Q: China's penalty for monopolistic behavior is much lighter compared with that of the EU and the US. This also raises concerns that China's supervision is weak. How do you see this problem?

A: Globally, the antitrust regime has some convergence but also several differences. Due to the different circumstances of each specific antitrust case, the supervision of monopolistic behavior cannot be simply based on the size of the penalties.

China's Antitrust Law states that businesses with monopolistic behavior will be fined 1 percent to 10 percent of their annual sales turnover. Based on the cases from the past few years, the overall penalties for monopolistic behavior are not weak, and penalties could be up to 8 percent of the annual sales. Therefore, China's regulations on monopolistic behavior are strict and the punishment severe.

Q: Which industries in China have borne the brunt of the investigations on monopolistic behavior?

A: There are no specific industries as such, as all industries and areas are on our radar. We will investigate domestic or foreign companies if they are in alleged violation of China's Antitrust Law without any discrimination.

The Antitrust Law does not target specific industries, nor a specific market. Most of the cases that we are working on pertain to a wide cross-section of industries. Of course, in some instances, we will pay more attention to some industries.

Recently, there have been some instances of probes against automobile companies and auto parts makers, but we have been focusing on the automotive industry for two or three years.

Q: Some overseas information technology companies are also facing antitrust investigations in China. Why do you think that tech companies are lax in adhering to the Antitrust Law?

A: In most cases, the monopolistic actions arise as a result of the companies' untempered pursuit of maximum profits in the market. The pursuit of maximum profits sometimes endangers normal market competition and consumers' interests.

Every company doing business in China should review their business using the clauses of the Antitrust Law implemented in 2008. Some business operators in China have failed to adjust their practices in accordance with the Antitrust Law. Others have a clear understanding of the law but they take the chance that they may escape punishment.

Q: There have been some allegations that most of the antitrust investigations are directed against overseas companies. What are your views on this?

A: Such accusations are groundless and baseless. Some of the NDRC monopoly investigations involve overseas multinationals, but that does not mean that we are targeting them.

As a law-enforcement agency, we treat local and overseas companies equally to ensure justice for all. This is the spirit of the Chinese Antitrust Law. We are also handling cases involving State-owned enterprises and Chinese companies from the private sector.

In 2012, we penalized a light emitting diode screen monopoly case involving six overseas companies. China is the largest LED consumer in the world and as such we suffered the most due to the monopolistic actions of the vendors. The US, European Union and South Korea had also investigated these companies before us.

We have also investigated monopoly cases in milk powder and liquor industries, and some of these companies were SOEs. The punishments for some local and overseas companies were waived because the monopoly behavior was less serious and they were fully cooperating with the investigations.

Microsoft not transparent with sales information: regulator	Top 9 anti-trust cases in China