Publication
La Cour suprême du Canada tranche : les cadres ne pourront se syndiquer au Québec
Le 19 avril dernier, la Cour suprême du Canada a rendu une décision fort attendue en matière de syndicalisation des cadres.
États-Unis | Publication | May 2019
On May 1, Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim suggested that antitrust enforcers should expand enforcement of Section 8 of the Clayton Act to account for modern corporate structures, including LLCs and other forms of non-corporate entities.
Section 8 of the Clayton Act prohibits "interlocking directorships"—that is, the practice of serving as an officer or director of competing corporations—if the corporations are competitors "by virtue of their business and location of operation," unless certain exemptions apply. But as AAG Delrahim noted, the Clayton Act was passed well before modern entities such as limited liability companies existed and applies only to "corporations."
Although courts have not addressed whether Section 8 should apply to LLCs, AAG Delrahim stated that the Antitrust Division "believe[s] the harm can be the same regardless of the form of the entities." Currently, the DOJ and Federal Trade Commission do not factor in corporate structures when analyzing the potential anticompetitive effects of a proposed merger or conduct matter. Given this existing framework, AAG Delrahim stated that the DOJ is considering "how to bring this thinking to Section 8 as well."
AAG Delrahim also used his speech to caution institutional investors from coordinating conduct between competing firms in which they have investments. His statements follow recent scholarship that suggests that common minority ownership by institutional investors may have the effect of lessening competition. Under one theory, institutional investors could harm competition through overt action: the investor calls the competitors it owns and discourages them from competing in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act. Alternatively, the directors of the various competitors who share an institutional investor may be incentivized to charge monopolistic prices in order to maximize profits and ensure that the directors do no lose their seat on the board.
AAG Delrahim's speech is a reminder that even behavior that is not explicitly prohibited by the letter of the antitrust statutes may still raise eyebrows at the DOJ, FTC, and state attorneys general offices. Companies of all legal forms should monitor the external officer, director, and/or equivalent positions of their management and director teams so as to avoid becoming embroiled in antitrust investigations or litigation relating to potential interlocks.
Publication
Le 19 avril dernier, la Cour suprême du Canada a rendu une décision fort attendue en matière de syndicalisation des cadres.
Publication
Le budget 2024 propose d’élargir la portée de certains pouvoirs permettant à l’ARC de demander des renseignements aux contribuables tout en prévoyant de nouvelles conséquences pour les contribuables contrevenants.
Publication
L'impôt minimum de remplacement (IMR) est un impôt sur le revenu additionnel prévu dans la Loi de l’impôt sur le revenu (Canada) (la « Loi ») auquel sont assujettis les particuliers et certaines fiducies qui pourraient autrement avoir recours à certaines déductions et exemptions et à certains crédits pour réduire leur impôt sur le revenu fédéral canadien régulier.
Abonnez-vous et restez à l’affût des nouvelles juridiques, informations et événements les plus récents...
© Norton Rose Fulbright LLP 2023