Merger Review on Both Sides of the Atlantic: A Comparison

    View Authors February 2017

    Although there are over 75 countries in the world with merger control regimes that, for the most part, apply to foreign-to-foreign transactions, the US and EU remain the key jurisdictions when assessing global mergers. This is the case once a transaction is announced and notified, but maybe even more so when legal teams of companies are assessing the chances of successfully implementing a planned transaction.

    The reason is that other competition authorities look towards Brussels and Washington. Unless there are local specifications, it is unlikely that a country would stop a global deal if both the US and EU have approved it. When assessing the risk of a transaction, the first question will inevitably be: can we get it through in the US and
    the EU?

    In the not too distant future that question may also include China but, for the most part, the Chinese review remains more a question of effects on the deal timetable, not whether the deal is viable. While the US and EU reviews are very similar, there are a number of key differences that we have sought to highlight below.