|
Recently, the domestic retail giant China Resources Vanguard Supermarket was identified commercial bribery, the report pointed out: under the guise of "store promotional service fee" to obtain supplier other than the normal cost of other fees in violation of the "People's Republic of China Against Unfair Competition Law "the provisions of the relevant statute, is a commercial bribery offense, shall be subject to a fine of Quality Supervision Bureau of the market of 10 million penalty and ordered to refund the money extorted 85,000 yuan. Retailers in the state has increased regulation violations arbitrary charges, is expressly prohibited retailers charge slotting allowances to suppliers, in the context of Duitou fees, booth fees, posters fees, like most retailers will charge a separate denomination, merge in Under "promotion service fee" item, to avoid government regulation, all kinds of hidden "promotional services fee" abound, promotional service charge of 4% from the level of a substantial increase to around 7% -8%.
With the integration of industrial chain concept deeply rooted among large domestic retail supermarkets gradually become the mainstream market in the retail industry, and this large retail supermarket management is the "supermarket + suppliers" model, which is responsible for providing a venue large retail supermarkets and equipment, related retail products by the cooperation provided by suppliers, the products are sold out until then with suppliers Results section ways. In other words, large retail supermarkets in this mode does not bear any risk inventory backlog, only need to provide space and equipment, so it should appear to be equal and mutually beneficial cooperation between the retail supermarkets and suppliers. However, the large retail supermarkets to suppliers impose so-called "slotting allowances", "holiday fee" and other expenses incident after another, which undoubtedly reflects the unequal relations of cooperation between large supermarkets and suppliers.
Slotting allowances reflects the interests of producers and supermarket distribution relationship between itself 应属 independent pricing range, which itself is justified, the government should not interfere. But when large retailers will expand the scope of slotting allowances unlimited, when its fees constitutes "overcharging", this "slotting allowances" nor "slotting allowances." While slotting allowance is alienation. Large retailers make it easy on the nature of benefits or reduce the abuse of market power, charge slotting allowances to producers unfairly damage the market order of fair competition. Entry fee is relatively independent of the supply behavior occurs, it is the cost associated with the sale. But in practice, slotting allowances tend to be alienated. Not only the scope and slotting allowances are unreasonably expand the project, but the whole purpose of slotting allowance is based on sales for the purpose of the chain chooses to become suppliers or sole basis for the sale of goods, but also become the supplier of exclusion a means of competitors.
Retailers share some form of dominance itself is the result of competition, market players is the right to freedom, the right to a reasonable extension of competition and development. However, due to the current abuse of the dominant position retailers, overcharging admission fees, thereby undermining fair competition and undermines the effective competition. And abuse of a dominant monopoly power as the essence of the abuse of a dominant position on the deal is anti-competitive, is a pro-competitive market structure damage.
Status levied against large retail supermarket slotting allowances and other random items cost, you need to start solving the following four aspects.
First, encourage competition mechanism, creating a fair competitive market environment. If we are to examine the nature of the underlying legal dispute through this economic phenomenon slotting allowance, we will find that people debate for slotting allowances, the main focus of the competition is that it could promote or damage effect, that , slotting problem is essentially a game of competition issues of mutual interest, the legal regulation of slotting it into a protection against competition mechanism. Therefore, to encourage fair competition in the market mechanism, the non-standard large supermarkets impose fees must be resolutely stopped, if necessary, the need for discipline with the "Anti-Unfair Competition Law"; Meanwhile, the timely introduction of "anti-monopoly law" to maintain fair competition in the market environment.
Second, increase efforts to rectify market order, regulate the behavior of slotting allowances. In fact, behind the excessive charge slotting allowances, but also other hidden confusion, such as arbitrary breach of contract law, tax evasion, commercial bribery and other issues, as well as social and other commercial credit system is not perfect, are all reflected from the side of market disorder , the harsh reality of the business environment. Therefore, management must make greater efforts to rectify market order, regulate the behavior of slotting allowances, construction of social credit system, multi-start, develop good competitive environment and good market competition mechanism. In addition, although according to WTO commitments, China will open, including retail services, but for the entry of foreign commercial enterprises, but can not let go no matter the excuse with international practice. In fact, many countries have made provisions through legislation when setting up large-scale retail enterprises in foreign should be reviewed in accordance with unified local population density, the number of existing stores and services, geographic scope, the new shop can create employment opportunities, etc. planning. Therefore, we also need to be effectively controlled from a macro according to the actual situation. Then there should also strengthen enforcement efforts, increase the abuse of a dominant market position in the destruction of the supervision and inspection rules of behavior, or even to develop a unified legal norms, can not be implemented.
|