implemented in December 1, 1993. The Law in part covers business behavior that limits competition in a rather detailed manner. As such both legal scholars and practicing lawyers consider that the Anti-improper Competition Law not only regulates competition behaviors too substantially, but also may cause difficulties when engaging between the Anti-improper Competition Law and the competition law system.
Upon participating WTO, mainland is required of the transparency duty by WTO and must establish and implement a comprehensive competition legal system that provides an open, transparent and predictable behavior criterion to market operators and enterprisers. This is vital to maintain market competition orders and fence off potential monopoly often influenced by multinational enterprises in the open market. Therefore, the Anti-monopoly Law as inaugurated on August 31, 2007, and subjected to implementation on August 1, 2008 aims specifically at market behaviors that limit competition. It regulates market behaviors in great details that include monopoly agreements, centralization of market operators and related enterprise responsibilities. The chapter on “administrative monopoly”, which suits a unique condition in mainland, intends to guard fair market competition against its public-owned enterprises and to assure the advancement to market economy in a global scale. In accordance, Taiwan enterprises must be familiar with the basic principle and detailed stipulation of mainland’s competition law to avoid being trapped with unlawful behaviors and suffering economic losses when developing markets in the mainland.
This research studied the development history and detailed contents of competition laws at both sides of the straits, and offered to analyze their stipulation on strategic alliance. The research follows by analyzing four cases of actual Taiwanese enterprises developing market into mainland, including cooperation between the Haired(海爾) and Taiwan’s OEM companies, between the Taiwan Cement(台泥) and Cha-Ni Cement(嘉泥), the technological association between UMC(聯電) and 和艦technology companies, association between Uni-President Enterprises Corporation(UPEC)(統一企業) and Wei-Lih(維力) by stock holding. These cases were studied to explain whether associations in terms of strategic alliance actually involve rulings stipulated by competition laws at either side of the straits. By reference to actual legal practices in details, similarities and differences in the application of each competition legal system may be better comprehended. Practical suggestions to Taiwan enterprises seeking to develop the mainland market may be offered accordingly.
|
|---|
