Has UK Merger Control Really Got Tougher?
It's that time of the year when press releases tell us that M&A in all sorts of sectors are about to take off and that new developments are set to transform the regulatory landscape.
In the UK's case a common theme seems to be that the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has become more interventionist regarding mergers.
Much of this commentary focuses on 2019's most high profile UK cases - such as the Sainsburys/Asda deal - and also on signals of a more assertive stance regarding digital markets.
But is it true for merger cases taken as a whole?
The answer depends on which aspects of intervention one looks at. For example:
- The proportion of cases that were called in for review in 2019, rather than notified voluntarily, was much in line with the previous CMA average.
- And the proportion of cases found not to raise competition problems was also similar to before.
- Meanwhile, mergers in markets that might be deemed too small for investigation proceeded without public scrutiny.
On the other hand, there was a record number of cases referred for a full Phase 2 merger investigation, as I foreshadowed in a previous article.
But does this signal tougher intervention?
Or was it more a reflection of the sharp increase in the number of high competition-risk deals that companies embarked on in 2019.
We may find out in 2020.
Happy New Year!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I look in detail at these points in my A-Z review of CMA 2019 decisions, taking place during January