中国对美国公司加强监管：消费者获益

    去年，中国反垄断监管部门曾突访微软（Microsoft）4个办事处、调查芯片制造商高通（Qualcomm），并称要就价格垄断处罚奥迪（Audi）及一些宝马（BMW）汽车经销商。最近一周中国有关部门又发现亨氏（H.J. Heinz Co）婴儿米粉“含铅量严重超标”，将这个食品巨头推向了风口浪尖。

    随着一起起针对外国品牌的高调调查，很多评论称中国政府正为了扶植国内企业而排挤外企。中国欧盟商会（European Union Chamber of Commerce）发表了一份白皮书，批评中国政府的此类举动，表示这些举措并不公平，属于保护主义行径。今年7月，中国的外商直接投资（Foreign direct investment）比去年下跌16.9%，更令外界有了批评政府调查的理由。

    但这些对中国反垄断调查的批评正确吗？还是说，中国的反垄断调查实际上显示了政府正在向国际标准靠拢，甚至正在改善整体的商业环境，从而最终创造更多竞争，并通过更低的价格带动更多消费？

    首先，我们不应该将反垄断调查和消费者安全监督混为一谈。安全监管部门瞄准了麦当劳（McDonald’s）、肯德基（KFC）以及现在的亨氏，原因是这些公司向中国消费者出售受污染的、有毒及虚假食品。涉案高管已被处以罚款及监禁。这些公司危害中国消费者的健康，错误昭然。比如麦当劳就出售用过期肉制作的汉堡包。

    中国政府正在响应民众要求，捍卫食品供应链安全。2013年中国市场研究集团曾在15个城市采访5,000名民众，结果显示，污染以及食品和消费品安全排在家庭医疗费用及教育支出之前，是中国目前最受关注的两大焦点。为此，中国政府已采取不同措施，例如推动乳制品业整合，就像过去促进钢材制造业整合一样，从而确保实现更好的质量控制，防止环境进一步恶化。

    其次，许多公司，比如高通及微软也曾因为垄断在欧洲等其它司法管辖区受罚。欧洲等地的监管部门过去数十年来一直在调查并处罚这些公司的垄断行为，但是这些企业在中国却面对着相对宽松自由的环境。中国政府过去一直致力于脱贫等更重要的任务，因而并未向反垄断调查等事宜专门投入大量资源，但情况最近已有所改变。

    During the past year, Chinese anti-monopoly watchdogs raided four Microsoft offices, investigated chip maker Qualcomm, and vowed to punish Audi and several BMW dealers for essentially charging unfair prices. This week, food giant H.J. Heinz Co. found itself in a storm as Chinese regulators said they found “severely high levels of lead” in the company’s infant cereals.

    With yet another high-profile investigation of a foreign brand in China, many argue that the government is singling out foreign firms to support domestic players. The European Union Chamber of Commerce in China has written a white paper criticizing the government’s efforts, suggesting the moves are unfair and protectionist. Foreign direct investment into China dropped 16.9% in July from a year ago, giving ammunition to critics of the government’s investigations.

    But are critics of China’s anti-trust investigations right? Or do they indicate attempts by the government to catch up to international standards and even the playing field to eventually create more competition and spur more consumption through lower prices?

    First, it is a mistake to lump the anti-monopoly investigations and the consumer safety watchdogs together. The safety regulators have targeted McDonald’s , KFC, and now Heinz for selling tainted, mislabeled and toxic products to Chinese consumers. Executives have been fined and jailed. These companies have undoubtedly made mistakes that have endangered the health of Chinese consumers. McDonald’s, for instance, sold hamburgers made with expired meat.

    The Chinese government is moving to safeguard the food supply chain in response to citizens’ demands. Food and product safety and pollution are the two biggest concerns in China – ahead of paying for medical care and education for family members, according to 5000 interviews my firm, The China Market Research Group, conducted in 2013 across15 cities. In response, the government for instance has been pushing for consolidation within the dairy sector – just as it had in the steel industry – to ensure better quality control and curb environmental degradation.

    Second, many companies, such as Qualcomm and Microsoft , have come under fire in other jurisdictions like Europe for monopolistic practices in the past. Regulators investigated them and fined them over the course of several decades, while in China these companies have gotten a relatively free pass. Until recently, the Chinese government was overwhelmed by other priorities like poverty reduction and did not devote significant resources into things like anti-monopoly investigations.