Merger Review Regimes in the ASEAN Region and Case Analysis of Grab-Uber Merger

In 2018, the largest yet cross-border M&A deal between digital platforms in Southeast Asia was reached, namely the Grab-Uber M&A case. The local digital platform Grab consolidated the regional operations of San Francisco, California-based Uber, a development which had significant effects on competition and consumer welfares in the Southeast Asia digital market. The competition authorities in the region independently initiated their investigation and started to deliberate the merger case to determine the anti-competitive effects on their domestic market, and to decide whether this transaction should be restricted or approved. Even though the two merging and merged firms completed their transactions, each authority applied different logic and imposed different remedies in deciding the case. Authorities in some member states such as Singapore and the Philippines decided that the Grab-Uber merger was anti-competitive, while others such as Indonesia and Viet Nam considered the merger not anti-competitive. Upon this backdrop, this article reviews the competition policies and laws of four major ASEAN countries – Indonesia, Singapore, Viet Nam, and the Philippines – from institutional and legal perspectives, focusing on M&A review regimes. Then, we briefly introduce how these com-petition authorities decided on the Grab-Uber merger case, also analyzing the competition effects of the case on the ride-hailing market in the countries. Based on the analysis results, we propose overseas competition policies for Korea.