The document summarizes the regulations and process around requests for information (RFIs) during investigations in Taiwan. It discusses the obligations of concerned parties and third parties to provide information, with concerned parties having a higher obligation. It provides examples of how the Fair Trade Commission (FTC) has used RFIs to assess market dominance in cases involving potential anti-competitive behavior. Through RFIs, the FTC aims to understand market definition, transactions, industry structure and consumer preferences to determine if laws have been violated.

1. Requests for Information:
Limits and Effectiveness
Speaker: Dr.Tsai-Lung Hong
Commissioner, Fair Trade Commission
Chinese Taipei
2018.11.30

2. Outline
1
Regulations
Limitation & Process
Case Studies
Conclusion

3. 2
Handling Flow Chart
Investigation
initiated by
the FTC (ex
officio)
Complaints
filed by the
public
Whether the business
activities seemingly
violate the Fair Trade
Act?
Case dismissed
Starting to
investigate
no
yes

4. 3
Article 27
To notify the concerned parties and third
parties to appear to make statements.
To notify the concerned parties and third
parties to submit data, documents and any
other necessary materials.
To dispatch staff members for the onsite
inspection of the office of the concerned
parties and third parties.
The Fair Trade Act：
Investigation Process

5. The Obligations of the Concerned
Parties and Third Parties
4
Both the concerned parties and third parties
have the obligation to provide necessary
information regarding the investigation of
cases.
The concerned parties’ cooperation throughout
the investigation is more important and relevant
than third parties.

6. 5
The Fair Trade Act：
Administrative Responsibility
Article 27 Article 44
Penalty:
NT$50,000( 1,428€) ~
NT$500,000( 14,285€) , if
any party evade, obstruct,
or refuse to cooperate
without justification.
Penalty (continue to
refuse to cooperate):
NT$100,000( 2,857€) ~
NT$1 million( 28,571€) , if
a party continues to refuse
to cooperate without
justification.
• 1€=35 NT dollars
• 24 cases about refusing to
provide related information or
appear to give their statements.

7. 6
The concerned
parties
Third parties
Necessary information
(directly associated
with confirmation of
violation/compulsory)
Highest obligation Higher obligation
Not directly associated
with confirmation of
violation/voluntary
Lower obligation Lowest obligation
The Level of Obligations of the
Concerned Parties and Third Parties

8. Information not Directly Associated
with Confirmation of Violation
(Voluntary)
related to product characteristics
e.g. market definition
market information
e.g. the number and amounts of transactions.
industrial survey reports
e.g. industrial structure
7

9. Limitation ─
If the third parties have the
obligation to keep information
confidential
Issue：The third parties are not willing to,
even refuse to provide information.
8

10. Solutions
The FTC would try to explain to them that
government agencies are also obligated to keep
information confidential they provide. Therefore
they are more willing to cooperate with the
FTC’s requests for information.
Alternatives：requests to the authority of the
industry involved (such as the Ministry of
Finance), the related trade associations or
institutions
9

11. The Process of RFIs and Investigation
10
Application of Information
Subjects, Contents, and Approaches of RFIs
 To decide the subjects of RFIs
• the concerned parties (informants and offenders)
• third parties(trading counterparts and competitors)
• the authority of the industry involved
• the related trade associations or institutions
 The contents of RFIs
• the transaction process
• product prices & the quantity
• industrial characteristics
• consumer preferences

12. 11
The Process of RFIs and Investigation
Subjects, Contents, and Approaches of RFIs
 The approaches of RFIs
• providing necessary information or evidence (subjects)
• appearing to make statements (subjects)
• conducting onsite investigations (FTC)
• holding meetings (FTC)
• administering questionnaire surveys (FTC)

13.  The FTC imposed a fine of NT$40
million( 1,142,857€) on a channel agent for engaging
in unjustifiable discriminatory treatment by offering
different transaction terms to system operator s.
 Crucial Issue：Whether the channel agent (the
offender) has dominant position in the relevant
market or not?
 Purposes of RFIs：to assess the level of impact of
the violation on competition in the relevant market,
especially understand whether cable TV system
operators(buyers) must purchase channels which
the offender(seller) offered
12
Case： Abuse of Dominance

14. Case： Abuse of Dominance
13
over 100
channels
channel agent (the offender)
represented the 11 channel
system
operator A
system
operator B
system
operator C
Other channel
agents
channel licensing
system
operators
dominant position

15. Case： Abuse of Dominance─ RFIs
14
Subjects contents approaches confirmations
TV rating survey
company
the average
results of
rating surveys
providing
necessary
information
9 channels that the offender
represented ranked among
the top 50 in channel
ratings
National
Communications
Commission
the most
popular
channels
providing
necessary
information
“news” channels were the
most popular, including 2
news channels that the
offender represented
FTC
consumer
preferences
questionnaire
survey
if the system operator
doesn’t purchase the
offender ‘s channels, 71% of
consumers would switch to
other system operator.

16. Conclusion
The parties and third parties have the obligation
to accept the FTC’s investigations, especially
necessary information.
The third parties are willing to cooperate with
the FTC in most cases since government
agencies are obligated to keep information
confidential.
Experiences and skills matter
15