SCOOP: Rep. Darrell Issa on foreign regulations: "The relevant market in antitrust is now the world."

American businesses need a “level playing field and fair competition” when it comes to global regulations on tech companies — which in many places is not the case, Rep. Darrell Issa (R., Calif.) told the Washington Reporter.

“America’s businesses and innovators don’t need or want an unfair regulatory advantage around the world — only a level playing field and fair competition,” Issa said. “In too many places that’s not happening — so we are on the case, in the fight, and won’t stop until we win.”

Issa’s remarks followed a Judiciary Committee hearing in which the California lawmaker criticized allies like South Korea and the European Union (EU) for targeting American businesses and workers with regulations, and for circumventing American labor laws..

“President Trump is the first president in a very long time to ask what is the relevant market” when it comes to antitrust, Issa said in the hearing. “The relevant market in antitrust is now the world. And in tech, it is the world. And when countries like Korea, Australia, most of Europe, Brazil — countries that we have considered allies use their vast market power… as sovereign nations to adversely affect our competitiveness.”

“It doesn’t matter if you have a 100 percent market share in the United States and a 100 percent global market share as an original innovator if in fact foreign nations, in jealousy or in simply not wanting to in fact allow these unicorns to exist, use their market power to stop them,” Issa — himself a businessman — said. “That is what’s going on, often with our closest allies.”

The Judiciary Committee hearing saw bipartisan agreement that some regulations, like the EU’s Digital Markets Act (DMA), can create openings for American adversaries like China to exploit.

Rep. Lou Correa (D., Calif.) observed as much while speaking with Dick Auer, the Director of Competition Policy at the International Center for Law & Economics (ICLE). “I think European overregulation [really has] one winner, and that’s the Chinese economy. There are some in the U.S. who have embraced the European philosophy that big is bad,” Correa warned. His points are not just theoretical, he said. IRobot was recently acquired by a Chinese company following excessive antitrust regulations in America.

“I’m from California, the fifth largest economy in the world today. These big firms we’re talking about are mostly California firms. They’re our biggest taxpayers in California that support our social programs, support education, create millions of jobs in California, and are responsible for innovation, in Silicon Valley, and in most of the places of California. I believe the European approach puts a target on the backs of these firms, American companies,” he said.

Issa concurred with his fellow Californian during the hearing, warning that “they intend on using regulation to take us out of our competitive lead.”

Professor Aurilien Portuese, founding director of the George Washington University Competition & Innovation Lab added during the hearing that “Congress must act to curb DMA-inspired regulations that are multiplying all around the world. These proposals are disproportionately targeting US tech companies and insulate local monopolies.”

This Judiciary Committee hearing came after Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick and United States Trade Representative Jamieson Greer met with Europeans to jumpstart stalled trade talks.

After the meetings, Lutnick made clear a precondition that any trade deal would require removal of non-tariff barriers like the DMA, digital services taxes, and other targeted regulations.

Outside of Congress, many experts and Trump veterans have warned that Europe’s punitive regulatory regime could crush American companies and be a boon for China. Public Policy Solutions, led by former Trump domestic policy advisor Joe Grogan, released a report in June about American allies’ attacks on American tech and telecom companies. The group followed that report with warnings about how Latin American countries are adopting the same European-style protectionist approach.