On 8 May 2025, the European Commission launched a general consultation review process of its Horizontal and Non-Horizontal Merger Guidelines. The Horizontal Merger Guidelines (‘HMG’) and the Non-Horizontal Merger Guidelines (‘NHMG’), together the ‘Merger Guidelines’, respectively published in 2004 and 2008, provide guidance on the Commission’s practice when assessing the impact of mergers on competition within the legal framework of the EU Merger Regulation. The European Commission’s consultation provides an opportunity to update the assessment framework for mergers.

Enrique Andreu, Gianmarco Calanchi, Guillaume Duquesne, Kirsten Edwards-Warren, José Pastor, Josep Peya, Rameet Sangha and Nadine Watson of Econic Partners provided a response to certain topics of the consultation in relation to the assessment of mergers in dynamic markets and the introduction of new objectives and areas of intervention in merger control[1].

The Econic Partners team made five main recommendations:

  1. Incorporate theories of harm, which have been more recently pursued in cases involving dynamic markets. These include killer acquisitions, reverse killer acquisitions, and innovation theories of harm. The revisions should articulate the theories of harm, the type of evidence that proves or rebuts them, limiting principles, and safe harbours.
  2. Refine the guidelines on existing theories of harm to signpost how they will be applied in digital markets, in particular in relation to vertical, conglomerate and strengthening of dominant position concerns.
  3. Revise the guidelines on efficiencies to restore symmetry in the assessment of harms and benefits of mergers; to take a more open-minded approach to out-of-market efficiencies; and to have a more balanced assessment of merger-specificity.
  4. Add clarity to the guidelines on how sustainability will be taken into account. When firms compete or are likely to compete in the foreseeable future to provide sustainable products, the impact of mergers on sustainability should be taken into account. When there is a negative environmental externality, other climate policy tools are more appropriate. 
  5. Revise the guidelines to recognise the relevance of effects of mergers in labour markets. Protecting rivalry in labour markets is an objective consistent with protecting consumers. Safe harbours are however in order as an in-depth assessment is likely necessary in only a limited set of circumstances.

With respect to competitiveness, protecting the competitive process is not inherently at odds with creating European champions that can compete in global markets. A rigorous merger review process that carefully weighs both risks and benefits can safeguard consumers, while also enabling European firms to compete more effectively worldwide.

Read the Full Response

[1] This submission benefits from discussions with and comments from Econic Partners colleagues in the U.S. and China

The views expressed in this response are the sole responsibility of the authors and cannot be attributed Econic Partners or any other parties.