Anyone who still doubted that politics play an increasing role in antitrust should by now be convinced of the opposite: The recent appointment of the new Chief Economist at the European Commission is another instance where antitrust made it to the mainstream press across Europe. This post provides a short summary of what happened and tries to add a few considerations to the existing coverage.
The Chief Economist – a role introduced in 2003 – sits in the European Commission’s Competition Directorate and leads a team that provides guidance to the Commission on the economic impact of its antitrust enforcement. This guidance relates to both individual cases and general policy.
Different from usual positions within the Commission, the role of Chief Economist is generally only held for three years. Officeholders are recruited from outside the Commission and leave the regulator after their stint.
The importance of the economist team has varied over time, but as you all know economics have tended to become more and more important in antitrust – and convincing the economist team can sometimes help to also convince case teams that, e.g., a transaction should be cleared.
The Chief Economist role turning political
The current Chief Economist Pierre Régibeau is to leave his position at the end of this month. About two weeks ago, the Commission announced that Fiona Scott Morton, a Yale professor, would be appointed as the next Chief Economist. So far, business as usual.
But then the storm began. French ministers complained about the appointment. Members of the EU parliament complained about the appointment. The Commission’s Executive Vice President and Competition Commissioner Vestager defended the appointment. Nevertheless, French president Macron complained, saying that Europe’s strategic autonomy also meant “autonomy of thought”.
A day after Macron’s criticism, Fiona Scott Morton withdrew from becoming Chief Economist. So, within a little over a week, the critics had pushed Scott Morton out of a job she never got to work in. The Commission has now re-started the search to fill the position and has appointed Lluis Sauri Romero, a head of unit in the economist team, as acting Chief Economist.
Two reasons for criticism
The criticism of Fiona Scott Morton’s appointment focussed on two points:
First, she had previously advised big tech companies like Apple and Microsoft. The Commission’s reassurance that Scott Morton would, for a period of two years (so two thirds of her term), not be able to work on cases involving a company for which she had worked in the course of her career were not enough to soothe the critics.
The second – and surprisingly more prominent – reason for criticism was Scott Morton’s nationality: She is a US national and apparently the critics believed that the position should be given to a European, of which, in their view, there should surely be one with equal ability.
Revolving doors
Fiona Scott Morton would have been the first non-EU national (and also the first woman) to take the job. Leaving that aside, a look at her would-be predecessors shows that it is not unusual for a Chief Economist to be recruited from university or from economic advisories:
| Chief Economist | Nationality | Tenure | Previous Employer | Next Employer |
| Pierre Régibeau | Belgium | 2019-2023 | CRA | To be seen |
| Tommaso Valletti | Italy/UK | 2016-2019 | University | University |
| Massimo Motta | Italy | 2013-2016 | University | University |
| Kai-Uwe Kühn | Germany | 2011-2013 | CRA; University | CRA; University |
| Damien Neven | Belgium | 2006-2011 | University | CRA; University |
| Lars-Hendrik Röller | Germany | 2003-2006 | University | University |
Nevertheless, none of the previous Chief Economists seem to have faced similar criticism regarding potential conflicts of interests when they were appointed. But, in all fairness, the focus on revolving doors at the Commission increased significantly over the past years (also see our post here).
Antitrustpolitics
To me, the most important point around the new Chief Economist is neither the criticism of choosing an American national nor the criticism of potential conflicts of interest. It is the fact that politics got so involved that ultimately a candidate handpicked by the Commission withdrew from the appointment.
Hopefully Maybe this is a one-off, but in hindsight it could also be a breach of a veil paving the way for much broader political involvement – in times in which antitrust is already more political than ever. With Vestager to recuse herself from her position later this year if she makes the shortlist for the presidency of the European Investment Bank, the focus could turn on how open the person taking over from her is to political considerations.
Photo by Mateusz Wacławek on Unsplash
Antitrustpolitics.com 