Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Antitrust (3)
- & abusive acts (1)
- Additional revenue generation (1)
- Alternative estimate of compliance gains (1)
- Anti-competitive harm (1)
-
- Antitrust enforcement (1)
- Aspen (1)
- Audit rates (1)
- Benefit-cost analysis. (1)
- Bigness (1)
- CBO underestimate (1)
- Chapter 11 (1)
- Claims trading (1)
- Clayton Act (1)
- Coase (1)
- Competition (1)
- Competition law & policy (1)
- Competition policy (1)
- Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (1)
- Consumer protection (1)
- Consumer welfare (1)
- Corporate bankruptcy law & practice (1)
- Credit cards (1)
- Deathtrap provisions (1)
- Debit cards (1)
- Deceptive (1)
- Deterrence (1)
- Diminishing returns (1)
- Distortive incentives (1)
- Efficiencies (1)
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Economics
Competitive Harm From Vertical Mergers, Herbert J. Hovenkamp
Competitive Harm From Vertical Mergers, Herbert J. Hovenkamp
All Faculty Scholarship
The antitrust enforcement Agencies' 2020 Vertical Merger Guidelines introduce a nontechnical application of bargaining theory into the assessment of competitive effects from vertical acquisitions. The economics of such bargaining is complex and can produce skepticism among judges, who might regard its mathematics as overly technical, its game theory as excessively theoretical or speculative, or its assumptions as unrealistic.
However, we have been there before. The introduction of concentration indexes, particularly the HHI, in the Merger Guidelines was initially met with skepticism but gradually they were accepted as judges became more comfortable with them. The same thing very largely happened again …
Antitrust: What Counts As Consumer Welfare?, Herbert J. Hovenkamp
Antitrust: What Counts As Consumer Welfare?, Herbert J. Hovenkamp
All Faculty Scholarship
Antitrust’s consumer welfare principle is accepted in some form by the entire Supreme Court and the majority of other writers. However, it means different things to different people. For example, some members of the Supreme Court can simultaneously acknowledge the antitrust consumer welfare principle even as they approve practices that result in immediate, obvious, and substantial consumer harm. At the same time, however, a properly defined consumer welfare principle is essential if antitrust is to achieve its statutory purpose, which is to pursue practices that injure competition. The wish to make antitrust a more general social justice statute is understandable: …
Understanding The Revenue Potential Of Tax Compliance Investment, Natasha Sarin, Lawrence H. Summers
Understanding The Revenue Potential Of Tax Compliance Investment, Natasha Sarin, Lawrence H. Summers
All Faculty Scholarship
In a July 2020 report, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that modest investments in the IRS would generate somewhere between $60 and $100 billion in additional revenue over a decade. This is qualitatively correct. But quantitatively, the revenue potential is much more significant than the CBO report suggests. We highlight five reasons for the CBO’s underestimation: 1) the scale of the investment in the IRS contemplated is modest and far short of sufficient even to return the IRS budget to 2011 levels; 2) the CBO contemplates a limited range of interventions, excluding entirely progress on information reporting and technological advancements; …
The Law And Economics Of Risk Regulation, Cary Coglianese
The Law And Economics Of Risk Regulation, Cary Coglianese
All Faculty Scholarship
Law plays a central role in the management of risk in society. The rules adopted by regulatory agencies now affect nearly every facet of the economy, and as such regulation has motivated a substantial body of academic research. Law and economics research on regulation has, first, demonstrated the normative justification for governmental intervention in the marketplace based on the concept of market failure. Second, political economy research on regulation has shown how, as a positive matter, interest groups, political movements, and public pressure affect the stringency of such regulation, sometimes more than any normative rationale for regulation. Third, risk regulation …
Frand And Antitrust, Herbert J. Hovenkamp
Frand And Antitrust, Herbert J. Hovenkamp
All Faculty Scholarship
This paper considers when a patentee’s violation of a FRAND commitment also violates the antitrust laws. It warns against two extremes. First, is thinking that any violation of a FRAND obligation is an antitrust violation as well. FRAND obligations are contractual, and most breaches of contract do not violate antitrust law. The other extreme is thinking that, because a FRAND violation is a breach of contract, it cannot also be an antitrust violation.
Every antitrust case must consider the market environment in which conduct is to be evaluated. SSOs operated by multiple firms are joint ventures. Antitrust’s role is to …
What’S In Your Wallet (And What Should The Law Do About It?), Natasha Sarin
What’S In Your Wallet (And What Should The Law Do About It?), Natasha Sarin
All Faculty Scholarship
In traditional markets, firms can charge prices that are significantly elevated relative to their costs only if there is a market failure. However, this is not true in a two-sided market (like Amazon, Uber, and Mastercard), where firms often subsidize one side of the market and generate revenue from the other. This means consideration of one side of the market in isolation is problematic. The Court embraced this view in Ohio v. American Express, requiring that anticompetitive harm on one side of a two-sided market be weighed against benefits on the other side.
Legal scholars denounce this decision, which, …
Distorted Choice In Corporate Bankruptcy, David A. Skeel Jr.
Distorted Choice In Corporate Bankruptcy, David A. Skeel Jr.
All Faculty Scholarship
We ordinarily assume that a central objective of every voting process is ensuring an undistorted vote. Recent developments in corporate bankruptcy, which culminates with an elaborate vote, are quite puzzling from this perspective. Two strategies now routinely used in big cases are intended to distort, and clearly do distort, the voting process. Restructuring support agreements (RSAs) and “deathtrap” provisions remove creditors’ ability to vote for or against a proposed reorganization simply on the merits.
This Article offers the first comprehensive analysis of these new distortive techniques. One possible solution is simply to ban distortive techniques, as several scholars advocate with …