Five priorities of the new EU Commissioner in charge of competition

Renewed opportunities: promoting synergies between a clean transition and a competitive European economy

A key priority of the Executive Vice-President will be to implement and draft new initiatives on competition policy to support the EU's clean, just and competitive transition, and the efforts to fight against climate change. In this regard, Ribera has committed to simplify and speed up competition enforcement processes in order to avoid delay in the efforts towards green transition and decarbonisation. 

A key tool identified to achieve this goal is a reform of existing EU State aid control rules. Ribera’s approach is consistent with the recommendations in the Draghi Report on the future of European competitiveness, authored by the former president of the European Central Bank and Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi¹. Ribera referred to developing a new and simplified State aid framework to “enable Member States to provide swift and effective State aid as part of the Clean Industrial Deal” and as such to “accelerate the rollout of renewable energy, to deploy industrial decarbonisation and to ensure sufficient manufacturing capacity of clean tech”. She also committed to prioritize State aid work to deal with distortive aids, to promote innovative aid and to make effective use of IPCEIs (Important Projects of Common European Interest²) and strengthen their cross-border dimension. 

Ribera avoided addressing whether she would support further State aid for new nuclear power plants, commenting that “each single case should be assessed” on a case-by-case basis.

In line with the above, we can expect significant developments in the field of State aid, and potential opportunities for companies to develop projects that are aimed at renewable energy, clean tech and decarbonisation. 

The new playing field: promoting the position of the European industry on global markets

A central focus of the new competition policy will be to help EU companies enhance their competitiveness ahead of the challenge of growing global competition.

The Executive Vice-President commented on the need for a “new approach to competition policy that is more supportive of companies scaling up in global markets and that allows European businesses and consumers to enjoy the benefits of effective competition”. She further stated that competition policy must evolve to promote European industry and to reposition it on the world market. 

Ribera emphasised the need to make full use of the legislative tools, in particular the FSR³ and FDI⁴ frameworks, to ensure that all companies benefit from a level playing field in the EU single market and are not undermined by subsidized products. 

Ribera also acknowledged the need to adapt merger control enforcement and guidelines to help EU companies remain competitive in global markets and to ensure that the legal framework gives “the right weight to the EU economy’s needs and reflects overall policy objectives and market realities, including possible efficiencies”. Adding to the general sentiment, the Executive Vice-President expressed the view that “we do not want Trojan horses that challenge the existing European businesses that compete on a level playing field”. 

On the questions surrounding European champions, she stressed that the need to improve and develop the single market must be combined with the need to ensure competition, and that exclusively focusing on domestic champions is not a good solution. She mentioned that all guidance from Mario Draghi, Enrico Letta ⁵ and Christine Lagarde ⁶ are a reference point for the future policy. 

Considering Ribera’s remarks, we can expect active enforcement of the FSR and FDI rules against distortive third country-endorsed investments, and potentially more openness from the Commission to accept defences related to ensuring the efficiency of European companies. 

Continued digital policy: ensuring “vigorous” enforcement of the DMA7

Ribera referenced the importance of effectively using the existing tools within the DMA to ensure that consumers have more control in relation to the digital gatekeepers, in particular when it comes to the use of their data and to the acceptance of terms and conditions. She also stressed the importance of opening up locked ecosystems, in response to concerns about the dominant position of the gatekeepers.

The Executive Vice-President stressed that, for efficient enforcement, it is necessary not only to cooperate with other (national and global) regulators, but also to strengthen the capacity, in particular human resources, within DG COMP ⁸, to ensure that it is well equipped to monitor compliance of gatekeepers with their obligations. She has promised to ensure transparency within the compliance process.

We can therefore expect a continued focus of DG COMP on the enforcement of the DMA, not only to ensure digital competition and fair online market practices, but also with an eye on the protection of consumers. New digital legislation, however, does not currently appear to be on the radar. 

Merger control revisited: updating the merger control rules

Ribera has stressed the importance of updating the competition tools, and in particular the merger rules, in order to capture deals that prevent innovation, such as the so-called “killer acquisitions” that target companies with low revenues but high competitive and innovative potential. These acquisitions may threaten the competitive landscape by eliminating emerging companies with the potential to disrupt industries and challenge existing players. 

She recognised that this is one of the more challenging tasks of the new competition policy, and that she is paying attention on how to close the enforcement gap, in particular following the seminal judgment of the Court of Justice of September 3, 2024, which disagreed with the initial approach proposed by the European Commission in relation to Article 22 EUMR references.⁹

She has also agreed, in line with the recommendations made in the Draghi report, that a structural response might be required to address killer acquisitions, noting that the Commission is currently lacking such structural solutions. The Commission is reported to be working with the national competition authorities on potential solutions, while avoiding “creating any unnecessary additional administrative burden or legal uncertainty for companies”.

It remains uncertain how the European Commission will choose to tackle the issue of killer acquisitions, and in particular whether this would entail a revision of the European Union Merger Regulation ¹⁰ or Guidelines ¹¹ (as has been reported by the previous Competition Commissioner, Margrethe Vestager)^12, or a revision of national Member States’ rules, to include call-in powers for below threshold mergers. 

New approaches to competition enforcement: updating existing competition tools and the possible introduction of a new market investigation tool to address structural issues 

Ribera commented on the ongoing drafting of Article 102 Guidelines on exclusionary abuses of dominance ¹³, and opened the door to issuing guidelines on exploitative abuses. She has also committed to making full use of the competition policies in order to protect vulnerable consumers who are facing unfair price increases in key sectors such as food or energy and to focus more on the impact on consumers. 

Ribera has shown support for the Draghi report proposal to introduce a new competition tool in order to address structural competition issues, by allowing the European Commission to conduct market studies and investigations. Ribera admitted that the existing tools do not provide the right answers to these problems, and highlighted the DMA as an example of a legal framework that already includes structural remedies. She stated that the proposal to introduce this new competition tool will be evaluated. 

This would not be the first time the European Commission has tried to introduce a structural ex ante tool, but the previous 2020 proposal was abandoned in light of underwhelming feedback. However, several Member States have since introduced a similar tool, or are planning to do so, which might suggest stronger support for EU-level regulation this time around.  

Authored by Victoria Bulmez and May Lyn Yuen.