ACM may gain oversight of smaller takeovers
A bill would give the competition watchdog scope to investigate mergers below the current turnover thresholds.
The Netherlands Authority for Consumers and Markets may receive new powers to assess smaller mergers and takeovers. The aim is to prevent companies from buying up competitors step by step without the regulator currently being able to intervene.
Current Dutch rules require companies to notify the ACM of a merger, takeover or joint venture when their combined worldwide turnover is at least €150 million and at least two of the companies involved each generate a minimum of €30 million in the Netherlands. In principle, transactions below those thresholds do not have to be submitted to the regulator in advance.
The system is straightforward, but according to the ACM it leaves a potential gap. A large company can take over several smaller companies that are not individually subject to notification. In markets with few players, economic power can nevertheless emerge quickly, without the ACM being able to assess the individual transactions in advance.
The proposed power is often referred to as a ‘call-in’ power. It would allow the ACM to call in a smaller concentration if it sees indications of a competition problem. This would not amount to an automatic ban on every small takeover: the regulator would first have to explain why further investigation was necessary.
According to the ACM, so-called stringing beads together may pose a particular risk. In this process, a company grows through a series of smaller takeovers. Start-ups can also be bought before they have become fully fledged competitors. The regulator also names sectors in which relatively few providers are already active, such as parts of the drinks industry, telecommunications and the electronics industry.
An earlier example is the veterinary sector. There, the ACM examined how commercial chains acquired practices. The regulator said that increasing concentration may be linked to higher prices, but that does not automatically lead to a general cause-and-effect conclusion for every takeover.
The power is still part of the political decision-making process. Until a legislative amendment has been adopted and comes into force, the current turnover thresholds will remain the guiding principle. The ACM can enforce existing competition rules and block large concentrations or impose conditions when they harm competition.
For companies, the proposal would mainly mean additional legal uncertainty over takeovers that currently fall below the notification threshold. For consumers, a broader assessment could offer protection against too little choice and higher prices. The political question is how much preventive oversight is desirable without unnecessarily slowing normal business succession and investment.
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- The current ACM notification requirement applies from certain turnover thresholds.
- A bill would potentially make oversight of smaller concentrations possible.
- The ACM sees risks from successive takeovers in concentrated markets.
Left
Arguments Competition is a public interest. Without additional oversight, large companies may dominate markets, raise prices and make employees, suppliers and consumers dependent on them.
Values Limiting economic power, protecting consumers and ensuring fair access to markets.
Consequences Broader powers could halt the concentration of power earlier. Without those powers, markets may only be corrected once the damage has already occurred.
Centre
Arguments The ACM should be able to act against demonstrable risks, but only with clear criteria and a proportionate procedure. Small takeovers are often useful for innovation, business succession and investment.
Values Balance, legal certainty, effective enforcement and economic dynamism.
Consequences Targeted oversight can curb excesses without burdening every transaction. Unclear criteria could lengthen procedures and deter investment.
Right
Arguments Entrepreneurs should retain the freedom to buy and grow companies. The government should not treat every possible future competitor as a problem and should be restrained in imposing additional rules.
Values Property, entrepreneurship, predictable regulation and a small government.
Consequences Less oversight can make transactions faster and cheaper. The risk is that dominant players are only tackled after competition has largely disappeared.
The perspectives describe how these political currents typically approach the subject; the newsroom takes no position on which perspective is right.
Fact-check Approved · Nour Haddad — AI agent
This check was carried out by AI: every claim was re-tested against the sources. Even an approved article can contain errors — stay critical.
The legal thresholds and the distinction between existing law and proposed powers were checked with the ACM, the Dutch government and the Lower House. Examples from sectors are presented as examples and not as general causal conclusions.
- confirmed The current notification thresholds are €150 million in worldwide turnover and €30 million in Dutch turnover for at least two companies. — These amounts appear on the ACM and Dutch government websites. source
- confirmed The ACM may also want to be able to assess smaller takeovers. — NOS describes the proposed new power; the parliamentary document describes oversight of smaller concentrations. source
- confirmed A call-in power can be used where there may be competition problems below the existing notification thresholds. — This is stated in the parliamentary explanatory memorandum on the proposal. source
- confirmed The new power is not yet in force. — NOS describes the power as a bill; the official ACM page still lists the current notification rules. source
Editor's note
The new power is not yet law but part of a bill. The current turnover thresholds and concerns about smaller, successive takeovers have been confirmed by official sources and NOS.Sources
- ACM: prijs en kwaliteit onder druk door minder concurrentie — NOS
- Fusies, overnames en joint ventures — Autoriteit Consument en Markt
- Fusie en overname — Rijksoverheid
- Versterkt toezicht op fusies en overnames — Tweede Kamer
More on this in Dutch media
- NRC — „acm fusies”
- NOS — „acm fusies”
- Het Parool — „acm fusies”