Congress snuck a provision in the new Bayanihan law to keep the Philippine Competition Commission from going after problematic mergers and acquisitions — a provision that was neither consulted with the PCC nor included in the original approved versions of the bill.
For two years, companies will not be legally required to notify the PCC about their M&A, unless the deal is priced beyond P50 billion, according to the Bayanihan to Recover As One Act, or Bayanihan II, which President Rodrigo Duterte signed earlier this month.
The same law also bars the PCC from launching its own investigations of questionable M&As that cost below P50 billion, even if it had a reason to suspect the deal might harm consumers and other market players. This will last for a year.
This caught many stakeholders off guard. Neither the original approved versions of the Bayanihan 2 under the House of Representatives and the Senate had this provision in the first place.
The lawmakers in the bicameral committee, however, inserted this provision, without consulting the antitrust body. The Inquirer learned that the PCC only got wind of this a few days before the bill got ratified back in August.
In effect, the lawmakers have mandated the PCC to look away at a time when close scrutiny is more needed than ever, since the pandemic and the lockdown put smaller businesses and consumers at their most vulnerable.
Why is this a cause for concern, other than the fact that the PCC was not consulted?

The problematic deals flagged by the PCC in the past were actually all priced below P50 billion, not above it.
Out of more than 200 M&As that the PCC reviewed in the past four years, only 14 were priced above P50 billion. Moreover, none of these 14 deals were considered harmful, or anticompetitive in competition jargon.
They were not considered anticompetitive because these were deals of this size were usually global transactions that had little impact in the Philippines, and were only reviewed here because the business had some operations or assets in the country, a competition expert said.
On the contrary, the problematic deals that the PCC flagged, corrected, and even blocked were M&As by local players that cost billions of pesos, sometimes as much as P10 billion, but certainly not more than P50 billion.
Interestingly, a similar provision could be found in another economic stimulus bill that got passed in the House, but not in the Senate.

How did this skip the House and Senate versions of Bayanihan 2, and still find itself in the bicam version?

newsinfo.inquirer.net/1336225/bicame…
What’s the possible benefit from this?

A competition expert tells us that maybe this will fast-track M&As so that those who are barely surviving the pandemic won’t have to close shop.

“They’ll have a white knight that will save their operations,” the expert said.
However, white knights can save who they want to even under the Philippine Competition Act.

A blocked M&A can be exempted from that block if the firm was "faced with actual or imminent financial failure,” and if the deal was the only and least harmful way to save the company.
Even if the Bayanihan II provision would only last for two years, lawmakers failed to see the harmful consequences might last longer than that, and be more difficult to correct.
By the time the PCC can act again, these companies that ate up its competitors through unscrutinized M&As would already have a bigger slice of the market. Then, they would be in a stronger position to dictate prices, or make the environment difficult for new competitors to enter.
Smaller businesses might also be harmed in the long term under the Bayanihan II provision. For example, the expert cited the previous proposal of Universal Robina Corp. (URC) to buy the sugar milling business of Roxas Holdings, Inc. (RHI) in Batangas.
The PCC blocked that deal last year after reviewing it.

Had URC bought its competitor, sugar cane planters would have no choice but to sell their harvests to URC and accept whatever price the monopoly would set, as opposed to choosing the best possible price, according to PCC
In a world without a mandated PCC review, the source said the sugar cane farmers would have been on the losing end of the deal.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Roy Canivel

Roy Canivel Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @roycanivel_inq

19 May
The economic stimulus bill co-authored by Cong. Stella Quimbo includes P20 billion solely for mass testing.

If it gets passed, 20 million Filipinos could get tested, regardless if they are showing symptoms or not, through antibody rapid kits. They could get tested twice.
Mass testing, @TeacherStellaQ clarified, does not mean testing everyone, but it means testing a huge number of Filipinos to an extent that even asymptomatic carriers will also be tested.

Mass testing could also lead to some false negatives. But not mass testing could be worse.
Under the Philippine Economic Stimulus Act or Pesa, P10 billion will be allotted for mass testing this year, and another P10 billion for 2021, so that there will be a faster economic recovery and a safe working environment.
Read 21 tweets
16 May
Retailers are concerned that neither their customers nor their employees will come under MECQ, after the government allowed most businesses to resume operations but banned mass transportation, a business group said.
To make matters worse, they are worried that mall operators might start charging them for rent, said the Philippine Retailers Association, at a time when they are not even sure if they would any have any workforce or consumers.
PRA Vice Chairman Roberto Claudio called out the inconsistencies in the new quarantine rules, which still have not been ironed out by the government on May 15, the last day of the enhanced community quarantine.
Read 10 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!