{"id":116228,"date":"2025-10-07T13:20:09","date_gmt":"2025-10-07T13:20:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/?post_type=comparative_guide&#038;p=116228"},"modified":"2025-10-14T09:19:12","modified_gmt":"2025-10-14T09:19:12","slug":"the-netherlands-merger-control","status":"publish","type":"comparative_guide","link":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/chapter\/the-netherlands-merger-control\/","title":{"rendered":"The Netherlands: Merger Control"},"content":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"template":"","class_list":["post-116228","comparative_guide","type-comparative_guide","status-publish","hentry","guides-merger-control","jurisdictions-the-netherlands"],"acf":[],"appp":{"post_list":{"below_title":"<div class=\"guide-author-details\"><span class=\"guide-author\">Linklaters<\/span><span class=\"guide-author-logo\"><img src=\"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/1\/2018\/11\/linklaters-logo.png\"\/><\/span><\/div>"},"post_detail":{"above_title":"<div class=\"guide-author-details\"><span class=\"guide-author\">Linklaters<\/span><span class=\"guide-author-logo\"><img src=\"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/1\/2018\/11\/linklaters-logo.png\"\/><\/span><\/div>","below_title":"<span class=\"guide-intro\">This country specific Q&amp;A provides an overview of Merger Control laws and regulations applicable in The Netherlands<\/span><div class=\"guide-content\"><div class=\"filter\">\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t<input type=\"text\" placeholder=\"Search questions and answers...\" class=\"filter-container__search-field\">\r\n\t\t\t<\/div>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t<ol class=\"custom-counter\">\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Overview<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The main statute regulating merger control in the Netherlands is the Dutch Competition Act (DCA, <em>Mededingingswet<\/em>). The national competition authority responsible for the public enforcement of competition law is the Autoriteit Consument &amp; Markt (ACM).<\/p>\n<p>From a geographical perspective, the DCA applies only to the \u2018mainland\u2019 of the Netherlands. Therefore, other jurisdictions which are part of the Kingdom of the Netherlands (i.e. Aruba, Bonaire, Saba, Sint Eustatius, Cura\u00e7ao and Sint Maarten) fall outside the DCA\u2019s geographical scope.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Is notification compulsory or voluntary?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Notification is compulsory once the relevant filing thresholds are met. The regime does not provide for the possibility of a voluntary notification in case the filing thresholds are not met.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Is there a prohibition on completion or closing prior to clearance by the relevant authority? Are there possibilities for derogation or carve out?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The Dutch merger control regime is <u>suspensory<\/u>, meaning that it prohibits the implementation of a reportable concentration prior to clearance by the ACM. The ACM enforces this prohibition proactively.<\/p>\n<p>The DCA provides for the possibility to apply for an exemption of the suspension obligation for \u2018serious reasons\u2019. The parties have to show that observing the suspension obligation would result in irreparable damage. This normally only applies in situations of impending bankruptcy or irreparable depreciation because of the loss of groups of employees, customers and\/or suppliers. The fact that a merger is cleared elsewhere is insufficient to obtain a derogation.<\/p>\n<p>There is also an exception to the suspension obligation for public offer situations, provided that immediate notification of the offer is made and the voting rights connected to the shares obtained are not exercised (with a possible exemption in case such exercise is necessary to maintain the value of the investment).<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What types of transaction are notifiable or reviewable and what is the test for control?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p><strong>Types of notifiable transactions<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The ACM interprets the term \u2018concentration\u2019 in a manner consistent with the European Commission\u2019s application of the equivalent provision under the EU Merger Regulation. A concentration shall therefore be deemed to arise where a control on a lasting basis results from:<\/p>\n<ol style=\"padding-left: 0\" type=\"i\">\n<li>the merger of two or more previously independent undertakings or parts of undertakings; or<\/li>\n<li>the acquisition, by one or more persons already controlling at least one undertaking, or by one or more undertakings, whether by purchase of securities or assets, by contract or by any other means, of direct or indirect control of the whole or parts of one or more undertakings.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>The creation of a joint venture performing on a lasting basis all the functions of an autonomous economic entity (a full-function JV) is considered to constitute a concentration within the meaning of point (ii) above.<\/p>\n<p>Internal reorganisations, insofar they do not lead to a change of control, are not notifiable.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Test for control <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Only acquisitions that involve a change of control trigger a filing. The notion of control is interpreted in line with the approach taken at the EU level and is defined as the possibility of exercising decisive influence over an undertaking.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">In which circumstances is an acquisition of a minority interest notifiable or reviewable?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Acquisitions of minority shareholdings (i.e. less than 50% of the voting rights) are only notifiable if they lead to a change of control. A minority shareholding can give rise to negative control and, in some cases, may give rise to <em>de facto <\/em>control, for example as a result of certain veto rights. This accords with the approach taken at the EU level (more specifically in the European Commission\u2019s Consolidated Jurisdictional Notice), for example in relation to veto rights conferring control.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What are the jurisdictional thresholds (turnover, assets, market share and\/or local presence)? Are there different thresholds that apply to particular sectors?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p><strong>Relevant thresholds<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>A Dutch merger control filing is triggered if:<\/p>\n<ol style=\"padding-left: 0\" type=\"i\">\n<li>the combined Dutch turnover of all undertakings concerned exceeded \u20ac150 million in the previous calendar year; and<\/li>\n<li>at least two of the undertakings concerned achieved \u20ac30 million turnover in the Netherlands in the previous calendar year.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>Contrary to the approach under the EU Merger Regulation, the relevant turnover to be taken into account for the threshold assessment is that of the calendar year preceding the transaction (and thus not the financial year). This means that where one or more of the undertakings involved have a financial year that does not coincide with the calendar year, the turnover must be re-calculated accordingly.<\/p>\n<p>Different thresholds apply to concentrations involving (i) two or more pension funds (as defined in the Dutch Pension Law (<em>Pensioenwet<\/em>) and the Dutch Financial Supervision Act (<em>Wet op het financieel toezicht<\/em>)), (ii) undertakings active in the insurance sector (as defined in the Dutch Pension Law) and (iii) financial and credit institutions (as defined in the Dutch Pension Law).<\/p>\n<ol style=\"padding-left: 0\" type=\"i\">\n<li>For insurance companies, the threshold amounts remain the same; however, the turnover should be calculated as the value of gross premiums written.<\/li>\n<li>For pension funds, notification is required if total gross premiums written exceed \u20ac550 million and at least two funds have each received \u20ac100 million from Dutch residents.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">How are turnover, assets and\/or market shares valued or determined for the purposes of jurisdictional thresholds?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The Dutch rules for the calculation of turnover closely follow Article 5 of the EU Merger Regulation. Two important differences between the European and the Dutch merger control systems exist:<\/p>\n<ol style=\"padding-left: 0\" type=\"i\">\n<li>Dutch law deviates from the EU Merger Regulation regarding the calculation of the turnover of a joint venture between two or more undertakings concerned. While the EU Merger Regulation prescribes that the turnover of a joint venture between undertakings concerned should be apportioned equally amongst those undertakings, Dutch law requires that the turnover be apportioned according to each undertaking\u2019s share of capital or voting rights.<\/li>\n<li>Under Dutch law, the relevant turnover should be based on the turnover generated in the calendar year preceding the transaction and not the financial year. This means that if one or more of the undertakings concerned have a financial year which does not coincide with a calendar year, the turnover must be re-calculated accordingly.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Is there a particular exchange rate required to be used for to convert turnover thresholds and asset values?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>No guidance is given under Dutch law. The ACM therefore follows the approach taken by the European Commission, namely to use the average of European Central Bank (ECB) annual average exchange rate figures.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">In which circumstances are joint ventures notifiable or reviewable (both new joint ventures and acquisitions of joint control over an existing business)?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>In line with the EU Merger Regulation and the European Commission Consolidated Jurisdictional Notice, only the establishment of a full-function joint venture constitutes a concentration. The creation of a non-full-function joint venture is therefore not notifiable. Concentrations are notifiable if they result in a change of control and meet the applicable thresholds.<\/p>\n<p>In the case of a joint venture, each of the parents (and their groups) intending to exercise \u00a0joint control is considered an undertaking concerned. In this situation, the jurisdictional threshold can be met by the two parents together, even if the target joint venture itself does not meet the threshold. Put differently, the thresholds may require a filing of transaction even though there is no actual nexus to the Netherlands.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are there any circumstances in which different stages of the same, overall transaction are separately notifiable or reviewable?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>There is no specific guidance under the DCA on the notification of inter-related transactions. In practice, the ACM follows the approach set out in the European Commission\u2019s Consolidated Jurisdictional Notice, namely that transactions which are determined to be inter-dependent will be treated together.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">How do the thresholds apply to \u201cforeign-to-foreign\u201d mergers and transactions involving a target \/ joint venture with no nexus to the jurisdiction?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>There are no specific jurisdictional thresholds for foreign-to-foreign transactions under the Dutch merger control rules, nor is there a separate local effects test in addition to the local turnover threshold. If the target in a sole control scenario has no local turnover, a filing can be ruled out even if it has assets or a corporate entity in the Netherlands.<\/p>\n<p>The general turnover thresholds require that at least two of the undertakings concerned each have obtained \u20ac30 million turnover in the Netherlands. In the context of a joint venture, this means that once the parent companies each meet the local turnover test, notification is required regardless of whether the joint venture itself has any Dutch nexus.<\/p>\n<p>Accordingly, foreign-to-foreign mergers are subject to Dutch merger control solely by meeting the general turnover thresholds, without any additional requirement to demonstrate effects on the Dutch market.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">For voluntary filing regimes (only), are there any factors not related to competition that might influence the decision as to whether or not notify?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Not applicable.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What is the substantive test applied by the relevant authority to assess whether or not to clear the merger, or to clear it subject to remedies?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The substantive test applied by the ACM is in line with the EU Merger Regulation and provides that concentrations which would significantly impede effective competition, particularly as a result of the creation or strengthening of a dominant position, should not be allowed (the SIEC test). There are no different tests that apply to sectors, although the ACM takes into account sector-specific characteristics in its analysis.<\/p>\n<p>In practice, the ACM follows the European Commission\u2019s Horizontal and Non-Horizontal Merger Guidelines.<\/p>\n<p>The parties may propose remedies in Phase I. If the ACM considers these solutions insufficient, the parties must apply for a licence (<em>vergunning<\/em>) by submitting a more extensive notification form, initiating Phase II proceedings. Phase II does not commence automatically after the conclusion of the Phase I review phase. This differs from the procedure at EU level.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are factors unrelated to competition relevant?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>In general, the ACM assesses concentrations solely on the basis of competition criteria. However, if one of the undertakings involved in the concentration is entrusted with services of general economic interest, the ACM can refuse to grant a permit only if such refusal does not obstruct the performance of such task.<\/p>\n<p>In a recent case (<em>DPG Media \/ RTL Netherlands<\/em>), the ACM considered media pluralism, a non-competition factor, in its substantive assessment and the remedies imposed. This decision should be viewed within the broader European context, where recent initiatives (namely, the introduction of Article 22 of the European Media Freedom Act and the consultations regarding the revision of the EU Merger Guidelines), have sought to incorporate media pluralism into merger reviews at both national and European levels.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, if the ACM has refused to grant a permit, the parties may nonetheless request the Minister of Economic Affairs (<em>Minister van Economische Zaken<\/em>, the \u201cMinister\u201d) to grant a permit. Important reasons in the public interest are taken into account by the Minister, which could outweigh the expected restriction of competition brought forth by the concentration.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are ancillary restraints covered by the authority\u2019s clearance decision?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Ancillary restraints are not by definition covered by the clearance decision of the ACM. In the notification form, parties are required to include any agreement between them that may restrict competition but is directly related and necessary to the implementation of a concentration. If the parties would like a decision on whether such agreements qualify, according to the ACM, as ancillary restrictions, they must request this within the notification form. The ACM does not have the obligation to confirm whether it considers these agreements to constitute ancillary restraints.<\/p>\n<p>However, note that the ancillary restraint exception applies by operation of law. This means that it may apply to an agreement even without the ACM having issued a decision on this matter. The fact that the ACM does not issue a decision on the notified restrictions through the notification form does not imply, however, that such restrictions are not covered by the prohibition on anti-competitive agreements, nor that the ancillary restraint exception applies to such restrictions.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">For mandatory filing regimes, is there a statutory deadline for notification of the transaction?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>There is no statutory deadline, but the notification must be made prior to the implementation of a concentration.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What is the earliest time or stage in the transaction at which a notification can be made?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>In order for parties to be able to notify a transaction, they must demonstrate that their intention to enter into a concentration is sufficiently concrete. A LoI or an MoU is typically sufficient to start the notification process.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Is it usual practice to engage in pre-notification discussions with the authority? If so, how long do these typically take?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>There is no mandatory or formal consultation procedure prior to notification.<\/p>\n<p>Undertakings must announce an intended notification to the ACM via an intake form and receive feedback. This intake form should be submitted via the ACM website at least one week prior to the formal notification<\/p>\n<p>However, in more complex cases, it is advisable to engage with the ACM in advance of the notification to discuss the filing and avoid delays during the Phase I notification process.<\/p>\n<p>Depending on the complexity of the case, pre-notification consultation can take several weeks or months. For straightforward transactions, such consultation may not be necessary.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What is the basic timetable for the authority\u2019s review?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p><strong>Phase I review<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The ACM is required to take a Phase I decision within four calendar weeks of notification, subject to suspensions (stop-the-clocks) from the moment the ACM asks for further information to the day on which the requested information is received.<\/p>\n<p>In practice, the ACM often takes the full four-week time period to issue its decision. The ACM has increasingly been clearing straightforward cases with no third-party submissions earlier (as quickly as after two weeks from submission of the filing).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Phase II review<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The ACM is required to take a Phase II decision within 13 calendar weeks from the initiation by the parties, subject to suspensions (stop-the-clocks) from the moment the ACM requests \u00a0additional information until the day the requested information is received. During this period, the prohibition to close the transaction remains applicable.<\/p>\n<p>Contrary to the EU procedure, the ACM does not start Phase II proceedings on its own. The equivalent of a decision to open Phase II is the decision that the notified concentration requires a licence. It is up to the parties to apply for such a licence (and thus effectively to open a Phase II themselves) through a separate, more extensive standard form, which is more similar to the Form CO. Phase II will thus be based on this second form.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Under what circumstances may the basic timetable be extended, reset or frozen?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The review period can be extended (i) at the request of the parties or (ii) if the ACM asks the parties for further information in the form of an information request. This suspension starts from the moment the ACM asks for further information to the day on which the requested information is received.<\/p>\n<p>Such requests for information after notification are common, although the ACM is often willing to consider sending limited and straightforward questions on an informal basis without suspending the time limit, provided the parties undertake to reply quickly.<\/p>\n<p>The foreseen review periods only commence if the ACM considers the notification form complete. If it finds any information or additional documents missing, the ACM will send a request for the necessary file completion within five working days after receiving the form. Phase I and the corresponding statutory waiting period will only commence on the working day after the ACM has received the requested information.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are there any circumstances in which the review timetable can be shortened?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>While this does not constitute a separate procedure <em>per se<\/em>, the ACM may clear a transaction in the notification phase with a summary or short-form decision. In this case, although the formal review period is not shortened, the transaction will typically be cleared more quickly.<\/p>\n<p>Aside from this, the DCA provides for the possibility to apply by reasoned request for an exemption of the statutory suspension obligation for \u2018serious reasons\u2019. In practice, this means that it must be shown that observing the suspension obligation would result in irreparable damage. This normally only applies in situations of impending bankruptcy or irreparable depreciation because of the loss of groups of employees, customers and\/or suppliers. Also note that an exemption from the waiting period does not suspend the notification obligation as such and the ACM can and will examine the transaction as any other transaction. The fact that a merger is cleared elsewhere is insufficient to obtain a derogation.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, there is an exception to the suspension obligation for public offer situations, provided that immediate notification of the offer is made and the voting rights connected to the shares obtained are not exercised. An exemption may be granted if exercising those rights is necessary to preserve the value of the investment.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Which party is responsible for submitting the filing?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The responsibility to make a notification lies with the party or parties acquiring control. This includes shareholders who are not involved in the present transaction, but who will continue to have control over the target, as well as both parent companies of a joint venture.<\/p>\n<p>The seller is not required to make a notification, assuming they will not retain control over the target.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What information is required in the filing form?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The information required in the filing form can be categorised into (i) information about the undertakings concerned, (ii) data concerning the concentration, (iii) market data, (iv) supporting documents, (v) ancillary restraints, and (vi) European Union information.<\/p>\n<p>Information about the undertakings concerned includes company details, business activities, group structures, and turnover data. Data concerning the concentration covers the transaction structure, related agreements, and post-concentration ownership arrangements. Market data requires market definition, market shares, competitor information, and customer details for affected markets. Supporting documents must include annual accounts, transaction documents, and relevant market studies. Ancillary restraints information covers agreements directly related to the concentration. European Union information includes details of parallel notifications and EU-wide turnover figures.<\/p>\n<p>All responses must be provided in Dutch, and if attachments are in other languages, the ACM may request translations. A standard filing form is available on the ACM&#8217;s website which includes a detailed breakdown of the specific information requirements for each category.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Which supporting documents, if any, must be filed with the authority?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The following supporting documents must be filed with the ACM:<\/p>\n<ol style=\"padding-left: 0\" type=\"i\">\n<li>The most recent annual accounts and annual reports of the undertakings concerned, and, where applicable, the most recent annual accounts and annual reports of the undertaking that includes the financial data of an undertaking concerned in consolidated annual accounts, except when this concerns an undertaking that loses control through the concentration.<\/li>\n<li>A dated copy of the most recent documents on the basis of which the concentration will be implemented. The documents must provide clarity about the (intended) commitment underlying the concentration, particularly showing what the ownership and control relationships will be after the concentration, and what obligations rest on parties that influence competition between parties and\/or with third parties.<\/li>\n<li>Written evidence showing the representative authority of the designated contact person(s), both for officials of the parties concerned and for external advisers such as lawyers.<\/li>\n<li>Market studies available to the undertakings concerned that are relevant to: (a) the way in which the relevant affected market(s) have been defined by the notifying parties; (b) determining the size of the relevant affected market(s) and the position of parties thereon; and (c) if other reports are referenced in the notification, those reports.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Is there a filing fee?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The Dutch merger control procedure is subject to the following filing fees:<\/p>\n<ol style=\"padding-left: 0\" type=\"i\">\n<li>Phase I cases: \u20ac 17,450.<\/li>\n<li>Phase II cases (i.e. licence application): \u20ac 34,900 (additional to Phase I fee).<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Is there a public announcement that a notification has been filed?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Within 3-5 working days after the formal notification, the ACM publishes a short notice announcing receipt of the notification. The publication on the website typically includes (i) a high-level description of the transaction; (ii) a short description of the activities of the parties involved; and (iii) information on how third parties can submit their views.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Does the authority seek or invite the views of third parties?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Third parties can submit their views on the proposed transaction on the basis of the public announcement of the ACM that a notification has been received.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What information may be published by the authority or made available to third parties?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The ACM publishes its final decision on its website. Phase I clearance of a transaction sets forth a high-level standardised decision without any details of the competitive assessment.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Does the authority cooperate with antitrust authorities in other jurisdictions?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The ACM is a member of the European Competition Network (ECN), and the International Competition Network (ICN), and cooperates extensively with other competition regulators, in particular the European Commission and other EEA Member States.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What kind of remedies are acceptable to the authority?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The ACM distinguishes three types of remedies (i) structural remedies, (ii) behavioural remedies, and (iii) quasi-structural remedies:<\/p>\n<ol style=\"padding-left: 0\" type=\"i\">\n<li>Structural remedies bring about a structural change in the market, such as when merging undertakings divest business units or withdraw from a joint venture.<\/li>\n<li>Behavioural remedies require the undertaking created by the concentration to behave in a certain way or refrain from certain behaviour.<\/li>\n<li>Quasi-structural remedies do not have a structural character but have lasting structural effects on the market, such as granting perpetual licences to third parties whilst retaining ownership rights.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>The ACM has a preference for structural remedies over behavioural remedies. Structural remedies change the structure of the market in a lasting way and, in principle, require no further supervision after implementation. The ACM considers behavioural remedies suitable only in exceptional circumstances.<\/p>\n<p>In recent practice, the ACM has exceptionally accepted behavioural remedies to address competition problems in the digital economy, where structural remedies are sometimes difficult to design without detracting from the benefits of a concentration.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What procedure applies in the event that remedies are required in order to secure clearance?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Remedies can be discussed during the pre-notification phase and submitted during Phase I (ultimately one week before expiry of the four-week review period) or during Phase II (ultimately three weeks before the expiry of the 13-week review period).<\/p>\n<p>In case remedies are offered in Phase I, the parties can only close the main transaction once those remedies have been implemented, similar to the upfront buyer requirement under the EU Merger Regulation. However, in practice, the ACM can grant an exemption to this rule. This restriction does not apply when remedies are submitted in Phase II.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What are the penalties for failure to notify, late notification and breaches of a prohibition on closing?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The ACM can impose fines equal to or \u00a0greater of \u20ac 900,000 or 10% of the undertaking&#8217;s worldwide annual turnover in the calendar year preceding its decision. In cases of recidivism within five years, the ACM can increase the fine by up to 100% of the undertaking&#8217;s worldwide annual turnover.<\/p>\n<p>The duty to notify rests with the undertaking(s) acquiring control. Therefore, in case of an acquisition of sole control, the seller will not be fined for a missed notification. Similarly, the target undertaking does not share the liability for a fine.<\/p>\n<p>Undertakings and individuals can be fined for infringements of merger control rules in the Netherlands. For example, the ACM has imposed significant fines on both executive and non-executive directors for failure to observe behavioural remedies. The statutory maximum fine for individuals is \u20ac 900,000.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What are the penalties for incomplete or misleading information in the notification or in response to the authority\u2019s questions?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>In case incorrect or incomplete information is submitted, a fine can be imposed up to the greater of \u20ac 900,000 or 1% of the undertaking\u2019s worldwide annual turnover in the calendar year preceding the decision.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Can the authority\u2019s decision be appealed to a court?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>ACM decisions can be appealed within 6 weeks to the District Court in Rotterdam. Subsequent appeals can be made within 6 weeks to the Trade and Industry Appeals Tribunal (<em>College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven<\/em>).<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">What are the recent trends in the approach of the relevant authority to enforcement, procedure and substantive assessment?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>The ACM has referred significantly more cases to Phase II from 2018 onwards compared to previous years, when such referrals were exceptional. For example, in 2024, the ACM received 152 notifications, issued 132 Phase I clearances, referred four cases to Phase II, and issued one Phase II clearance.<\/p>\n<p>The ACM has opened its first <em>ex-ante<\/em> proceedings under Article 102 TFEU and its national equivalent into a transaction below the filing thresholds (the acquisition of Ziemann by Brink\u2019s), applying the CJEU\u2019s <em>Towercast <\/em>judgment. The ACM is expected to \u00a0continue to apply the EU <em>Towercast<\/em> doctrine in the future, in order to review below-threshold transactions. In this regard, the DCA was also recently amended to reflect the EU <em>Towercast<\/em> doctrine. The DCA still contained a provision that prohibited the application of the abuse of dominance provision to concentrations. This provision has now been deleted<strong>.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The ACM has announced that it will continue to focus on three identified main areas in 2025, including encouraging an open and fair digital economy, accelerating the energy transition, and moving towards a more sustainable economy.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<li class=\"question-block filter-container__element\">\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"filter-container__match-html\">Are there any future developments or planned reforms of the merger control regime in your jurisdiction?<\/h3>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<button id=\"show-me\">+<\/button>\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"question_answer filter-container__match-html\" style=\"display:none;\"><p>Other than the recent legislative change mentioned above, the ACM has launched a public consultation on the legislative procedure for the adoption of a proposed call-in mechanism for below-threshold deals in June 2025. This would allow the ACM to review transactions below the notification thresholds where at least one party has generated \u20ac 30 million Dutch turnover in the previous calendar year, and the concentration could significantly affect competition.<\/p>\n<p>Under the draft legislation, which remains subject to change, the ACM would have four weeks to request information after the public announcement, after becoming aware of a transaction, or within six months of the concentration being implemented. Once the ACM has received a complete response to its request for information, it would have a further four weeks to decide whether to impose a notification obligation and suspend implementation of the concentration.<\/p>\n<p>However, in October 2025, the Dutch Council of State (<em>Raad van State<\/em>) issued a negative opinion on this draft legislation. As a result, the legislative reform is likely to be delayed for the foreseeable future.<\/p>\n<p>Additionally, the Minister for Economic Affairs is considering indexation of the turnover thresholds. The ACM supports this and proposes raising the individual turnover threshold from \u20ac 30 million to \u20ac 50 million.<\/p>\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/li>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t\t\r\n<div class=\"word-count-hidden\" style=\"display:none;\">Estimated word count: <span class=\"word-count\">4678<\/span><\/div>\r\n\r\n\t\t\t<\/ol>\r\n\r\n<script type=\"text\/javascript\" src=\"\/wp-content\/themes\/twentyseventeen\/src\/jquery\/components\/filter-guides.js\" async><\/script><\/div>"}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comparative_guide\/116228","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comparative_guide"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/comparative_guide"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/my.legal500.com\/guides\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=116228"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}