
Digital Competition Bill
PMF IAS Impact: 40 Direct Hits in Prelims 2024 and 53 Direct Hits in Prelims 2025!
- Context (IE): India’s proposed digital competition law aims to stop tech giants from self-preferencing or using data from one company to benefit another.
- The proposed law is inspired by the European regulatory model.
- It is designed to prevent anti-competitive practices, ensure transparency, and curb unfair favouritism in the digital sector.
- The Bill was drafted by a 16-member committee on digital competition law after a year of deliberation.
Key Observations and Recommendations of the Committee
Need for ex-ante regulation of Digital Competition
- The ex-post framework (intervening after an event occurs) under the Competition Act of 2002 fails to promptly address anti-competitive conduct, highlighting the need for new legislation.
- The present framework may not be effective in addressing the irreversible tipping of markets in favour of large digital enterprises.
Irreversible tipping of markets
|
- The Committee recommends the Digital Competition Act, which would empower the Competition Commission of India (CCI) to regulate large digital enterprises ex-ante (intervening before an event occurs), ensuring fair competition.
- The proposed legislation should regulate only those enterprises that have a significant presence and the ability to influence the Indian digital market.
Systemically Significant Digital Enterprises (SSDEs)
- Certain features of digital markets enable enterprises to gain influence quickly, this includes:
- Collection of user data, which can allow large incumbent enterprises to enter related markets;
- Network effects, where the utility of a service increases when the number of users consuming the service increases, and
- Economies of scale, wherein incumbents can offer digital services at lower costs as compared to new entrants.
- The Committee recommended designating entities offering certain core digital services as SSDEs for ex-ante regulation, as these services are susceptible to market concentration.
- These include search engines, social networking services, operating systems, and web browsers.
Thresholds for Classification of SSDEs
- The Committee recommended using both quantitative thresholds and qualitative criteria to designate enterprises as SSDEs.
The Quantitative threshold
- It can be based on a dual test of:
- Significant financial strength, gauged from parameters such as turnover, gross merchandise value, and market capitalisation and
- Significant spread based on the number of business and end users of the core digital service in India.
- Digital enterprises fulfilling the quantitative thresholds would have to report the same to CCI, which will then designate them as SSDEs.
- The quantitative threshold may not cover all digital enterprises that may have a significant presence in Indian digital markets.
- The Committee recommended that a set of qualitative criteria may be used to designate such enterprises as SSDEs.
- These criteria include the resources of the enterprise and the volume of data aggregated by them.
Associate Digital Enterprises (ADEs)
- In some cases, compliance may be required from multiple digital enterprises in a group that is engaged in providing a core digital service.
- The Committee recommended that notifying enterprises should identify all other enterprises within its group involved in the provision of a core digital service.
- These enterprises should be designated as ADEs under the proposed framework.
Obligations of SSDEs
- The Committee recommends prohibiting SSDEs from carrying out certain practices. These include
- Favouring their own products and services or those of related parties,
- Using non-public data of business users operating on their core digital service to compete with those users,
- Restricting users from using third-party applications on their core digital services and
- Requiring or incentivising users of an identified core digital service to use other products or services offered by the SSDE.
- Regulations may allow differential obligations for different SSDEs and ADEs based on factors like business models and user base.
Enforcement of provisions
- The Bill empowers the Director General, appointed under the 2002 Act, to investigate any contraventions when directed by the CCI.
- The Committee recommended that CCI should bolster its technical capacity including within the Director General’s office for early detection and disposal of cases.
- It also recommended constituting a separate bench of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal for the timely disposal of appeals.
Penalties
- The 2002 Act provides for behavioural remedies and high monetary penalties to address anti-competitive practices.
- The GOI has decriminalised various corporate offences to promote ease of doing business.
- It recommended that contraventions under draft Bill should be addressed by imposing civil penalties.
- It recommended capping the penalty at 10% of the global turnover of SSDEs.
Digital Competition Bill
- It specifically prohibits these companies from unfairly favouring their own products or those of related parties.
- It restricts the misuse of business users’ non-public data.
- These regulations will apply alongside compliance with the existing Competition Act and the Digital Personal Data Protection Act.
Key Provisions
Predictive Regulation
- Proposes a preventive (ex-ante) approach instead of the current post-incident (ex-post) regulation.
- It aims to foresee and prevent potential anti-competitive practices before they occur.
Significant Entities
- The Bill proposes this for certain “core digital services” like search engines, and social media sites.
- The CCI will designate “Systematically Significant Digital Enterprises” (SSDE), on various quantitative and qualitative parameters.
- Criteria include, in the last 3 financial years,
- Turnover over Rs 4,000 crore in India,
- Global turnover over $30 billion,
- Gross merchandise value in India over Rs 16,000 crore, or
- Global market capitalisation over $75 billion.
- SSDEs must have at least 1 crore end users or 10,000 business users.
Prohibited Practices
- SSDEs cannot engage in self-preferencing, anti-steering, or restricting third-party applications.
- Violations can result in fines of up to 10% of global turnover.
Associate Digital Enterprises (ADEs)
- Entities benefiting from data shared by a major tech group will be designated as ADEs.
- ADEs will have the same obligations as SSDEs.
Need for the Digital Competition Law
- Big tech companies have a history of anti-competitive behaviour.
- For instance, Google was fined Rs 1.337 crore for its conduct in the Android ecosystem.
- The dominance of a few companies creates high barriers for new entrants, limiting innovation within big tech firms.
- The bill aims to foster competition, which can lead to more innovation outside the big tech companies.
- The bill aims to level the playing field for smaller businesses struggling against big tech’s market dominance.
Benefits of the Digital Competition Bill
- Increases Transparency: Requires tech companies to be more transparent in their operations and dealings.
- Protects Innovators and Startups: Exempts smaller companies and startups from stringent rules, encouraging innovation.
- Aligns with Global Standards: Follows a similar approach to the EU’s Digital Markets Act, showing an effort to align with international regulatory frameworks.
- Boosts Digital Economy: By effectively regulating, it supports the growth of India’s digital market, which is expected to reach $800 billion by 2030.
Concerns with the bill
- Stifling Innovation: There’s a worry that strict regulations could limit creativity and growth in the tech sector.
- Too Much Power to Regulators: The Bill’s ex-ante approach may give regulators excessive discretionary power, raising concerns about potential misuse.
- Duplication with Existing Laws: It might overlap with provisions in the current Competition Act, leading to regulatory complexity and potential confusion.
- Potential for Conflicting Decisions: This overlap could result in parallel inquiries and divergent rulings for the same issue under different laws.