May 24, 2012

Japanese FTC Streamlines Merger Review Process

The Japanese Fair Trade Commission (the JFTC) has adopted new rules that should streamline Japan's review process for both domestic and global transactions. The new rules will end the JFTC's practice of holding "preconsultations" with companies pursuing mergers or acquisitions that would impact competition in Japan. The JFTC adopted the new rules on June 14, 2011, and they will become effective on July 1, 2011.

Under the prior rules and practice, M&A parties were typically required to consult with the JFTC prior to submitting any official notification of their transaction-in effect, obtaining informal approval of the transaction prior to any filing. However, this preconsultation process was unpredictable and could often take considerable time, with the timing of JFTC approval not known until after the preconsultation was completed. This was particularly problematic for deals done outside of Japan, where filings in Japan had to be coordinated with other global filings.

Under the JFTC's new rules, parties will first notify the JFTC of the terms of their transaction through an official submission that does not require any consultation with the JFTC. The JFTC will then have 30 days to review the submission and decide if a more in-depth review is necessary. After 30 days, if no further request is made by the JFTC, consent will be deemed to have been granted. Consultations with the JFTC will only be required if the 30-day period is extended for a more in-depth review.

These new rules will further align the policies of the JFTC with merger-control authorities in both the United States and the European Union. In addition, it is hoped that this will streamline the Japanese approval process for the great majority of transactions that require notification.

However, there are concerns that this new policy will prolong the review period for transactions that may materially impact competition in Japan. Under the prior procedures, parties may be able to shape the JFTC's impression of a transaction during the preconsultation period, thereby reducing the amount of time the JFTC takes to make its decision. Under the new procedures, however, the parties will not be able to have any consultations with the JFTC until after the initial 30-day period expires.

Copyright © 2012 by Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP. All Rights Reserved.

About the Author

Partner

Gregory R. Salathé is a partner in Morgan Lewis's Business and Finance Practice. He is also Co-Managing Partner of the firm's Tokyo office and of Morgan Lewis-TMI, the firm's joint venture in Japan with TMI Associates. Mr. Salathé's practice includes cross-border mergers and acquisitions, strategic alliances, and private equity.

81 3 4578 2509

About the Author

Partner

Harry T. Robins is a partner in Morgan Lewis's Antitrust Practice. Mr. Robins represents clients, including a number of prominent private equity firms and Fortune 500 companies, before the U.S. Federal Trade Commission and the U.S. Department of Justice, as well as international regulatory agencies, in connection with mergers and acquisitions and joint venture transactions.

212-309-6728

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.