11In economics, the term “every man for himself” describes an economic policy aimed at enriching one country at the expense of other countries. The term “every man for himself” is most often used in reference to international trade policies such as the application of tariffs and other import restrictions, as well as currency devaluations aimed at improving the international competitiveness of the goods the country exports. “Beggar-thy-neighbour,” International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences (2021) accessed January 30, 2021. Today, fears of a resurgence of protectionism are growing, from the U.S. trade war with China to Brexit in the U.K. to lesser-known trade-restrictive measures taken by countries around the world. The General Agreement on Trade and Customs (GATT), which had been replaced by the World Trade Organization (WTO) since 1995, has rendered obsolete traditional forms of protectionism such as tariffs. However, it has not defeated protectionism; Instead, protectionism has evolved thanks to its protean ability to adapt to new and often undetectable forms now called “dark” protectionism (e.B. Competition law enforcement and recent bailouts). It is argued that there are two ways in which States can use competition law to affect free trade and restrict foreign companies` access to domestic markets: exemption from certain anti-competitive practices under national competition law and strategic enforcement of national competition law. This article considers competition law as an instrument of protectionist policy with a comparative analysis of the United States and the European Union. Using an international political economy (IPR) perspective supported by overlapping theories of realism (legal/political), this article notes that, while there is no direct and robust empirical evidence of protectionist motivations for enforcing competition law, particularly with respect to “merger regulation and export cartels”, the presence of political elements in decision-making, however, the broad discretion of competition authorities and the “sponge character” of competition law are one way of using competition law for protectionist tendencies. If you have questions about U.S.

customs legislation and tariffs, please refer to the U.S. Customs Law Library Research Guide. If you have questions about non-U.S. countries when it comes to customs legislation and tariffs, consult the Law Library`s Customs Law Research Guide. The likelihood that States will apply competition law as such becomes evident from the natural tendency of States to pursue protectionist policies on the basis of realistic theoretical foundations, as well as the vague nature of competition law. In order to bridge this gap, which neither competition law nor commercial policy can bridge, States must therefore agree on uniform basic principles of competition law. Strategic trade theory is often used to explain state support for export cartels.152 Exporting states, by supporting their domestic enterprises involved in export cartels, increase their national income through export earnings and promote the welfare of producers (exporters) at the expense of importing states. According to strategic trade theory, exporting states will oppose any extraterritorial application of competition law by the importing state that restricts export cartels.153 Just as the blockade status shows the applicability of national competition law to anti-competitive acts and measures of the state and state-owned enterprises in Germany. This is evidenced by the (blocking) order, which hinders foreign investigations and the enforcement of foreign decisions and judgments against russian strategic enterprises.154 In addition, the lack of cooperation with the investigation of the importing State may also be due to the lack of incentive of an exporting State to immediately discipline the export cartel, since it does not have negative effects on the national economy.155 Not only the applicable trade laws, but also national competition laws are not enough.155 Not only are applicable commercial laws, but also national competition laws not enough.

address the problem of anti-competitive behaviour in foreign countries that is detrimental to the State of destination; this stems from the fundamental differences between competition policy and trade policy.156 The texts of other agreements can be found on the WTO`s legal texts website. In addition, the following resources can be useful: like competition law, trade policy has both political and economic dimensions. It refers to the system of incentives that a State introduces in terms of production and consumption, including the import, export and trade in goods and services, in accordance with the imposing State`s growth and development objectives.66 Trade policy includes various measures and instruments such as the introduction of customs duties, quotas or restrictions, subsidies to domestic industry and other measures, which are often divided into two broad types: tariff measures and non-tariff measures.67 It appears that states are using their competition laws as invincible barriers to trade to advance their protectionist imperatives, such as national security and environmental protection.9 In recent years, States have been accused of using their competition law to engage in protectionism. For example, the US criticises the fact that the EU Merger Regulation protects competitors and not competition, particularly in the technology sector in mergers involving third-country companies – even if the same acquisitions are approved by other competition authorities. A good example is the Commission`s decision in 2001 to block General Electric`s acquisition of Honeywell for $42 billion.10 Similarly, the United States is encouraged to change its position on export cartels because of their “every man for himself” effect.11 Consideration of the controversy surrounding the application of competition law for protectionist purposes is particularly relevant today. protect and maintain free trade and liberalization. There is a gap between competition policy and trade policy that is not taken into account by national competition law and does not regulate WTO rules. Merger control rules and exemptions from the export cartel appear to be being used as tools for protectionist purposes to exploit this gap.

This article therefore examines whether states use their competition law to pursue protectionist policies in the EU and the US. In this context, the article focuses in particular on the analysis of how merger regulation and the treatment of export cartels promote protectionism.12 The impact of anti-competitive business practices on international trade is the main concern of trade policy.104 Experts105 recognize that anti-competitive practices by companies impede international trade in addition to barriers to trade. commerce. .