Finnish merger control to focus on national transactions

Posted on

31 Oct


Dittmar & Indrenius > Insight > Finnish merger control to focus on national transactions

A proposal by the Finnish Government to lower the national merger control thresholds will significantly increase the number of transactions notifiable to the Finnish Competition and Consumer Authority. However, a focus on national markets could result in fewer notifications from global operators.

Must I notify the Finnish Competition and Consumer Authority of my merger or acquisition? Concerning transactions involving Finnish operations, the answer may, in the future, more often be a “yes”. In September 2022, the Finnish Government submitted a proposal for new legislation (‘Proposal’) that would significantly lower the turnover thresholds that trigger an obligation to notify a merger to the Finnish Competition and Consumer Authority (‘FCCA’). The proposal introduces a fully Finnish ‘100+10’ rule. This means that transactions between parties whose combined turnover from Finland exceeds EUR 100 million and of which at least two generate a turnover of at least EUR 10 million from Finland need to be notified to the FCCA in the future. The proposal is a shift from the current threshold, which in a similar sense could be described as a ‘global 350 + Finnish 20’ -rule.

“The proposal introduces a fully Finnish ‘100+10’ rule.”

The Proposal estimates that the annual amount of transactions subject to the Finnish merger control regime doubles. While the number of notifiable deals likely increases, the Proposal clearly concentrates the FCCA’s focus on Finnish merger activity. One of the Proposal’s core aims is to weave the net of Finnish merger control tighter so that it would catch national industries and markets of local significance that have so far been small enough to swim through the holes. On the flipside, this means that transactions without substantial links to the Finnish economy that the soon-past global threshold caught are released. According to the Proposal, there were nine such transactions between 2017 and 2019.

The amendment brings the Finnish merger control jurisdiction closer to its Nordic counterparts. However, contrary to, for example, the Swedish and Norwegian regimes, the Finnish system will not include a possibility for the FCCA to require a notification of a transaction below the threshold. The FCCA had proposed a possibility for such ex post merger control, but it was abandoned due to resulting uncertainties for future transactions.

“Signing during the few months left of 2022 is therefore the last chance to avoid notifying a transaction that falls within the ‘100+10’ rule.”

The renewed rules come into force in January 2023. Consequently, the new thresholds apply to transactions which are signed, where control is acquired, or where a public bid has been announced after the entry into force of the upcoming law. Signing during the few months left of 2022 is therefore the last chance to avoid notifying a transaction that falls within the ‘100+10’ rule. Simultaneously, the Government is also introducing a renewed form for notifying transactions to the FCCA. The new form should ease the notification process for transactions where no horizontal or vertical links exist, and should be used for any notifications to the FCCA as of January 2023.

Since the reform concerns only the turnover threshold, the FCCA retains its competence to require, for example, penalties for jumping the gun and the dismantling of a notifiable merger implemented without its approval. Therefore, while a transaction might ultimately not be notifiable to the FCCA, it always pays to ensure in advance that it actually is so.

More by the same author

Busy times ahead ā€“ Review of Finnish merger control in 2022

D&Iā€™s annual merger control report highlights the most recent trends and developments in Finnish merger control enforcement. Although it was expected that 2021 was just calm before the storm, 2022 actually seemed to prolong the relative serenity of the Finnish Competition and Consumer Authority’s (“FCCA”) enforcement activity after some more eventful earlier years. Most of the FCCA’s activity in 2022 was in line with its enforcement practice of the previous year. For example, there were no proposals to prohibit concentrations, no declarations of incomplete notifications and no stop-the-clock decisions in 2022. However, one Phase II case in particular was burdensome for the FCCA and the parties alike, with the parties eventually modifying the transaction so that it fell outside of the jurisdiction of the FCCA. Moreover, the several legislative amendments adopted in the end of 2022 ā€“ namely lower notification thresholds and the new notification form ā€“ signal a busy 2023 for the FCCA and everyone else involved in Finnish merger control.

Foreign Subsidies Regulation

The new Foreign Subsidies Regulation (the “FSR” or the “Regulation”) ā€“ entering into force today, 12 January 2023 ā€“ introduces a further regulatory hurdle for companies active in the EU with financial connections to third countries. The FSR enables the European Commission (the “EC”) to screen foreign subsidies that may have a negative impact on the internal market by allowing it to review M&A transactions and public procurement procedures that include financial contributions from non-EU Member States. For companies, the FSR imposes a mandatory prior notification obligation for such transactions and procedures if the Regulation’s notification thresholds are exceeded, as well as a risk of heavy fines for non-compliance. Even if the notification thresholds are not met, the FSR enables the EC to screen any potential market distortions on its own initiative. While highlighting the trend of the EU’s increased scrutiny of transactions on several fronts, the FSR also adds regulatory hurdles to public procurement procedures.

The Finnish Market Court imposes a fine for resale price maintenance for the first time in a decade

The Finnish Market Court has imposed its first fine for resale price maintenance for over a decade. The judgment follows a European trend of competition authorities pursuing and fining resale price maintenance. Moreover, the judgment signals the Market Court’s strict approach to such conduct: if an agreement constituting resale price maintenance is discovered, it is considered a violation of the competition rules in itself and will most likely attract a fine. Partners in distribution relationships should make sure that their cooperation does not involve elements that could constitute agreements on minimum resale prices.

Latest insights

Collaboration with Miltton

News / 15 May 2023

Great Place to Work

News / 27 Apr 2023