| 1. |
What is the amendment history of the Fair Trade Law? |
| A1: |
- First amendment
A Bill for a Partial Amendment to the Fair Trade Law passed the third
reading process at the Congress on 15 January 1999 and was promulgated
by the President on 3 February to take effect on 5 February of the same
year. A total of 20 articles were newly introduced or revised by the
amendment. The 16 amended articles were Articles 10, 11, 16, 18, 19,
20, 21, 23, 35, 36, 37, 40, 41, 42, 46 and 49; the four newly introduced
articles, Articles 23-1, 23-2, 23-3, and 23-4. The major points of that
amendment are as follows:
- Abolished the requirement of public announcement of names of
monopolistic enterprises and enterprises with a market share of
one-fifth (former Articles 10[2] and 11[2]).
- Permitted administrative fines to be imposed without notice for
violations of the Law, and raised the upper limits, and imposed
lower limits, on such fines (Articles 40 and 41).
- Adopted the general principle of “administrative measures
before judicial ones” in handling violations of the Law, while
also raising the amounts of criminal fines (Articles 35, 36, and
37).
- Strengthened regulation of multi-level sales and provided adequate
penalties for violations (Articles 23, 23-1, 23-2, 23-3, 23-4, and
42).
- Established the principle of the Fair Trade Law as a fundamental
economic law, which aims at harmonizing competition policy and industrial
policy (Article 46).
- Abolished provisions excluding daily necessities from the prohibition
on resale price restrictions on (Article 18[1][proviso] and [2]).
- Second amendment
Article 9 was amended and promulgated on 26 April 2000. This amendment
deletes the provisions of Article 9 concerning competent authorities
at the provincial level in response to the passage of the Provisional
Statute on the Adjustment of the Function, Business, and Organization
of the Taiwan Provincial Government and the Law on Local Government
Systems.
- Third amendment
In anticipation of the enforcement of the Administrative Procedure Law
from 1 January 2001, the Fair Trade Commission, on 1 May 2000, submitted
a Bill for a Partial Amendment to the Fair Trade Law to the Executive
Yuan for ratification and submission to the Congress for deliberation.
On 2 August 2000 the Cabinet completed its review of the bill and submitted
it for deliberation to the Congress. Furthermore, in 2001, recognizing
that Taiwan faces serious competitive pressure from the trend
of economic globalization in the 21st Century and that competitive advantages
enjoyed by large multinational enterprises and the change of the structural
characteristics of Taiwan’s economy have made enterprise mergers
and acquisitions a significant competitive advantage, the Fair Trade
Commission drafted a Bill for Further Partial Amendments to the Fair
Trade Law. This bill, drafted with an eye on trends in comparative laws
concerning regulatory controls on enterprise combinations, was tailored
to the following objectives: adapting to structural adjustments in industries
and new requirements of Taiwan’s economic environment;
maintaining and protecting market competition mechanisms; conforming
to the consensus reached at a meeting of industry groups of the Economic
Development Advisory Conference that government handling of enterprise
combination cases should follow the principles of streamlining procedures,
removing barriers, and offering appropriate incentives. On 31 August
2001, the Bill for Further Partial Amendments to the Fair Trade Law
was submitted to the Cabinet, which forwarded it on 17 October 2001
for deliberation by the Congress. The bill passed the third reading
process at the Congress on 15 January 2002 and was promulgated by the
President on 6 February 2002, to take effect on 8 February 2002. A total
of 15 articles were newly introduced or revised by the amendment. The
11 amended articles were Articles 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17,
23-4, and 40; the four newly introduced articles, Articles 5-1, 11-1,
27-1, and 42-1. The primary points of the amendment are as follows:
- Abandons the original prior approval system for enterprise mergers
in favor of an advance filing and opposition system, and allows
the Commission to distinguish between financial institution enterprises
and non-financial institution enterprises when announcing sales
volume thresholds triggering filing requirements for enterprise
combinations. If the Fair Trade Commission has not raised any opposition
to a merger within 30 days after an enterprise files a merger report,
the merger may lawfully proceed. (Article 11)
- Specifies types of mergers that will not weaken competitive mechanisms
on the market and for which merging enterprises are not required
to file merger reports with the Fair Trade Commission. (Article
11-1)
- Allows the central regulatory authority, the Fair Trade Comission,
to attach conditions to decisions on mergers, and provides legal
consequences for violation of such attached conditions. (Article
12)
- Moves into the Law itself a number of provisions of subordinate
regulations that bear upon rights and interests of the regulated
industries and individuals. (Articles 5-1, 7, 8, 42-1)
- Sets a time period for processing by the Commission of applications
for exceptional approval of concerted action, specifies kinds of
conditions that may be attached to approvals of concerted action,
and provides for revocation thereof; specifies the scope of authorization
of the Supervisory Regulations Governing Multi-Level Sales; sets
forth principles for handling applications by parties to access
materials or files and the basis for that authorization. (Articles
14, 15, 16, 17, 23-4, 27-1)
|
| 2. |
What is the applicability of the amended articles of the Fair Trade
Law to unlawful acts? |
| A2: |
- Article 13 of the Law Governing the Standards of Central Laws and
Regulations provides that laws and regulations prescribed to take effect
from the date of promulgation shall actually take force as of the third
day from the date of promulgation. Article 49(2) of the amended Fair
Trade Law provides that “Amendments to the Law shall take effect
from the date of promulgation.” The amended articles of this Law
were promulgated by presidential announcement on 3 February 1999 and
took force on the third day subsequent thereto, i.e. 5 February 1999.
If an unlawful act occurred or continued to exist on that day, the act
would be liable to punishment under the amended articles. If an unlawful
act were completed prior to that enforcement date, the applicability
of the penalty provisions would be divided along the lines of criminal
penalties and administrative penalties, as follows:
1. Criminal penalties
(1) Punishments under Article 35: If an act was completed prior to the
enforcement date of the amendment, the post-amendment provisions apply
in accordance with the principle of leniency regarding amended articles
set forth in Article 2(1) of the Criminal Code; however, violations
of Article 23 are liable to punishment under Article 35 of the pre-amendment
Law.
(2) Punishments under Article 36: If an enterprise that violated Article
19 prior to enforcement of the amended articles fails to cease its illegal
conduct after being ordered by the Commission to do so, the pre-amendment
provisions shall apply in keeping with the principle of leniency. On
the other hand, an enterprise that violated Article 19 prior to enforcement
of the amended articles and fails to rectify its illegal conduct after
being ordered by the Commission to do so is not liable to criminal punishment,
because the Law in force at the time of the act did not provide criminal
penalties addressing the failure to “rectify” violations.
(3) Punishments under Article 37: The pre-amendment provisions of Article
37 apply to violations of Article 22 that occurred prior to enforcement
of the amended articles, in keeping with the principle of leniency.
2. Administrative penalties
(1) Penalties under Article 40: The pre-amendment articles apply, based
on the principle of “substance governed by the old provisions,
procedure by the new.
(2) Penalties under Article 41 and 42: For acts completed prior to the
enforcement date of the amended articles, the pre-amendment articles
likewise apply.
- If previous acts were completed prior to enforcement of the amended
articles and subsequent acts occurred or continued in existence after
enforcement, the post-amendment provisions apply to the subsequent acts.
|
| 3. |
Does profit seeking have to be the main activity of the "enterprise"
in Article 2 of the Fair Trade Law? |
| A3: |
The Fair Trade Law (hereinafter referred to as this Law) is enacted
to maintain trading order, protect the interests of consumers, and ensure
fair competition. Therefore, any entity whose actions will affect market
order or market competition in the provision of goods or services, shall
be subject to regulation by this Law; such an entity is referred to as
an enterprise under this Law.
Relevant articles of law: Fair Trade Law, Article 2 |
| 4. |
Are unregistered businesses and firms subject to the Fair
Trade Law? |
| A4: |
Any un-registered commercial establishments, that engage
in the provision of goods and services, shall be considered as enterprises
as referred to in Article 2 of this Law, whether whose registration with
the competent authorities is unnecessary in accordance with law (such
as small-scale commercial establishments that are exempt from registration
in accordance with Article 4 of the Commercial Registration Law), or whose
registration is required by law but which fail to do so.
Relevant articles of law: Fair Trade Law, Article 2
|
| 5. |
What organizations are referred to by ˇ¨trade associationˇ¨
in Article 2(1)(iii) of the Fair Trade Law? |
| |
According to Article 2 of the Enforcement Rules to the
Fair Trade Law, the term ˇ§trade associationˇ¨ in Article 2(1)(iii) of the
Law refers to: industry associations and chambers of industry organized
under the Industrial Association Law; commercial associations, federations
of commercial associations, exporter associations, and federations of
exporter associations, and chambers of commerce organized under the Commercial
Association Law; and also to other professional associations organized
under the provisions of other relevant laws and regulations, such as architects
associations, bar associations, and CPA associations organized in accordance
with the Architects Law, the Lawyers Law, and the Certified Public Accountants
Law.
Relevant articles of law: Fair Trade Law, Article 2; Enforcement Rules
to the Fair Trade Law, Article 2 |
| 6. |
Are government administrative agencies considered
enterprises under Article 2 of the Fair Trade Law? |
| A6: |
Administrative agencies are organs that act externally
on behalf of the state or of public juristic persons such as local autonomous
organizations. Within its scope of authority, such an agency may act in
its own name on behalf of the juristic person of which it is part. It
is considered an entity capable of adopting independent action. Whether
an administrative agency is considered an enterprise as referred to in
Article 2 of this Law depends on whether the agency at issue is exercising
public powers or engaging in private economic activity:
- When an administrative agency is exercising public powers or taking
actions under a particular public law as a national administrative entity
rather than providing goods and services and engaging in trade, such
acts are inconsistent with this Lawˇ¦s defining criteria for an enterprise.
In this context, the agency is not considered an ˇ§enterpriseˇ¨ as referred
to in Article 2.
- However, when an administrative agency acting in an independent capacity
engages in ordinary trading or economic activity under a particular
private law, it is governed by the provisions of this Law just like
any ordinary privately operated enterprise. It shall be interpreted
in this way so as to ensure fair trade and competitive opportunity for
its trading counterparts and competitors.
Relevant articles of law: Fair Trade Law, Article 2 |
| 7. |
Is demand resulting from actions of administrative
agencies governed by the provisions of the Fair Trade Law? |
| A7: |
When an administrative agency, in its private capacity,
provides goods or services of market value as part of its operations or
as one of its objectives, the demand resulting from such actions, regardless
of whether goods or services have been provided at the time of demand,
shall be subject to regulation by the Law. When an administrative agency
provides goods or services for a fee, the demand resulting from such actions,
regardless of whether goods or services have been provided at the time
of demand, shall also be subject to regulation by this Law.
ˇ@ When an administrative agency commissions a private or other organization
to provide goods or services of market value, in its private capacity,
as part of its operation or as one of its objectives, the demand resulting
from such actions, regardless of whether goods or services have been provided
at the time of demand, shall be subject to regulation by this Law. The
demand resulting from the provision of goods or services for a fee, regardless
of whether goods or services have been provided at the time of demand,
shall also be subject to regulation by this Law. The division of duties
worked out between the Fair Trade Commission and the Public Construction
Commission following the implementation of the Government Procurement
Law (on 27 May 1999) is as follows:
- The applicability of law and the division of duties regarding government
procurement disputes occurring before and after implementation of the
Government Procurement Law:
- Disputes involving acts that occurred prior to the implementation
of the Government Procurement Law and that have a bearing on the
competitive order of the marketplace are to be handled under the
Fair Trade Law.
- Disputes involving acts that spanned the implementation of the
Government Procurement Law and that have a bearing on competitive
order of the marketplace are to be resolved by the parties involved
through the channels
set forth in the Government Procurement Law; provided, acts that
already constituted violations of the Fair Trade Law prior to the
implementation of the Government Procurement Law, the Fair Trade
Commission may still impose punishment under the Fair Trade Law.
3. Disputes involving acts that occurred after the implementation
of the Government Procurement Law and that have a bearing on competitive
order of the marketplace are to be resolved by the parties involved
through the channels set forth in the Government Procurement Law.
- Government procurement disputes occurring after the implementation
of the Government Procurement Law but involving violations of competition
laws and regulations:
- Where acts related to government procurement have a bearing on
competitive order, if the Government Procurement Law has relevant
provisions, the cases are to be handled by the competent authority
of that law or by the relevant authorized agencies pursuant to the
provisions of that law.
- In government-planned or authorized and agency-administered construction
projects relating to transportation, energy, environmental protection,
or tourism where the competent authorities for the target industry
have approved the investment and construction by the private sector,
the procedures for selecting the private concerns to invest are
governed by the Government Procurement Law, except where otherwise
provided by law.
- Although the Government Procurement Law is silent on anti-competitive
acts between bid-winning enterprises and their subcontractors, cases
of this kind that touch upon provisions of the Fair Trade Law are
handled by the Fair Trade Commission under that Law.
|