Understanding the Importance of Acquisition in Business

Oct 13, 2025 by wbrum.org 91 views

Introduction

Understanding the Importance of Acquisition in Business

Acquisition is a strategic step in the business world that is often taken to improve the efficiency and competitiveness of the company. This process involves the takeover of share ownership of a company, with the aim of gaining faster profits and increasing the company's valuation. Although acquisitions can provide benefits, not infrequently this step also has the potential to lead to monopoly practices and unhealthy business competition. In this context, there needs to be strict supervision, especially by the Business Competition Supervisory Commission (KPPU) to ensure that the acquisition does not reduce competition in the market.

Background of the Problem

UU no. 5 of 1999 regulates the prohibition of monopolistic practices and unfair business competition. In the law, the notification mechanism (notification) is one of the tools for the KPPU to oversee every acquisition. This notice must be done from the date of acquisition. However, in practice, there is a criticism that states that this mechanism is less effective in preventing monopoly and unhealthy competition practices. One aspect that is in the spotlight is sanctions for the delay of notification which is often considered to have no clear legal basis. The fine imposed in the case of delays is often not comparable to the value of the acquisition transaction.

Case Study: KPPU Decision No. 06/KPPU-M/2017

Referring to the KPPU decision No. 06/KPPU-M/2017 regarding the late acquisition notification of shares by PT Japfa Comfeed Indonesia, Tbk, can be seen how this situation takes place. Although there are no indications of monopoly practice in this case, KPPU continues to impose a fine for the delay of notification which is considered not to have a strong legal basis. PT Japfa then submitted a legal effort in response to the decision. In the process, the District Court rejects objections from Japfa but also adjustments by reducing the amount of fines to be paid.

Analysis of the Case

From this case, it appears that there is a legal vacuum that needs to be overcome to provide certainty for business actors in acquisitioning. The research method used in this analysis is normative juridical, where researchers explore secondary data from relevant regulations and literature, with qualitative data analysis as the main approach.

Implications of the Case

Seeing this situation, it is important for us to understand that the acquisition carried out without a deep understanding of applicable regulations can result in unwanted legal consequences. This is a lesson for other companies to be more careful in every step taken, especially those related to the takeover of other companies. The KPPU is also expected to improve the existing mechanisms and sanctions in order to be more effective in overseeing the practice of business competition in Indonesia. Thus, it is expected that the climate of business competition in the country can be well maintained, encouraging healthy and sustainable economic growth.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the acquisition process can have a significant impact on the business world, and it is essential to understand the applicable regulations to avoid unwanted legal consequences. The KPPU decision No. 06/KPPU-M/2017 highlights the need for improvement in the existing mechanisms and sanctions to ensure that the acquisition does not reduce competition in the market. By understanding the importance of acquisition and the need for strict supervision, business actors can take a more careful approach to the takeover of other companies, and the KPPU can improve its role in overseeing business competition in Indonesia.

Recommendations

Based on the analysis of the case, the following recommendations are made:

The KPPU should improve the existing mechanisms and sanctions to ensure that the acquisition does not reduce competition in the market.
Business actors should take a more careful approach to the takeover of other companies, ensuring that they understand the applicable regulations and comply with them.
The government should review and revise the UU no. 5 of 1999 to provide clarity on the notification mechanism and sanctions for the delay of notification.
The KPPU should provide more guidance and support to business actors to ensure that they understand the applicable regulations and comply with them.

By implementing these recommendations, the climate of business competition in Indonesia can be well maintained, encouraging healthy and sustainable economic growth.

Q&A: Acquisition Juridical Analysis

Q: What is acquisition in the business world?

A: Acquisition is a strategic step in the business world that is often taken to improve the efficiency and competitiveness of the company. This process involves the takeover of share ownership of a company, with the aim of gaining faster profits and increasing the company's valuation.

Q: What are the potential risks of acquisition?

A: Although acquisitions can provide benefits, not infrequently this step also has the potential to lead to monopoly practices and unhealthy business competition. In this context, there needs to be strict supervision, especially by the Business Competition Supervisory Commission (KPPU) to ensure that the acquisition does not reduce competition in the market.

Q: What is the role of KPPU in overseeing acquisition?

A: KPPU is responsible for overseeing every acquisition to ensure that it does not reduce competition in the market. The notification mechanism (notification) is one of the tools for KPPU to oversee every acquisition. This notice must be done from the date of acquisition.

Q: What is the problem with the notification mechanism?

A: In practice, there is a criticism that states that this mechanism is less effective in preventing monopoly and unhealthy competition practices. One aspect that is in the spotlight is sanctions for the delay of notification which is often considered to have no clear legal basis. The fine imposed in the case of delays is often not comparable to the value of the acquisition transaction.

Q: What is the case study of KPPU decision No. 06/KPPU-M/2017?

A: Referring to the KPPU decision No. 06/KPPU-M/2017 regarding the late acquisition notification of shares by PT Japfa Comfeed Indonesia, Tbk, can be seen how this situation takes place. Although there are no indications of monopoly practice in this case, KPPU continues to impose a fine for the delay of notification which is considered not to have a strong legal basis.

Q: What are the implications of the case study?

A: From this case, it appears that there is a legal vacuum that needs to be overcome to provide certainty for business actors in acquisitioning. The research method used in this analysis is normative juridical, where researchers explore secondary data from relevant regulations and literature, with qualitative data analysis as the main approach.

Q: What are the recommendations for business actors and KPPU?

A: Based on the analysis of the case, the following recommendations are made:

The KPPU should improve the existing mechanisms and sanctions to ensure that the acquisition does not reduce competition in the market.
Business actors should take a more careful approach to the takeover of other companies, ensuring that they understand the applicable regulations and comply with them.
The government should review and revise the UU no. 5 of 1999 to provide clarity on the notification mechanism and sanctions for the delay of notification.
The KPPU should provide more guidance and support to business actors to ensure that they understand the applicable regulations and comply with them.

Q: What is the conclusion of the analysis?

A: In conclusion, the acquisition process can have a significant impact on the business world, and it is essential to understand the applicable regulations to avoid unwanted legal consequences. The KPPU decision No. 06/KPPU-M/2017 highlights the need for improvement in the existing mechanisms and sanctions to ensure that the acquisition does not reduce competition in the market. By understanding the importance of acquisition and the need for strict supervision, business actors can take a more careful approach to the takeover of other companies, and the KPPU can improve its role in overseeing business competition in Indonesia.