Economics Today – the essential applied Economics magazine is used by thousands of teachers, A-level students and participants in higher education to deepen, broaden, review and apply economic theory in a range of current contexts. It is the logical choice for those seeking a replacement for The Economic Review from Lachette which has now ceased publication. We’re proud that Economics Today has been adopted as officially recommended reading for competitors in the Economics Olympiad UK.
This blog post has been written to complement a piece in the September 2026 issue of Economics Today which includes varied articles on topics including rent controls, the economic challenges facing Andy Burnham, the gender pay gap in sport, game theory, the happiest and richest countries in the world and “What has gone wrong with UK economic policy”. The article on economic policy is written by Andrew Sentance, a former member of the Monetary Policy Committee. For something a bit different we’ve also got a feature on the economics of Peppa Pig!
You can find out more here below. If you’ve got good things to say about Economics Today, please tell the world!
The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)
In the September issue of Economics Today, Jane Nash discusses the study by the CMA of the market for veterinary services for households with cats, dogs and other animals. This article complements Jane’s by offering a review of other work by the CMA as part of the UK’s competition policy. Whilst exam boards do not expect students to have a detailed knowledge of competition policy, unless you have some awareness of specific cases the thrust of competition policy is too easily an unknown topic. Economics Today has always covered the CMA as illustrated by Allan Hodge in the issue for March 2020 when he included the prohibition of the proposed merger between Sainsbury’s and Asda. More recently Peter Cramp reviewed seven market cases by the CMA in the issue for March 2024. What follows is an update on the work of the CMA since that issue of Economics Today to date.
The Tech Giants
It is necessary to begin with an awareness of the CMA, back in 2020, reporting that it was concerned about its existing powers to regulate the market for digital advertising. The CMA created a new body within the CMA called the Digital Markets Unit (DMU) to oversee competition and innovation in digital markets. This event will become relevant in the review below but do note that Cathy Williams included this new body in her article in Economics Today.
See “The Tech giants and Monopoly”, Economics Today, vol.28, no.1, October 2021, pp.22-25
- Vodaphone and Three
In December 2024, the CMA approved this merger which would create the largest mobile network in the UK thus reducing the number of mobile operating companies from four down to three. You might be surprised the CMA were content to see the number of competitors reduced but, in this case, it approved the deal after the companies pledged legally-binding undertakings to make significant investment in their networks over an eight-year period such that fewer locations suffered poor mobile coverage. As Alistair Osborne commented in The Times on 6 November 20024, this “mobile tie-up looks like the right call”. When the deal was announced he said in the same newspaper on 6 December that “competition policy becomes more flexible”.
In September 2024 the CMA issued concerns about Google’s dominance of the online market. The CMA’s study of this market paralleled similar concerns in the US. In November the CMA claimed in a provisional report that both Apple and Google denied consumers of having a genuine choice of mobile web browsers. In 2025 the CMA acquired new digital competition powers under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers (DMCC) Act to pursue its concerns with both Apple and Google. The CMA was also studying the cloud computing market dominated not just by Google but also Amazon and Microsoft.
New Chair of the CMA
In January 2025 Marcus Bokkerink, Chairman of the CMA was ousted by Chancellor Rachel Reeves on the grounds that he was not sufficiently supportive of the government’s “growth mission” and he was replaced by a former boss of Amazon, Doug Gurr. Mr Bokkerink had argued that the CMA should be independent of inference by government. Whilst the Chancellor could claim more than 100 MPs required the CMA have a pro-growth agenda, it was now clear that politics had very much entered the role of regulation. Chancellor Reeves had not singled out the CMA alone, as 6 other regulators had also been asked to show how they could support her “no.1 mission” of aiming to speed the pace of UK economic growth. She claimed that red tape and regulation hampered faster economic growth. Critics were not slow to claim that the Chancellor’s first Budget tax increases had lacked measures to boost economic growth!
When at Amazon UK, Doug Gurr had criticised the CMA for its opposition to the company taking a minority stake in Deliveroo in 2018. But this bid was followed by the CMA opposing the attempt by Meta, the owner of Facebook, to acquire another US company called Giphy in 2021. Then political intervention again took place in 2023 as the then Chancellor, Jeremy Hunt, persuaded the CMA to change its initial opposition to Microsoft taking over Activision Blizzard. These events underline the fact that the CMA became involved in takeover deals by the so-called “tech giants” as described by Cathy Williams in her article in Economics Today in October 2021. Political intervention in the CMA was again evident in early 2025 when the Business Secretary, Jonathan Reynolds, sought to give a “strategic steer “to the CMA by requiring it to
“minimise uncertainty for business by being pro-active, transparent, timely, predictable and responsive in its engagement “(The Times ,14 February 2025)
The CMA responded by aiming to complete its studies of merger bids within a shorter period of time compared with hitherto. Some of its merger investigations had in previous years lasted for many months predictably irritating companies seeking quick outcome of their acquisition bids.
Vehicle recycling cartel
In March 2025, in coordination with the European Commission the CMA fined car manufacturers and two car industry trade bodies for operating a cartel regarding advertising claims car vehicle recycling. The CMA fined the companies £77m after they admitted breaking competition law. The European Commission fined 15 manufacturers and a trade association £458m.
Google (again)
In June 2025 the CMA in a provisional decision criticised Google over the way it dominated online search engines. Google accounted then for more than 90 % of search enquiries well ahead of that offered by Microsoft’s Bing subsidiary and the newly-created service by OpenAI’s ChatGPT. Google was reported as highly critical of the CMA stance arguing it was a “roadblock to growth in the UK.” One might comment that was somewhat ironic given the Chancellor’s earlier call for regulators not to frustrate economic growth!
The CMA acted using the newly-acquired powers under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers (DMCC) Act to designate companies with high market power to have so-called “strategic market status”.
Ticketmaster
In July 2025 the CMA reported that the US-owned company had been unwilling to adopt remedies to address the CMA’s concerns over ticket pricing that had arisen over the surge pricing of Oasis concert ticket prices. The CMA was then to seek legal action to enforce its concerns.
Private Dentistry
Following a request by Chancellor Reeves in November 2025, the CMA announced a study of this market in March 2026. Several press articles had highlighted the high cost of private dental care given the very limited access to NHS dentists. Patrick Hosking declared in The Times that the “Regulator is barring its teeth at last” (5th March 2026)
Microsoft
In April 2026, the CMA announced it would begin in May a study of Microsoft’s business software services to establish whether the company’s dominance was limiting consumer choice and innovation. The CMA reported that it was of the view that the cloud computing market was not working well but both Microsoft Azure and Amazon Web Services had made changes to promote competition in that market.
Summing-up: the CMA operates in a political world
The ousting of the chair of the CMA in January 2025 is not the only example of how the CMA cannot go about the study of markets as an independent regulator. Marcus Bokkerink claimed in response to his sacking that during his time at the CMA it pushed
“to create the conditions for sustained innovation, productivity growth and investment on which growth depends” (The Daily Telegraph ,8 February 2025)
It is hard not to see the initial attempt to block Microsoft’s takeover of Activision Blizzard in 2023 during his chairmanship as relevant to his leadership being in question. Mr Bokkerink’s reported comment that “monopolisation of markets” and “consumer and competition authorities vulnerable to short term expediency” was an obstacle to economic growth (The Daily Telegraph,13 February 2025). In an article Marcus Bokkerink offered several reasons to relate competitiveness and economic growth – See “Ten quick regulatory reforms to make the UK more competitive”, The Times, 10 April 2025.
In May 2025, the Institute for Public Policy and Research ( IPPR) claimed that the CMA needed to take a strong stance in regards the US-based “tech giants”. It did so in response to the government stating that the CMA’s priorities had been “reset” to focus on economic growth as well as “ensuring free and fair competition and protecting the rights of consumers” (The Times,15 May 2025). The IPPR’s criticism echoed concerns expressed by the House of Lords Communications and Digital Committee that the so-called reset “implied a weaker stance towards companies like Google and Apple.” Ironically a former chairman of the CMA, Lord Tyrie, claimed in September 2025 that the CMA was slow to use its new powers under the 2025 DMCC Act.
Just to underline the political climate surrounding the CMA, Doug Gurr, its new Chair, faced keen questioning from the House of Commons Business and Trade Select Committee in February 2026 given his previous job at Amazon UK. Was he prepared to stand up to Ministers given his predecessor had been removed? (The Times ,25 February 2026). The chair of the Select Committee, Liam Byrne, commented that for the first time since 2017 the CMA had not opposed any mergers in 2025.
Marcus Bokkerink claimed in July 2026 that the CMA was not using its new powers to advantage questioning why both Amazon and Microsoft’s cloud businesses were not classified as having “strategic market status” (The Times, 27 July 2026)
Two further illustrations of the CMA in a political climate are very recent. In May 2026 the CMA claimed its investigation of petrol prices earlier in the year following the conflict in the Middle East showed that petrol stations had not taken advantage of the conflict to raise their profit margins. This was in response to what the Chancellor had claimed was the “gouging” of consumers! Reeves’s successor as Chancellor, John Healey, announced on 1st August 2026 that multiple retailers would not be allowed to “take the public for a ride” as a result of the continuing Middle East conflict and regarding grocery prices and reports of “price-gouging” at the petrol stations. Even if one allows for the new government trying to offer pleasing comments about the control of inflation, the point here is just to underscore the point that competitive markets are not the sole responsibility of the CMA!
The Digital Services Act
A source of irritation for the “tech giant” companies has been, since 1 April 2020, the 2% tax on the revenues of large multinational companies (those with annual revenues over £500m) and with digital services supply to UK users of more than £25m. The rationale of this tax announced in the 2018 Budget was to address the misalignment of where profits are taxed (the US) and where the companies generate revenue overseas. The yield of the tax in the Uk in the fiscal year 2024-25 was estimated at £515m. The tech giants have had the backing of President Trump to get this tax removed but the UK position is that the rationale of the tax is valid and seen as an interim tax until a global agreement can be reached.
Remember This!
Investigation of merger bids is crucial to an active competition policy such that it can head off concentration of markets and consumers in danger of being disadvantaged. The recent view from the new Labour government that growth can be secured from dominant firms challenges the rationale of the scrutiny of takeover bids from dominant firms. One might point out that growth of revenues by large companies is not necessarily achieved by internal growth but can be by acquisition of rival firms. Since 2002 merger bids have to be assessed with regard to the “substantial lessening of competition test”. This is a vital aspect of scrutiny or merges bids.
