By: Tom Verdonk<\/p>\n
On September 10, the President-elect of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, <\/span>announced<\/span><\/a> that Danish Commissioner Margrethe Vestager would reprise her role as European Commissioner for Competition for a second five-year term. Vestager has held this post since November 2014. After a subsequent <\/span>hearing<\/span><\/a> without any noteworthy opposition in front of Members of the European Parliament, Vestager obtained the Parliament\u2019s approval. Her re-appointment in itself is unique: No Commissioner has ever been reappointed to the same role for a second term. Moreover, Vestager\u2019s second term is likely to have a significant impact on antitrust enforcement in the European Union (EU), in particular with regard to the tech sector.<\/span><\/p>\n Officially, Von der Leyen\u2019s Commission was supposed to take office on November 1. The new Commission\u2019s first day in office, however, was delayed after parliamentarians rejected 3 out of Von der Leyen\u2019s 27 appointees. After new Commissioners were selected and subsequently confirmed by the European Parliament, Von der Leyen\u2019s Commission eventually took office on December 1.<\/span><\/p>\n Far less controversial was Vestager\u2019s nomination. In January 2018, she <\/span>expressed<\/span><\/a> her interest in continuing in her role, though her name initially <\/span>emerged<\/span><\/a> as a candidate to succeed Juncker as Commission President. In addition to being confirmed as Commissioner for Competition, Vestager has also been appointed as <\/span>Executive Vice-President for \u2018a Europe fit for the digital age\u2019<\/span><\/a>. Her nomination to these positions is clearly seen as a reward for her achievements during her first term in the eyes of the EU\u2019s political class.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n While Vestager will remain in charge of antitrust enforcement, her Director-General (i.e. someone who heads a Directorate-General, or policy department, such as the Directorate-General for Competition, and reports to the politically responsible Commissioner) will not stay in Brussels. Effective September 1, <\/span>Johannes Laitenberger<\/span><\/a> has been <\/span>appointed<\/span><\/a> a judge at the General Court in Luxembourg. This provides an opportunity for Vestager to start her second term with a new Director-General.<\/span><\/p>\n Vestager will not only be responsible for antitrust enforcement in the EU, but her role as Executive Vice-President also entails responsibility to \u201censure that Europe makes the most of the enormous potential of the digital age.\u201d According to the <\/span>Commission<\/span><\/a>, her role as Executive Vice-President and her role as antitrust enforcer are complimentary. Since competition policy is a vital element for the creation of a well-functioning Single Market in the EU (i.e. one territory without any internal borders or obstacles to the free movement of goods, capital, services, and persons), Vestager\u2019s competition policy as well as other policy initiatives could help in \u201cstrengthening EU’s industry and innovation capacity, as well as its technological leadership and strategic autonomy.\u201d These initiatives will clearly build on the EU\u2019s policy <\/span>priority<\/span><\/a> to create a Digital Single Market, introduced by the Juncker Commission and led by Vice-President and European Commissioner for Digital Single Market Andrus Ansip. This policy brought together Commissioners with related policy areas within a single cluster, and included Commissioner Vestager.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Over the past five years, Vestager earned a reputation as a tough tech industry watchdog – even being named the \u201c<\/span>most powerful regulator of Big Tech on the planet<\/span><\/a>\u201d. Probes into several tech giants and subsequent decisions like fining Google more than $9 billion for breaking antitrust laws and forcing Apple to pay about $14.5 billion for dodging taxes in violation of state aid rules earned her <\/span>praise<\/span><\/a> among Big Tech critics, but also attacks. <\/span>Accusations<\/span><\/a> of specifically targeting U.S. companies through antitrust actions often arise. When speaking to President Juncker, President Trump famously referred to Vestager as \u201c<\/span>your tax lady<\/span><\/a>\u201d who \u201creally hates the U.S.\u201d Vestager <\/span>responded<\/span><\/a> by telling reporters \u201cI’ve done my own fact-checking on the first part of that sentence, and I do work with tax and I am a woman, so this is 100 percent correct.\u201d She disagreed with the second sentence: \u201cI very much like the U.S.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n Despite these criticisms, Vestager\u2019s hearing at the European Parliament made it clear that she would not divert from her first term\u2019s approach. \u201cIn the last five years, I\u2019ve seen how enforcing competition rules can make markets work for people, not the other way round,\u201d she <\/span>noted<\/span><\/a>, adding that she was deeply honored to be able to continue her work. Although the Commission underlined the complementary nature of the two policy areas, her new dual role could play into the hands of her critics. Being a neutral competition law enforcer on one hand, and serving as a pro-European technology industry advocate on the other could create a conflict of interest. During her hearing, Vestager tried to reassure Members of the European Parliament about this concern. She emphasized, for example, that \u201c<\/span>independence in law enforcement is non-negotiable<\/span><\/a>\u201d and referred to the various checks and balances within the Commission\u2019s antitrust enforcement process. It remains to be seen, however, whether non-European tech firms are, likewise, reassured by these words.<\/span><\/p>\n Either way, Commissioner Vestager continues to take steps impacting the technology sector. In a rare move, the Commission imposed <\/span>interim measures<\/span><\/a> on Broadcom, ordering the firm to stop applying certain potentially anticompetitive provisions in the supply of chipsets for TV set-top boxes and modems. At the same time, she also made clear that she is not necessarily in favor of breaking up tech giants, <\/span>noting<\/span><\/a>: \u201cFrom a competition point of view, you would have to do something that breaking up the company was the only solution to the illegal behavior, to the damage. And we don’t have that kind of case right now.\u201d Accordingly, breaking up companies would be an instrument of last resort, yet seems to remain an option.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n