Both the Commission and the Community Courts have on several occasions stated that a concentration that will cause the creation or strengthening of an oligopoly under certain circumstances might cause what’s referred to as a collective dominant position in the market. The concept of collective dominant position has gained a lot of criticism for being poorly defined and thereby create an uncertainty. The Commissions approach when applying the concept has also gained criticism for its lack of consistency. As a consequence of the Court of First Instances (CFI) decision in the case Airtours v. the European Commission, 3 in whish the Commissions standard of proof were rejected by the CFI, the merger regulation have been revised by the Commission. The expected consequences of the revised merger regulation and its future application have been that the Commission will leave the criteria of dominance in favour of a criterion of anti-competitive effects when evaluating proposed concentrations. An analysis of the new merger regulation and the published guidelines, as well as recent decisions from the Commission based on the new regulation, show no major change in the Commissions approach. The Commission will continue to use the concept of dominance as the base for the decisions. The only change in approach seems to concern the concept of collective dominant position where the Commission apparently has made a move towards an anticompetitive effects criterion in the assessment of concentrations. The Commission appears to deliberately avoid using the term collective dominant position in favour of a concept of ‘anti-competitive effects of a concentration resulting from the non-coordinated behavior of undertakings which would not have a dominant position on the market concerned’.4 It definitely seems like we have seen the end of the concept of collective dominant position. / Såväl kommissionen som gemenskapsdomstolarna har vid flera tillfällen uttalat att en koncentration som skapar eller förstärker ett oligopol under vissa förutsättningar kan ge upphov till något man kallar kollektiv dominerande ställning på marknaden. Begreppet kollektiv dominerande ställning har fått utstå mycken kritik för att vara dåligt definierat och därigenom skapa osäkerhet, även kommissionens tillämpning av begreppet har kritiserats för att inte vara helt konsekvent. Efter förstainstansrättens dom i målet Airtours mot kommissionen1 där rätten underkände kommissionens bevisning i frågan om huruvida den aktuella koncentrationen skulle ge upphov till en kollektiv dominerande ställning, har kommissionen reviderat sin koncentrationsförordning. Förväntningarna på den nya förordningen och den framtida tillämpningen har varit stora. Många väntade sig att kommissionen nu skulle lämna dominanskriteriet vid bedömningen av en koncentrations konkurrenshämmande effekter, för att istället börja tilllämpa ett rent konkurrensskadekriterium. En analys av den nya förordningen med tillhörande riktlinjedokument och de få beslut som kommissionen fattat på basis av den nya förordningen, pekar dock på att ingen större förändring kommer att ske. Kommissionen kommer även i fortsättningen att, i de allra flesta fall, basera sin bedömning på dominanskriteriet. Däremot verkar begreppet kollektiv dominerande ställning vara något man avser att överge till förmån för en bedömning av de konkurrenshämmande effekterna av en föreslagen koncentration. Kommissionen förefaller numer undvika begreppet kollektiv dominerande ställning, man talar istället om ”Konkurrenshämmande effekter till följd av ett icke-samordnat beteende hos företag som inte skulle få någon dominerande ställning på den berörda marknaden”2, något som talar för att begreppet kollektiv dominerande ställning nu spelat ut sin roll.

No description available.

Using the U.S. Gramm-Leach-Bliley Financial Modernization Act ("GLBA") as a model, I argue that this act of financial reform, promulgated in November 1999, is a result of "Re-regulation", rather than "Deregulation" as suggested by most scholars. I emphasize the linear development of the GLBA, from 'regulation' to 'deregulation' and then further to 're-regulation'. This linear direction denotes sequential regulatory development that concerns the gradual relaxation of permissible banking activities, which is correspondingly marked by the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, and the GLBA of 1999. The GLBA enabled the U.S. financial services industry to begin offering all round financial services under the single roof of the Financial Holding Company("FHC"). The GLBA's mandate is to provide the U.S. financial services industry with a level playing field and allow them to compete with their strongest rivals from th eEuropean Union. European Union banks already operate under a liberal regime, following the success of the Second Banking Directive of 1989 that embraces financial liberalization. Taiwan's Financial Holding Company Act ("FHCA"), promulgated in July 2001,owes much of its content to its U.S. counterpart, the GLBA. Taiwan's FHCA is basically modeled after the U.S. GLBA but selectively adopts parts of the E.U. model. The U.S. model is represented by the GLBA while the E.U. model is represented by the Second Banking Directive. Through cross-selling and cross-marketing, financial holding companies in the U.S. model and universal banks in the E.U. model, both can achieve economies of scale and scope. This dissertation is otherwise devoted to providing a comparative analysis on certain key elements of the U.S. GLBA and Taiwan's FHCA, although I sometimes refer to the E.U.'s Second Banking Directive. I conclude that while Taiwan's FHCs lack the economic scale of U.S. FHCs, the adoption of the U.S. model in the FHCA offers Taiwan's FHCs better fire wall protection than the E.U. model would. More generally speaking, there are pros and cons to Taiwan's adoption of the GLBA. The GLBA and by extension the FHCA require its domestically established FHCs be pure holding companies, as opposed to the E. U. model which requires the parent companies (universal banks) to also be operating holding companies.

No description available.

The global financial tsunami between 2008 and 2009 was the result due to the affection of the subprime mortgage Storm in 2007. Already well-established companies, products with good marketing position, luxury goods and Mega-Mansions are still be able to raise the price of goods, while others need to discount prices to keep businesses afloat. The northern part of Taiwan has the benefit of a denser population than the south and along with better and more solid marketing strategies and the ability to support the various kinds of events, prices of the real estate market up north stands in better health -This is what the south needs to learn. This thesis analyzes the real estate market based on the 2008-2009 research in rebranding and marketing strategy making. It is based on Kotler¡¦s ¡uCCDVTP¡vmodel proposed in 2006 which discusses how construction companies in south build up successful brands and marketing strategy. This case study in King Town¡¦s construction company is supported by qualitative method through in-depth interviews and secondary data analysis. Refer to case study for the conclusion and use as reference as desired.

Internet is the trend, follow by this trend, the securities brokerage fee and trading pattern was totally changed with this booming trend. The trader accessing database through online trading system anytime and anywhere as long as with account and password with much lower commission fee. It is new trading model with dual winner what the trader and the brokerage company with both benefit to each other. To the brokerage company can save the cost since will have more trader to share the cost and in the long run will save human resources cost and branch set up operation cost¡Ketc; sales will be the total solution financial consultant and give out the trading operation to the internet. Of course this is the major ground to expedite the Internet trading booming and growing on and on what will not effect with economic decline and stop and more or less to growing in marvelous times speed. However, from internet trading system on line trading to open account with gift, discount competition, bonus point all the promotions follow by the securities brokerage merge together; there is a neck drawback come out that is the client group come out with conflict with the brokerage commission income, what is the issue for the stock brokerage company stand for? Volume or income? The subject study will search the online trading system history case by case to view the lessons through the USA and Korean experience of Internet online trading brokerage. The conclusion will as following below: 1. The internet brokerage company from discount brokerage company to the total solution brokerage The Internet Brokerage Company expend is fully related with Internet business, through the USA experience. In order to be survive with the market, internet brokerage company expend their business not only through competition and merge but also cost down, especially to the market expansion and customer development, and develop related business activities with different products to low down count on only one activity operation risky. The subject brokerage company binding with credit card and consumer loans to go the first step with one year experience on stock brokerage, banking, future together, the client use one set password to certify the account authority to use, they will get the fully services on information, trading system, electronic payment all together with one account and one password. After binding solution experience learning, all departments through delegation system and banking staff with stock brokerage staff will work together under the online system what is equipped with fully service brokerage company basic ground base. After that what will need to be further growing is to delegate service and value creative standard to express competition capabilities. 2. To study with fully use banking branches with stock brokerage services Banking group was allowed to set up stock brokerage service under the same group entity. To share the same clients sources what will not only lower down the cost but also make most benefit to the group inside and outside will attractive the client to access our total solution financial services what is fully supporting total financial services solution. There is some brokerage companies have been tried this model to run but no case with fully successful so far, Jihsun group have fifty two brokerage branches and forty six banking branches, with banking services on brokerage company branches and with stock brokerage company with banking services, in order to upgrade client base volume and quality, in the meantime to enhance the width of the services range between banking branches and stock brokerage branches.

Recent trend of globalization has lead financial industry to an increasingly competitive environment. In respond to intensify market competition, mergers and acquisition (M&A) amounts financial institutions to become the strategic choice for firms to increase their market power. The trend also adds pressure on local financial institutions of Taiwan to improve their competitiveness for their global position. The result of it was the establishment of financial holding companies (FHC) to utilizes the use of resources and to achieve the economic of scale through M&A between companies. Therefore the market will weight more heavily on FHC and a tendency of continues M&A is expected for the next several years. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the performance of fourteen FCFs of Taiwan by looking their financial profitability, operating efficiency and asset quality and strategic resource allocation performance; the results are summarized as followed: 1.When look at the financial profit performance, Cathay FHC has the best performance therefore it ranks top of the list, and Chine Development FHC has the worse result and ranked at bottom of the list. 2.If look at from operating efficiency and asset quality¡¦s prospective, Chine development FHC, Taishin FHC and Shin Kong FHC are the top three amounts fourteen FHC of Taiwan. 3.To performance better in strategic performance ranking were associated with more diversified in subsidiaries of FCFs or FCFs which has less market shares. 4.In combine of the three performance measurements, Cathay FCF, Chinatrust FCF and Taishin FCF are the top three FCFs amount the fourteen and Chine Development FCF, Jin Sun FCF and Waterland FCF are rank as bottom three for their poor performance.

<p>The enormous expansion of knowledge society has lead to a path away from the industrial enterprises toward the more knowledge-based entrepreneurship companies. This development has also meant that intellectual capital now can be seen as the core of the new business structure. However the growth has not been reflected in either the legal or the economic regulations in relation to what could have been expected, which means that there is thus a gap between <em>de lege lata</em> and <em>de lege ferenda</em>. This can specifically been seen regarding the prohibition of adding property other than cash applied in payment for shares or regarding issue of new shares when it comes to work and services. The prohibition may therefore be considered to stand against the knowledge companies’ advancement. Consequently the question is therefore whether or not changes can be made with consideration to the creditors and to the current legal foundation. It is my opinion that some changes can be made if de development of valuation methods continue to progress and if the regulations regarding labor would open up to more detailed agreements between employers and employees. If such steps were to be taken the possibility of payment with work and services would increase, however the cost of developing those improvements is today in my opinion not defensible and therefore intellectual capital continues to fall between the Swedish regulations.</p><p> </p>

<p>Both the Commission and the Community Courts have on several occasions stated that a concentration that will cause the creation or strengthening of an oligopoly under certain circumstances might cause what’s referred to as a collective dominant position in the market. The concept of collective dominant position has gained a lot of criticism for being poorly defined and thereby create an uncertainty. The Commissions approach when applying the concept has also gained criticism for its lack of consistency. As a consequence of the Court of First Instances (CFI) decision in the case Airtours v. the European Commission, 3 in whish the Commissions standard of proof were rejected by the CFI, the merger regulation have been revised by the Commission. The expected consequences of the revised merger regulation and its future application have been that the Commission will leave the criteria of dominance in favour of a criterion of anti-competitive effects when evaluating proposed concentrations. An analysis of the new merger regulation and the published guidelines, as well as recent decisions from the Commission based on the new regulation, show no major change in the Commissions approach. The Commission will continue to use the concept of dominance as the base for the decisions. The only change in approach seems to concern the concept of collective dominant position where the Commission apparently has made a move towards an anticompetitive effects criterion in the assessment of concentrations. The Commission appears to deliberately avoid using the term collective dominant position in favour of a concept of ‘anti-competitive effects of a concentration resulting from the non-coordinated behavior of undertakings which would not have a dominant position on the market concerned’.4 It definitely seems like we have seen the end of the concept of collective dominant position.</p> / <p>Såväl kommissionen som gemenskapsdomstolarna har vid flera tillfällen uttalat att en koncentration som skapar eller förstärker ett oligopol under vissa förutsättningar kan ge upphov till något man kallar kollektiv dominerande ställning på marknaden. Begreppet kollektiv dominerande ställning har fått utstå mycken kritik för att vara dåligt definierat och därigenom skapa osäkerhet, även kommissionens tillämpning av begreppet har kritiserats för att inte vara helt konsekvent. Efter förstainstansrättens dom i målet Airtours mot kommissionen1 där rätten underkände kommissionens bevisning i frågan om huruvida den aktuella koncentrationen skulle ge upphov till en kollektiv dominerande ställning, har kommissionen reviderat sin koncentrationsförordning. Förväntningarna på den nya förordningen och den framtida tillämpningen har varit stora. Många väntade sig att kommissionen nu skulle lämna dominanskriteriet vid bedömningen av en koncentrations konkurrenshämmande effekter, för att istället börja tilllämpa ett rent konkurrensskadekriterium. En analys av den nya förordningen med tillhörande riktlinjedokument och de få beslut som kommissionen fattat på basis av den nya förordningen, pekar dock på att ingen större förändring kommer att ske. Kommissionen kommer även i fortsättningen att, i de allra flesta fall, basera sin bedömning på dominanskriteriet. Däremot verkar begreppet kollektiv dominerande ställning vara något man avser att överge till förmån för en bedömning av de konkurrenshämmande effekterna av en föreslagen koncentration. Kommissionen förefaller numer undvika begreppet kollektiv dominerande ställning, man talar istället om ”Konkurrenshämmande effekter till följd av ett icke-samordnat beteende hos företag som inte skulle få någon dominerande ställning på den berörda marknaden”2, något som talar för att begreppet kollektiv dominerande ställning nu spelat ut sin roll.</p>

The United Kingdom Tax system is not neutral with respect to a Company’s investment and financing decisions, that is incentives and disincentives to invest in particular projects or use particular types of financing arise through the imposition of taxation. Such biases may increase or decrease the value of capital projects, and if a company is to be certain of making accurate investment decisions the incremental tax flows arising due to the project must be included in the evaluation. The tax flows arising through the acceptance of a project may differ depending on the company's or group's tax profile, and therefore the overall tax position of the company or group must be considered. The thesis explains the legislation relating to the taxation of corporate groups and suggests that because the tax system is so complicated, a computerised model is probably necessary. The author's computerised model is developed and tested in the thesis, comparing evaluations conducted using the procedures and assumptions of groups in the surveys, with those of the simulation model. It is shown that both understatements and overstatements occur through incorrectly allowing for taxation. The results of two empirical surveys are presented. The first, a postal survey, discusses the methods used by companies to incorporate tax in their project appraisals, and the second, based on interviews, provides a review of the whole capital budgeting process.