IndexIntroductionContext of the researchProblem statementResearch objectivesResearch questionsFeasibility of the researchLiterature reviewThe significance of the studyLimitations of the studyResearch methodologyIntroductionMergers and acquisitions are the new business trends, especially at the international. Over the past decade, companies have adopted this move as a way to minimize competition, expand trade, and meet diverse customer needs (Coyle, 2000). The extension of this move internationally has attracted the interest of international law. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay As a method to control mergers and acquisitions to save the interest of other companies and customers, international organizations such as the European Union (EU) have come up with regulations to regulate this business approach. In most cases, mergers aim to expand their market internationally. This extends coverage to more than one country. However, the countries involved may have different trade regulations. International business regulatory organizations are involved in the harmonization of mergers and acquisitions internationally (Hitt, Ireland & Harrison, 2001). According to Kekelekis (2009), each EU member state is connected to each other by the European Competition Network (ECN). The ECN improves coordination between the European Commission and national competition authorities to ensure that companies engaging in cross-border practices comply with competition laws and antitrust actions (Kekelekis, 2009). The EU has a total of twenty-eight member states, including the United Kingdom, Germany, Poland, Italy, France, Spain, Romania, Bulgaria, Australia, and Denmark, among others. The formation of this union aimed to create trade relations between member states as a way to improve economic and socio-political development. The EU has its own model for dealing with business-related issues among its members, including mergers and acquisitions. The creation of international trade laws by EU agencies has impacted trade between its members. Among these laws are antitrust actions regulating mergers, the enforcement of which extends to non-member states (Rose & Bailey, 2013). Research context The concerns of the EU approach to mergers and acquisitions can be framed as an emerging issue in the last decade. The EU's approach to mergers has been focused on antitrust and monopoly issues (Rose & Bailey, 2013). Merging companies is an amazing approach to economic development. It minimizes profits, improves the quality of production and the benefits flow to consumers who enjoy quality goods and services at low prices. However, the merger between two competitors can have a negative impact. When two companies merge, they form a giant business organization that takes control of the market. Mergers may be tempted to abuse their ability to control the market by raising prices. The unnecessary increase in prices was evident in monopoly business circles. Mergers have abused their power to control the market by lowering prices to outbid their adversaries. In order to ensure that mergers and acquisitions do not affect the business environment, the EU proposes regulations governing their operations (Bishop & Walker, 2010). The concentration of power facilitated by mergers and acquisitions has been strongly discouraged by the EU. There are similar criticismsalso restricted to US antitrust organizations. In the United States of America, the federal government has tasked the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Department of Justice (DoF) with enforcing federal antitrust laws. When negotiating mergers and acquisitions, it is the responsibility of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Department of Justice (DoF) to investigate and analyze the proposed merger's compliance with antitrust policies. These two commercial agencies are responsible for authenticating mergers in the United States. In general, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the US Department of Justice (DoF) are downgraded systems of international trade law that serve similar interests to the EU but at the national level (Council & FREDERICTON, 2005). EU and US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Department of Justice (DoF), the progress of mergers and acquisitions is determined. Over the past two decades these organizations have filed a few cases, preventing several companies from merging. However, the different approaches to antitrust policies between the US government and the United Nations have created questionable controversies. The EU uses a different model to fight antitrust laws, compared to the approach of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Department of Justice (DoF). The document seeks to establish the impact resulting from these variations (Kekelekis, 2009). Problem Statement According to the research of Hitt, Ireland and Harrison, (2001), the control of corporate mergers and acquisitions by the EU and the US has been in the interest of all corporate stakeholders, from entrepreneurs, to customers, to suppliers and competitors. Over the years, the EU and the US have made efforts to ensure that mergers comply with antitrust policies. From the aspect of antitrust policies, US antitrust law is the most powerful. However, the enforcement aspect of these laws appears to be vague, compared to the EU antitrust model of approach to the enforcement of these policies. There is a gap between EU and US antitrust laws, which has created contradictions and disputes in the mergers and acquisitions process (Lleras, 2017). Research Objectives Both general and specific objectives guide the research. The overall objective is to establish the impacts of the gap between the EU and US approaches to mergers and acquisitions in creating international law that supports antitrust actions. The study will be limited to the following specific objectives:-1. Analyze the international antitrust policies used by the EU model towards mergers and acquisitions.2. Determine the antitrust laws applied by the United States regarding mergers and acquisitions.3. Determine how the international antitrust policies used by the EU model towards mergers and acquisitions and the antitrust laws applied by the United States towards mergers and acquisitions affect mergers and acquisitions.4. Determine how the gap between the European model towards mergers and acquisitions and the US approach can be harmonized to create a common law that supports antitrust actions. Research Questions For the research to achieve its stated objectives, the following research questions need to be answered: - 1. What are the international antitrust policies used by the EU model towards mergers and acquisitions?2. What are the antitrust laws applied by the United States regarding mergers and acquisitions?3. How the international antitrust policies used by the EU model towards mergers and acquisitions and the antitrust laws applied by the United States towards mergers and acquisitionsdo they affect mergers and acquisitions?4. How can the gap between the European model towards mergers and acquisitions and the US approach to create a standard law that supports antitrust actions be minimized? Feasibility of the researchAmong the factors that build international cohesion are international relations. Businesses across borders have built healthy international ties between EU nations. Companies of different nationalities have come together in partnership to conduct joint business through mergers and acquisitions. Following the merger, the business environment is becoming dynamic. This requires regulations to protect business activities and prevent negative implications of the merger on affected markets. Among the bodies authorized to formulate and implement international affairs, the laws are those of the EU. Among the common aspects of the EU is antitrust law, commonly known as competition law (Kekelekis, 2009). As stated by Bishop and Walker (2010), the EU antitrust model is fought on four key aspects; the abuse of monopoly power through mergers and acquisitions, the limitation of mergers that could reduce competition, the limitation of cartels under the umbrella of mergers and acquisitions, and collusive practices associated with mergers. In its policy formulation process, the EU may end up formulating international laws for international business and mergers. The research will evaluate some of the international laws expressed by the EU and US antitrust agencies and how they might support antitrust actions. Literature Review Merger is among the most encouraged business approaches when international businesses are involved. Mergers and acquisitions extend their services across borders, meeting a broader range of customer needs. Competition between companies encourages innovation and efficiency in manufacturing, where customers enjoy quality products at reduced costs. For competition to be effective, business rules dictate that companies should act independently but subject to competitive pressure exerted by their opponents. However, the concentration of cooperative power caused by mergers and acquisitions could affect corporate activity. relationships between customers. Among the effects of the merger is the elimination of competition. When two large companies operating in the same industry merge, the aspect of competition is eliminated. The beneficiaries of commercial competition, which in this case are customers, suffer from the monopoly brought about by the merger (Sherman, 2018). The European Union was formed to control the abuse of the power of cooperation by mergers. According to Pollack (2015), its main objective is to formulate international trade laws and implement them in cooperation with the respective state business regulatory agencies. The EU regulates antitrust actions through two rules that have been formulated and clearly outlined in the EU Treaty. In Article 101 of the EU Treaty, the organization prohibits collaborative commercial acts between two or more independent business organizations that could undermine competition. This provision limits both horizontal (collaboration of competitors in the same supply chain) and vertical (between manufacturers and distributors) commercial agreements. The article prohibits the formation of cartels that manipulate the business environment through price fixing or market sharing. In Article 102 of the EU Treaty, trade law prohibits the abuse of the power of cooperation through mergers and acquisitions by imposing unfair prices, manipulating the market through limiting production and limitingof innovation and diversified production to the detriment of customers (Whish & Bailey, 2015). The European Union, through the national competition authorities (NCA), has the task of applying the two treaties and ensuring that mergers and acquisitions do not undermine this competition. National competition authorities work in conjunction with national courts to ensure that stated antitrust policies are not abused. Any merger or acquisition is reviewed before the merger is approved. Existing mergers are also monitored by antitrust authorities to ensure that they do not violate the treaty (Whish & Bailey, 2015). The EU has banned some mergers and acquisitions for questionable antitrust actions. The latest victims of the whitening of international antitrust policy are the General Electric Company and the Microsoft Corporation. In 2001, General Electric Company and Honeywell International Incorporation submitted an agreement to merge. This was authenticated by the US Department of Justice (DoJ) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). However, the EU blocked the proposed merger during their investigations, showing that the merger between the two companies could have undermined competition. As documented by Ezrachi (2016), in 2004, the Microsoft company was fined $600 million by the EU for antitrust actions and was ordered by the court to modify its Windows operating system to offer different products. U.S. antitrust authorities would require a federal court order to block any merger or acquisition it deems to undermine competition and oligopolistic markets. However, the EU has the authority to directly block such a company without a court order (Ezrachi, 2016). Overall, the EU, through national competition authorities (NCAs) and formulated treaties, has worked with the US government to implement antitrust policies. US antitrust laws are documented in the Sherman Act and the Clayton Act. The Sherman Act was formulated in 1890 to prohibit the combination of businesses likely to lead to monopoly, the abuse of monopoly, and any commercial transaction or act with the intent to manipulate the market through monopoly (Topel, 2018). The creation of the Clayton Act of 1914 was intended to strengthen the Sherman Act and help the U.S. government thwart monopoly before it occurred. According to Gilbert & Greene, (2014), the Clayton Act addresses the aspect of undermining competition through mergers, citing penalties for such criminal acts. In order for EU antitrust laws to intervene, investigations are conducted on reasonable suspicion. The documents relating to the investigations are documented and presented as evidence of the violation of antitrust policies. The President of the EU is responsible for appointing the Competition Commissioner, whose job is to lead investigations into antitrust actions. Antitrust policies are put in place to enhance competition between existing companies. In a competitive economic environment, companies are forced to lower the prices of their products to gain a competitive advantage. This scales with purchasing power and therefore increased production, with economic growth. Competition increases the quality of products, with competitors attempting to make their products unique and attractive to customers. It also promotes innovation and diversified production, where customers can enjoy a wide range of products. Adherence to EU antitrust policies has made EU companies stronger, adopting ethical business and gaining a competitive advantage even in markets outside the EU (Pollack, 2015). Over the years, the EU has protected competitionmaintaining the European Competition Network (ECN). The ECN coordinates the National Competition Authority (NCA), the respective antitrust authorities within EU Member States and national courts to ensure that mergers and acquisitions do not undermine such competition. These organizations coordinate to prohibit the formation of monopolistic businesses, cartels, and mergers that restrict competition. After credible evidence that a company has or intends to take antitrust action, actions are taken which in this case may include blocking of activity within EU member states or financial penalties. Such decisions can, however, be challenged by appeal to the EU General Court. Since the formation of the EU, EU members have enjoyed ethical business, without any antitrust action. Competition within EU members has been maintained, with cartels and monopoly eliminated (Kekelekis, 2009). In a general perception, EU antitrust policies may appear to weaken mergers and acquisitions. The enforcement of EU antitrust laws has come under criticism over the years, with a common perception that the laws are undermining businesses. However, the case is different. The European Competition Commission has certified mergers and acquisitions that do not undermine competition. This indicates that antitrust laws are intended to promote ethical business, protecting the interests of the company, customers and other competitors in the market, all with the key objective of stimulating economic and commercial development (Hitt,Ireland & Harrison, 2001). Significance of the Study Mergers and acquisitions have become a common trend in international business. Cross-border activities can be challenging when multiple nationalities are involved. In various states, antitrust laws may vary. Mergers and acquisitions can take advantage of and venture into business within nations where competition policies are less stringent. This will lead to the accumulation of cooperative power, monopoly and market share. Companies are likely to exploit their customers and undermine the right to healthy competition. The formation of cartels leads to economic decline, with the closure of less competitive companies. EU and US antitrust policies have been put in place to improve a competitive business environment. The research will evaluate the impacts of these policies on mergers and acquisitions. From the research we will understand the operations of the European Competition Commission in collaboration with the US antitrust. The study will analyze how EU and US trade laws have shaped business in the US and their influence on mergers and acquisitions. The importance of EU antitrust laws will be established. Business ethics emphasize competition without monopolies and cartels. International laws support business ethics across the EU by creating and enacting antitrust laws. Limitations of the Study International trade laws formulated by the EU are dynamic. EU regulations, directives and acts govern the entire business environment, covering personal businesses, small businesses and large companies. There are numerous laws, with different impacts on the business field. However, the search will be limited to competition laws that relate exclusively to mergers and acquisitions. This limitation is essential to make the research findings relevant and free from bias. The use of exploratory research design when conducting the research causes the study to narrow down to antitrust policies and their impact on mergers and acquisitions, a case study of the EU, and US antitrust laws. This leaves room for further research.