116-634: United States v. Morgan , 118 F. Supp. 621 (S.D.N.Y. 1953), more commonly referred to as the Investment Bankers Case was a multi-year antitrust case brought by the United States Justice Department against seventeen of the most prominent Wall Street investment banking firms, known as the Wall Street Seventeen. The Justice Department filed suit against the firms in 1947, claiming that
232-462: A bond not to exercise his trade in the same town as the plaintiff for six months but the plaintiff had promised nothing in return. On hearing the plaintiff's attempt to enforce this restraint, Hull J exclaimed, "per Dieu, if the plaintiff were here, he should go to prison until he had paid a fine to the King". The court denied the collection of a bond for the dyer's breach of agreement because the agreement
348-445: A competitive equilibrium for some set of prices. More generally, it suggests that redistribution should, if possible, be achieved without affecting prices (which should continue to reflect relative scarcity ), thus ensuring that the final (post-trade) result is efficient. Put into practice, such a policy might resemble predistribution . Because of welfare economics' close ties to social choice theory , Arrow's impossibility theorem
464-422: A competitive market equilibrium, provided that a social planner uses a social welfare function to choose the most equitable efficient outcome and then uses lump sum transfers followed by competitive trade to achieve it. Arrow's impossibility theorem which is closely related to social choice theory , is sometimes considered a third fundamental theorem of welfare economics. Welfare economics typically involves
580-400: A competitive market equilibrium. These restrictions are stronger than for the first fundamental theorem, with convexity of preferences and production functions a sufficient but not necessary condition. A direct consequence of the second theorem is that a benevolent social planner could use a system of lump sum transfers to ensure that the "best" Pareto efficient allocation was supported as
696-427: A general rule that the state may not aid or subsidize private parties in distortion of free competition and provides exemptions for charities , regional development objectives and in the event of a natural disaster . Leading ECJ cases on competition law include Consten & Grundig v Commission and United Brands v Commission . India responded positively by opening up its economy by removing controls during
812-476: A measure would still be concerned with the distribution of income ( distributive efficiency ) but not the distribution of final utilities. In normative terms, such authors were writing in the Benthamite tradition. The ordinal-behaviorist approach, originally called the new welfare economics , is based on the work of Pareto , Kaldor , Hicks , and Scitovsky . It explicitly recognizes the differences between
928-531: A millionaire. At the other extreme is the Max-Min, or Rawlsian utility function. According to the Max-Min criterion, welfare is maximized when the utility of those society members that have the least is the greatest. No economic activity will increase social welfare unless it improves the position of the society member that is the worst off. Most economists specify social welfare functions that are intermediate between these two extremes. The social welfare function
1044-437: A number of conditions that can lead to inefficiency. They include: Note that if one of these conditions leads to inefficiency, another condition might help by counteracting it. For example, if a pollution externality leads to overproduction of tires, a tax on tires might restore the efficient level of production. A condition inefficient in the "first-best" might be desirable in the second-best . To determine whether an activity
1160-543: A number of significant theoretical, legal and practical challenges. Antitrust administration and legislation can be seen as a balance between: Chapter 5 of the post-war Havana Charter contained an Antitrust code but this was never incorporated into the WTO's forerunner, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1947. Office of Fair Trading Director and Richard Whish wrote sceptically that it "seems unlikely at
1276-483: A product so much that one's smaller competitors cannot cover their costs and fall out of business. The Chicago school considers predatory pricing to be unlikely. However, in France Telecom SA v. Commission a broadband internet company was forced to pay $ 13.9 million for dropping its prices below its own production costs. It had "no interest in applying such prices except that of eliminating competitors" and
SECTION 10
#17327805157611392-420: A social utility frontier represents an efficient allocation of an economy's resources; that is, it is a Pareto optimum in factor allocation, in production, in consumption, and in the interaction of production and consumption (supply and demand). In the diagram below, the curve MN is a social utility frontier. Point D corresponds with point C from the earlier diagram. Point D is on the social utility frontier because
1508-504: A system of Industrial Monopoly Licenses, similar to modern patents had been introduced into England. But by the reign of Queen Elizabeth I , the system was reputedly much abused and used merely to preserve privileges, encouraging nothing new in the way of innovation or manufacture. In response English courts developed case law on restrictive business practices. The statute followed the unanimous decision in Darcy v. Allein 1602, also known as
1624-452: Is a curve that slopes downward to the right. The intermediate form of social indifference curve can be interpreted as showing that as inequality increases, a larger improvement in the utility of relatively rich individuals is needed to compensate for the loss in utility of relatively poor individuals. A crude social welfare function can be constructed by measuring the subjective dollar value of goods and services distributed to participants in
1740-530: Is a field of economics that applies microeconomic techniques to evaluate the overall well-being (welfare) of a society. The principles of welfare economics are often used to inform public economics , which focuses on the ways in which government intervention can improve social welfare . Additionally, welfare economics serves as the theoretical foundation for several instruments of public economics, such as cost–benefit analysis . The intersection of welfare economics and behavioral economics has given rise to
1856-457: Is a necessary, but not a sufficient condition for social welfare. Each Pareto optimum corresponds to a different income distribution in the economy. Some may involve great inequalities of income. So how do we decide which Pareto optimum is most desirable? This decision is made, either tacitly or overtly, when we specify the social welfare function . This function embodies value judgements about interpersonal utility. The social welfare function shows
1972-615: Is a way for national authorities to coordinate their own enforcement activities. Under the doctrine of laissez-faire , antitrust is seen as unnecessary as competition is viewed as a long-term dynamic process where firms compete against each other for market dominance . In some markets, a firm may successfully dominate, but it is because of superior skill or innovativeness. However, according to laissez-faire theorists, when it tries to raise prices to take advantage of its monopoly position it creates profitable opportunities for others to compete. A process of creative destruction begins which erodes
2088-498: Is also decreased, further decreasing social welfare by creating a deadweight loss . Sources of this market power are said to include the existence of externalities , barriers to entry of the market, and the free rider problem . Markets may fail to be efficient for a variety of reasons, so the exception of competition law's intervention to the rule of laissez faire is justified if government failure can be avoided. Orthodox economists fully acknowledge that perfect competition
2204-476: Is also known as Pareto efficiency after the Italian economist Vilfredo Pareto and means that resources in an economy over the long run will go precisely to those who are willing and able to pay for them. Because rational producers will keep producing and selling, and buyers will keep buying up to the last marginal unit of possible output – or alternatively rational producers will be reduce their output to
2320-484: Is an efficiency goal that is standard in economics. A situation is Pareto-efficient only if no individual can be made better off without making someone else worse off. An example of an inefficient situation would be if Smith owns an apple but would prefer to consume an orange while Jones owns an orange but would be prefer to consume an apple. Both could be made better off by trading. A Pareto-efficient state of affairs can only come about if four criteria are met: There are
2436-614: Is an evil... After Mill, there was a shift in economic theory, which emphasized a more precise and theoretical model of competition. A simple neo-classical model of free markets holds that production and distribution of goods and services in competitive free markets maximizes social welfare . This model assumes that new firms can freely enter markets and compete with existing firms, or to use legal language, there are no barriers to entry . By this term economists mean something very specific, that competitive free markets deliver allocative , productive and dynamic efficiency. Allocative efficiency
SECTION 20
#17327805157612552-544: Is closely connected with law on deregulation of access to markets, state aids and subsidies, the privatization of state owned assets and the establishment of independent sector regulators, among other market-oriented supply-side policies. In recent decades, competition law has been viewed as a way to provide better public services . Robert Bork argued that competition laws can produce adverse effects when they reduce competition by protecting inefficient competitors and when costs of legal intervention are greater than benefits for
2668-560: Is commonly known as trust busting . The history of competition law reaches back to the Roman Empire . The business practices of market traders, guilds and governments have always been subject to scrutiny, and sometimes severe sanctions. Since the 20th century, competition law has become global. The two largest and most influential systems of competition regulation are United States antitrust law and European Union competition law . National and regional competition authorities across
2784-596: Is considered a tool to stimulate economic growth. In Korea and Japan , the competition law prevents certain forms of conglomerates . In addition, competition law has promoted fairness in China and Indonesia as well as international integration in Vietnam. Hong Kong 's Competition Ordinance came into force in the year 2015. As part of the creation of the ASEAN Economic Community, the member states of
2900-531: Is delivered through the aggregate of individual preferences rather than the formation of government or income, especially those that exist because of neutrality, presented a challenge to reconcile conflicting interests in revenue sharing. The neutral results, avoiding special utility issues, restricted the social analyzes to structural utility issues. This restriction did not exclude important information about an individual’s social status or position needed to make an income allocation decision. Sen recommended expanding
3016-414: Is difficult to prove at what point a dominant firm's prices become "exploitative" and this category of abuse is rarely found. In one case however, a French funeral service was found to have demanded exploitative prices, and this was justified on the basis that prices of funeral services outside the region could be compared. A more tricky issue is predatory pricing . This is the practice of dropping prices of
3132-597: Is governed by international competition agreements. In 1945, during the negotiations preceding the adoption of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) in 1947, limited international competition obligations were proposed within the Charter for an International Trade Organisation . These obligations were not included in GATT, but in 1994, with the conclusion of the Uruguay Round of GATT multilateral negotiations,
3248-520: Is known as Kaldor–Hicks efficiency . If the two conditions disagree, that yields the Scitovsky paradox . There are many combinations of consumer utility, production mixes, and factor input combinations consistent with efficiency. In fact, there are an infinity of consumption and production equilibria that yield Pareto optimal results. There are as many optima as there are points on the aggregate production–possibility frontier . Hence, Pareto efficiency
3364-691: Is more than 50 percent of countries with a population exceeding 80,000 people. 81 of the 111 countries had adopted their competition laws in the past 20 years, signaling the spread of competition law following the collapse of the Soviet Union and the expansion of the European Union . Currently competition authorities of many states closely co-operate, on everyday basis, with foreign counterparts in their enforcement efforts, also in such key area as information / evidence sharing. In many of Asia's developing countries, including India, Competition law
3480-460: Is moving the economy towards Pareto efficiency, two compensation tests have been developed. Policy changes usually help some people while hurting others, so these tests ask what would happen if the winners were to compensate the losers. Using the Kaldor criterion , the change is desirable if the maximum amount the winners would be willing to pay is greater than the minimum the losers would accept. Under
3596-415: Is necessary to determine whether a firm is dominant, or whether it behaves "to an appreciable extent independently of its competitors, customers and ultimately of its consumer". Under EU law, very large market shares raise a presumption that a firm is dominant, which may be rebuttable. If a firm has a dominant position, then there is "a special responsibility not to allow its conduct to impair competition on
United States v. Morgan (1953) - Misplaced Pages Continue
3712-614: Is seldom observed in the real world, and so aim for what is called " workable competition ". This follows the theory that if one cannot achieve the ideal, then go for the second best option by using the law to tame market operation where it can. A group of economists and lawyers, who are largely associated with the University of Chicago , advocate an approach to competition law guided by the proposition that some actions that were originally considered to be anticompetitive could actually promote competition. The U.S. Supreme Court has used
3828-405: Is sometimes listed as a third fundamental theorem. Utility functions can be derived from the points on a contract curve. Numerous utility functions can be derived, one for each point on the production possibility frontier (PQ in the diagram above). A social utility frontier (also called a grand utility frontier ) can be obtained from the outer envelope of all these utility functions. Each point on
3944-465: Is the direct predecessor to modern competition law later developed in the US. It is based on the prohibition of agreements that ran counter to public policy, unless the reasonableness of an agreement could be shown. It effectively prohibited agreements designed to restrain another's trade. The 1414 Dyer's is the first known restrictive trade agreement to be examined under English common law. A dyer had given
4060-438: Is typically translated into social indifference curves so that they can be used in the same graphic space as the other functions that they interact with. A utilitarian social indifference curve is linear and downward sloping to the right. The Max-Min social indifference curve takes the shape of two straight lines joined so as they form a 90-degree angle. A social indifference curve drawn from an intermediate social welfare function
4176-404: Is whether a concentration (i.e. merger or acquisition) with a community dimension (i.e. affects a number of EU member states) might significantly impede effective competition . Articles 106 and 107 provide that member state's right to deliver public services may not be obstructed, but that otherwise public enterprises must adhere to the same competition principles as companies. Article 107 lays down
4292-497: The Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) pledged to enact competition laws and policies by the end of 2015. Today, all ten member states have general competition legislation in place. While there remains differences between regimes (for example, over merger control notification rules, or leniency policies for whistle-blowers), and it is unlikely that there will be a supranational competition authority for ASEAN (akin to
4408-721: The Case of Monopolies , of the King's Bench to declare void the sole right that Queen Elizabeth I had granted to Darcy to import playing cards into England. Darcy, an officer of the Queen's household, claimed damages for the defendant's infringement of this right. The court found the grant void and that three characteristics of monopoly were (1) price increases, (2) quality decrease, (3) the tendency to reduce artificers to idleness and beggary. This put an end to granted monopolies until King James I began to grant them again. In 1623 Parliament passed
4524-788: The Economic liberalisation . In quest of increasing the efficiency of the nation's economy, the Government of India acknowledged the Liberalization Privatization Globalization era. As a result, Indian market faces competition from within and outside the country. This led to the need of a strong legislation to dispense justice in commercial matters and the Competition Act, 2002 was passed. The history of competition law in India dates back to
4640-706: The European Commission was no longer the only body capable of public enforcement of European Union competition law . This was done to facilitate quicker resolution of competition-related inquiries. In 2005 the Commission issued a Green Paper on Damages actions for the breach of the EC antitrust rules , which suggested ways of making private damages claims against cartels easier. Some EU Member States enforce their competition laws with criminal sanctions. As analysed by Whelan , these types of sanctions engender
4756-547: The Hicks criterion , the change is desirable if the maximum the losers would be willing to offer the winners to prevent the change is less than the minimum the winners would accept as a bribe to give up the change. The Hicks compensation test is from the losers' point of view; the Kaldor compensation test is from the winners'. If both conditions are satisfied, the proposed change will move the economy toward Pareto optimality. This idea
United States v. Morgan (1953) - Misplaced Pages Continue
4872-480: The Pareto principle , totalitarianism , and free will Arrow concluded that there is no rational way to articulate individual preferences forms together resulting in a harmonious social status of the various social societies. Amartya Sen later emphasized the nature of the sequential gain approach, and Arrow's theory emphasized it. Sen said collective action often arises in social decision-making, because Arrow's theory
4988-576: The Statute of Monopolies , which for the most part excluded patent rights from its prohibitions, as well as guilds. From King Charles I , through the civil war and to King Charles II , monopolies continued, especially useful for raising revenue. Then in 1684, in East India Company v. Sandys it was decided that exclusive rights to trade only outside the realm were legitimate, on the grounds that only large and powerful concerns could trade in
5104-744: The Treaty of Rome , also known as the EC Treaty, which established the European Economic Community (EEC). The Treaty of Rome established the enactment of competition law as one of the main aims of the EEC through the "institution of a system ensuring that competition in the common market is not distorted". The two central provisions on EU competition law on companies were established in article 85, which prohibited anti-competitive agreements, subject to some exemptions, and article 86 prohibiting
5220-484: The World Trade Organization (WTO) was created. The Agreement Establishing the WTO included a range of limited provisions on various cross-border competition issues on a sector specific basis. Competition law has failed to prevent monopolization of economic activity. "The global economy is dominated by a handful of powerful transnational corporations (TNCs). ... Only 737 top holders accumulate 80% of
5336-517: The frontier of its possible production . Dynamic efficiency refers to the idea that business which constantly competes must research, create and innovate to keep its share of consumers. This traces to Austrian-American political scientist Joseph Schumpeter 's notion that a "perennial gale of creative destruction" is ever sweeping through capitalist economies, driving enterprise at the market's mercy. This led Schumpeter to argue that monopolies did not need to be broken up (as with Standard Oil ) because
5452-479: The 1880s controlled several markets, including the market in fuel oil , lead and whiskey . Vast numbers of citizens became sufficiently aware and publicly concerned about how the trusts negatively impacted them that the Act became a priority for both major parties. A primary concern of this act is that competitive markets themselves should provide the primary regulation of prices, outputs, interests and profits. Instead,
5568-410: The 1930s and 40s, has largely collapsed since the discovery of Arrow's impossibility theorem and utility representation theorems have shown them to be mathematically self-contradictory , violating the principle of transitive preferences . Situations are considered to have distributive efficiency when goods are distributed to the people who can gain the most utility from them. Pareto efficiency
5684-493: The 1960s when the first competition law, namely the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act (MRTP) was enacted in 1969. But after the economic reforms in 1991, this legislation was found to be obsolete in many aspects and as a result, a new competition law in the form of the Competition Act, 2002 was enacted in 2003. The Competition Commission of India , is the quasi judicial body established for enforcing provisions of
5800-467: The Act outlawed anticompetitive practices, codifying the common law restraint of trade doctrine. Rudolph Peritz has argued that competition law in the United States has evolved around two sometimes conflicting concepts of competition: first that of individual liberty, free of government intervention, and second a fair competitive environment free of excessive economic power . Since the enactment of
5916-558: The Chicago school approach in several recent cases. One view of the Chicago school approach to antitrust is found in United States Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Richard Posner 's books Antitrust Law and Economic Analysis of Law . Robert Bork was highly critical of court decisions on United States antitrust law in a series of law review articles and his book The Antitrust Paradox . Bork argued that both
SECTION 50
#17327805157616032-770: The Clayton Act, and in the European Union, under the Merger Regulation 139/2004 (known as the "ECMR"). Competition law requires that firms proposing to merge gain authorization from the relevant government authority. The theory behind mergers is that transaction costs can be reduced compared to operating on an open market through bilateral contracts. Concentrations can increase economies of scale and scope. However often firms take advantage of their increase in market power, their increased market share and decreased number of competitors, which can adversely affect
6148-507: The Competition Act. The Anti Monopoly Law of China came into effect in 2008. For years, it was enforced by three different branches of government, but since 2018 its enforcement has been the responsibility of the State Administration for Market Regulation . The People's Daily reported that the law had generated 11 billion RMB of penalties between 2008 and 2018. By 2008, 111 countries had enacted competition laws, which
6264-800: The European Union), there is a clear trend towards increase in infringement investigations or decisions on cartel enforcement. Competition law is enforced at the national level through competition authorities, as well as private enforcement. The United States Supreme Court explained: Every violation of the antitrust laws is a blow to the free-enterprise system envisaged by Congress. This system depends on strong competition for its health and vigor, and strong competition depends, in turn, on compliance with antitrust legislation. In enacting these laws, Congress had many means at its disposal to penalize violators. It could have, for example, required violators to compensate federal, state, and local governments for
6380-623: The Hart–Scott–Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976 , mergers and acquisitions came into additional scrutiny from U.S. regulators. Under the act, parties must make a pre-merger notification to the U.S. Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission prior to the completion of a transaction. As of February 2, 2021, the FTC reduced the Hart-Scott-Rodino reporting threshold to $ 92 million in combined assets for
6496-483: The Impeachment, Disturbance, Defeating or Decay of the said Staples, or of anything that to them pertaineth, or may pertain. In continental Europe, competition principles developed in lex mercatoria . Examples of legislation enshrining competition principles include the constitutiones juris metallici by Wenceslaus II of Bohemia between 1283 and 1305, condemning combination of ore traders increasing prices;
6612-608: The Municipal Statutes of Florence in 1322 and 1325 followed Zeno 's legislation against state monopolies; and under Emperor Charles V in the Holy Roman Empire a law was passed "to prevent losses resulting from monopolies and improper contracts which many merchants and artisans made in the Netherlands". In 1553, Henry VIII of England reintroduced tariffs for foodstuffs, designed to stabilize prices, in
6728-545: The Prevention and Suppression of Combinations formed in restraint of Trade was passed one year before the United States enacted the most famous legal statute on competition law, the Sherman Act of 1890. It was named after Senator John Sherman who argued that the Act "does not announce a new principle of law, but applies old and well recognised principles of common law". The Sherman Act of 1890 attempted to outlaw
6844-463: The Sherman Act enforcement of competition law has been based on various economic theories adopted by Government. Section 1 of the Sherman Act declared illegal "every contract, in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations." Section 2 prohibits monopolies , or attempts and conspiracies to monopolize. Following
6960-593: The United States, became the first European countries to adopt fully fledged competition laws. At a regional level EU competition law has its origins in the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) agreement between France, Italy , Belgium , the Netherlands , Luxembourg and Germany in 1951 following the Second World War. The agreement aimed to prevent Germany from re-establishing dominance in
7076-600: The abuse of dominant position. The treaty also established principles on competition law for member states, with article 90 covering public undertakings, and article 92 making provisions on state aid. Regulations on mergers were not included as member states could not establish consensus on the issue at the time. Today, the Treaty of Lisbon prohibits anti-competitive agreements in Article 101(1), including price fixing . According to Article 101(2) any such agreements are automatically void. Article 101(3) establishes exemptions, if
SECTION 60
#17327805157617192-469: The collusion is for distributional or technological innovation, gives consumers a "fair share" of the benefit and does not include unreasonable restraints that risk eliminating competition anywhere (or compliant with the general principle of European Union law of proportionality ). Article 102 prohibits the abuse of dominant position , such as price discrimination and exclusive dealing. Regulation 139/2004/EC governs mergers between firms. The general test
7308-465: The common market". Similarly as with collusive conduct, market shares are determined with reference to the particular market in which the firm and product in question is sold. Then although the lists are seldom closed, certain categories of abusive conduct are usually prohibited under the country's legislation. For instance, limiting production at a shipping port by refusing to raise expenditure and update technology could be abusive. Tying one product into
7424-562: The conditions prevailing overseas. The development of early competition law in England and Europe progressed with the diffusion of writings such as The Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith , who first established the concept of the market economy . At the same time industrialisation replaced the individual artisan , or group of artisans, with paid labourers and machine-based production. Commercial success became increasingly dependent on maximizing production while minimizing cost. Therefore,
7540-541: The constitution of Zeno of 483 A.D., which can be traced into Florentine municipal laws of 1322 and 1325. This provided for confiscation of property and banishment for any trade combination or joint action of monopolies private or granted by the Emperor. Zeno rescinded all previously granted exclusive rights. Justinian I subsequently introduced legislation to pay officials to manage state monopolies. Legislation in England to control monopolies and restrictive practices
7656-506: The consumers. An early example was enacted during the Roman Republic around 50 BC. To protect the grain trade , heavy fines were imposed on anyone directly, deliberately, and insidiously stopping supply ships. Under Diocletian in 301 A.D., an edict imposed the death penalty for anyone violating a tariff system, for example by buying up, concealing, or contriving the scarcity of everyday goods. More legislation came under
7772-474: The control over the value of all ... network control is much more unequally distributed than wealth. In particular, the top ranked actors hold a control ten times bigger than what could be expected based on their wealth. ... Recent works have shown that when a financial network is very densely connected it is prone to systemic risk. Indeed, while in good times the network is seemingly robust, in bad times firms go into distress simultaneously. This knife-edge property
7888-422: The courts found specific categories of agreement, specific clauses, to fall foul of their doctrine on economic fairness, and they did not contrive an overarching conception of market power. Earlier theorists like Adam Smith rejected any monopoly power on this basis. A monopoly granted either to an individual or to a trading company has the same effect as a secret in trade or manufactures. The monopolists, by keeping
8004-402: The current stage of its development that the WTO will metamorphose into a global competition authority". Despite that, at the ongoing Doha round of trade talks for the World Trade Organization , discussion includes the prospect of competition law enforcement moving up to a global level. While it is incapable of enforcement itself, the newly established International Competition Network (ICN)
8120-481: The deal that consumers get. Merger control is about predicting what the market might be like, not knowing and making a judgment. Hence the central provision under EU law asks whether a concentration would , if it went ahead, "significantly impede effective competition... in particular as a result of the creation or strengthening off a dominant position..." and the corresponding provision under US antitrust states similarly, No person shall acquire, directly or indirectly,
8236-405: The derivation or assumption of a social welfare function , which can then be used to rank economically feasible allocations of resources based on the social welfare they generate. Until 1951, the objective of welfare economics remained largely uncontested. Economists viewed welfare economics as the branch of the discipline concerned with delineating the actions a governing body should undertake. It
8352-457: The economy. The field of welfare economics is associated with two fundamental theorems. The first states that given certain assumptions, competitive markets (price equilibria with transfers, e.g. Walrasian equilibria ) produce Pareto efficient outcomes. The assumptions required are generally characterised as "very weak". More specifically, the existence of competitive equilibrium implies both price-taking behaviour and complete markets , but
8468-576: The efficiency aspect of the discipline and the distribution aspect and treats them differently. Questions of efficiency are assessed with criteria such as Pareto efficiency and Kaldor–Hicks efficiency , while questions of income distribution are covered in the specification of the social welfare function Further, efficiency dispenses with cardinal measures of utility, replacing it with ordinal utility , which merely ranks commodity bundles (with an indifference-curve map, for example). The consensus in favor of such approaches, pushed by behavioralists of
8584-470: The enactment in 1890 US court applies these principles to business and markets. Courts applied the Act without consistent economic analysis until 1914, when it was complemented by the Clayton Act which specifically prohibited exclusive dealing agreements, particularly tying agreements and interlocking directorates, and mergers achieved by purchasing stock. From 1915 onwards the rule of reason analysis
8700-400: The estimated damage to their respective economies caused by the violations. But, this remedy was not selected. Instead, Congress chose to permit all persons to sue to recover three times their actual damages every time they were injured in their business or property by an antitrust violation. In the European Union , the so-called "Modernisation Regulation", Regulation 1/2003, established that
8816-478: The existence of a very high market share does not always mean consumers are paying excessive prices since the threat of new entrants to the market can restrain a high-market-share firm's price increases. Competition law does not make merely having a monopoly illegal, but rather abusing the power that a monopoly may confer, for instance through exclusionary practices. Market dominance is connected with decreased innovation and increased political connectedness. First, it
8932-563: The face of fluctuations in supply from overseas. So the legislation read here that whereas, it is very hard and difficult to put certain prices to any such things ... [it is necessary because] prices of such victuals be many times enhanced and raised by the Greedy Covetousness and Appetites of the Owners of such Victuals, by occasion of ingrossing and regrating the same, more than upon any reasonable or just ground or cause, to
9048-478: The great damage and impoverishing of the King's subjects. Around this time organizations representing various tradesmen and handicrafts people, known as guilds had been developing, and enjoyed many concessions and exemptions from the laws against monopolies. The privileges conferred were not abolished until the Municipal Corporations Act 1835. The English common law of restraint of trade
9164-627: The grounds that it did not harm consumers. Running through the different critiques of US antitrust policy is the common theme that government interference in the operation of free markets does more harm than good. "The only cure for bad theory," writes Bork, "is better theory." Harvard Law School professor Philip Areeda , who favours more aggressive antitrust policy, in at least one Supreme Court case challenged Robert Bork's preference for non-intervention. When firms hold large market shares, consumers risk paying higher prices and getting lower quality products than compared to competitive markets. However,
9280-441: The hands of fewer than before. This usually means that one firm buys out the shares of another. The reasons for oversight of economic concentrations by the state are the same as the reasons to restrict firms who abuse a position of dominance, only that regulation of mergers and acquisitions attempts to deal with the problem before it arises, ex ante prevention of market dominance. In the United States merger regulation began under
9396-552: The jurisdiction of society... both the cheapness and the good quality of commodities are most effectually provided for by leaving the producers and sellers perfectly free, under the sole check of equal freedom to the buyers for supplying themselves elsewhere. This is the so-called doctrine of Free Trade, which rests on grounds different from, though equally solid with, the principle of individual liberty asserted in this Essay. Restrictions on trade, or on production for purposes of trade, are indeed restraints; and all restraint, qua restraint,
9512-543: The late 19th century, a depression spread through Europe, known as the Panic of 1873 , ideas of competition lost favour, and it was felt that companies had to co-operate by forming cartels to withstand huge pressures on prices and profits. While the development of competition law stalled in Europe during the late 19th century, in 1889 Canada enacted what is considered the first competition statute of modern times. The Act for
9628-421: The latter half of the 19th century, it had become clear that large firms had become a fact of the market economy. John Stuart Mill 's approach was laid down in his treatise On Liberty (1859). Again, trade is a social act. Whoever undertakes to sell any description of goods to the public, does what affects the interest of other persons, and of society in general; and thus his conduct, in principle, comes within
9744-573: The leading investment banking firms had combined, conspired and agreed, in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act , to control and monopolize the U.S. Securities markets. The 17 Wall Street firms named as defendants in the case, later known as the "Wall Street Seventeen" were: Excluded from the case were other prominent Wall Street firms including Bache & Co. , Halsey Stuart & Co. , Merrill Lynch , Pierce, Fenner & Beane and Salomon Brothers & Hutzler . The case, which
9860-537: The margin at which buyers will buy the same amount as produced – there is no waste, the greatest number wants of the greatest number of people become satisfied and utility is perfected because resources can no longer be reallocated to make anyone better off without making someone else worse off; society has achieved allocative efficiency. Productive efficiency simply means that society is making as much as it can. Free markets are meant to reward those who work hard , and therefore those who will put society's resources towards
9976-525: The marginal rate of substitution at point C is equal to the marginal rate of transformation at point A. Point E corresponds with point B in the previous diagram, and lies inside the social utility frontier (indicating inefficiency) because the MRS at point C is not equal to the MRT at point A. Although all the points on the grand social utility frontier are Pareto efficient, only one point identifies where social welfare
10092-400: The market constantly under-stocked, by never fully supplying the effectual demand, sell their commodities much above the natural price, and raise their emoluments, whether they consist in wages or profit, greatly above their natural rate. In The Wealth of Nations (1776) Adam Smith also pointed out the cartel problem, but did not advocate specific legal measures to combat them. People of
10208-448: The monopoly. Therefore, government should not try to break up monopoly but should allow the market to work. The classical perspective on competition was that certain agreements and business practice could be an unreasonable restraint on the individual liberty of tradespeople to carry on their livelihoods. Restraints were judged as permissible or not by courts as new cases appeared and in the light of changing business circumstances. Hence
10324-414: The next gale of economic innovation would do the same. Contrasting with the allocatively, productively and dynamically efficient market model are monopolies, oligopolies, and cartels. When only one or a few firms exist in the market, and there is no credible threat of the entry of competing firms, prices rise above the competitive level, to either a monopolistic or oligopolistic equilibrium price. Production
10440-586: The only additional assumption is the local non-satiation of agents' preferences – that consumers would like, at the margin, to have slightly more of any given good. The first fundamental theorem is said to capture the logic of Adam Smith's invisible hand , though in general there is no reason to suppose that the "best" Pareto efficient point (of which there are a set) will be selected by the market without intervention, only that some such point will be. The second fundamental theorem states that given further restrictions, any Pareto efficient outcome can be supported as
10556-419: The original intention of antitrust laws and economic efficiency was the pursuit only of consumer welfare, the protection of competition rather than competitors. Furthermore, only a few acts should be prohibited, namely cartels that fix prices and divide markets, mergers that create monopolies, and dominant firms pricing predatorily, while allowing such practices as vertical agreements and price discrimination on
10672-513: The price of a commodity ... to the disadvantage of the public should be punished as misdemeanours". Austria passed a law in 1870 abolishing the penalties, though such agreements remained void. However, in Germany laws clearly validated agreements between firms to raise prices. Throughout the 18th and 19th centuries, ideas that dominant private companies or legal monopolies could excessively restrict trade were further developed in Europe. However, as in
10788-486: The production of coal and steel as it was felt that this dominance had contributed to the outbreak of the war. Article 65 of the agreement banned cartels and article 66 made provisions for concentrations, or mergers, and the abuse of a dominant position by companies. This was the first time that competition law principles were included in a plurilateral regional agreement and established the trans-European model of competition law. In 1957 competition rules were included in
10904-427: The relative importance of the individuals that comprise society. A utilitarian welfare function (also called a Benthamite welfare function) sums the utility of each individual in order to obtain society's overall welfare. All people are treated the same, regardless of their initial level of utility. One extra unit of utility for a starving person is not seen to be of any greater value than an extra unit of utility for
11020-587: The restriction of competition by large companies, who co-operated with rivals to fix outputs, prices and market shares, initially through pools and later through trusts . Trusts first appeared in the US railroads, where the capital requirement of railroad construction precluded competitive services in then scarcely settled territories. This trust allowed railroads to discriminate on rates imposed and services provided to consumers and businesses and to destroy potential competitors. Different trusts could be dominant in different industries. The Standard Oil Company trust in
11136-559: The sale of another can be considered abuse too, being restrictive of consumer choice and depriving competitors of outlets. This was the alleged case in Microsoft v. Commission leading to an eventual fine of million for including its Windows Media Player with the Microsoft Windows platform. A refusal to supply a facility which is essential for all businesses attempting to compete to use can constitute an abuse. One example
11252-503: The same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices. It is impossible indeed to prevent such meetings, by any law which either could be executed, or would be consistent with liberty and justice. But though the law cannot hinder people of the same trade from sometimes assembling together, it ought to do nothing to facilitate such assemblies; much less to render them necessary. By
11368-420: The scope of data used in welfare research and emphasized the need for explicit discussion of ethics and morality in welfare economics. The early Neoclassical approach was developed by Edgeworth , Sidgwick , Marshall , and Pigou . It assumes the following: With these assumptions, it is possible to construct a social welfare function simply by summing all the individual utility functions. Note that such
11484-485: The seventeen defendant firms." Antitrust Competition law is the field of law that promotes or seeks to maintain market competition by regulating anti-competitive conduct by companies. Competition law is implemented through public and private enforcement. It is also known as antitrust law (or just antitrust ), anti-monopoly law , and trade practices law ; the act of pushing for antitrust measures or attacking monopolistic companies (known as trusts )
11600-603: The size of a company became increasingly important, and a number of European countries responded by enacting laws to regulate large companies that restricted trade. Following the French Revolution in 1789 the law of 14–17 June 1791 declared agreements by members of the same trade that fixed the price of an industry or labour as void, unconstitutional, and hostile to liberty. Similarly, the Austrian Penal Code of 1852 established that "agreements ... to raise
11716-459: The statute stated that overcharging merchants must pay the injured party double the sum he received, an idea that has been replicated in punitive treble damages under US antitrust law . Also under Edward III, the following statutory provision outlawed trade combination. ... we have ordained and established, that no merchant or other shall make Confederacy, Conspiracy, Coin, Imagination, or Murmur, or Evil Device in any point that may turn to
11832-403: The subfield of behavioral welfare economics. Two fundamental theorems are associated with welfare economics. The first states that competitive markets, under certain assumptions, lead to Pareto efficient outcomes. This idea is sometimes referred to as Adam Smith's invisible hand . The second theorem states that with further restrictions, any Pareto efficient outcome can be achieved through
11948-614: The transaction. Competition law gained new recognition in Europe in the inter-war years, with Germany enacting its first anti-cartel law in 1923 and Sweden and Norway adopting similar laws in 1925 and 1926 respectively. However, with the Great Depression of 1929 competition law disappeared from Europe and was revived following the Second World War when the United Kingdom and Germany, following pressure from
12064-578: The underlying social welfare function. By postulating W as W(UA, UB) and assuming W to be a positive function of each individual's utility, it was shown that maximum welfare occurred when allocative efficiency was achieved, and the marginal contribution to welfare of each individual was equalized. But this decision did not last long. In 1951, Kenneth Arrow tested whether rational collective selection rules could derive social welfare functions from individuals in preference to social states. He argued that rational law satisfies four conditions: partial universality,
12180-427: The whole or any part of the stock or other share capital... of the assets of one or more persons engaged in commerce or in any activity affecting commerce, where... the effect of such acquisition, of such stocks or assets, or of the use of such stock by the voting or granting of proxies or otherwise, may be substantially to lessen competition, or to tend to create a monopoly. Welfare economics Welfare economics
12296-561: The world have formed international support and enforcement networks. Modern competition law has historically evolved on a national level to promote and maintain fair competition in markets principally within the territorial boundaries of nation-states . National competition law usually does not cover activity beyond territorial borders unless it has significant effects at nation-state level. Countries may allow for extraterritorial jurisdiction in competition cases based on so-called "effects doctrine". The protection of international competition
12412-442: Was being cross-subsidized to capture the lion's share of a booming market. One last category of pricing abuse is price discrimination . An example of this could be a company offering rebates to industrial customers who export their sugar, but not to customers who are selling their goods in the same market. According to The World Bank's "Republic of Armenia Accumulation, Competition, and Connectivity Global Competition" report which
12528-523: Was brought to trial in the Southern District of New York in 1952, was presided over by the controversial and politically conservative Federal judge Harold Medina , who had become internationally infamous for his rulings in the 1949 Smith Act trials of Communist Party leaders . In October 1953, after a year-long trial, Medina found in favor of the investment banking firms. In his judgment, he saw "a constantly changing panorama of competition among
12644-559: Was commonly accepted that the term "maximizing welfare" held a specific meaning rooted in the philosophical framework of utilitarianism. Within the profession, there was ongoing debate regarding whether utility was an ordinal or cardinal concept. This debate seemed to have been addressed by Abram Bergson 's seminal paper in 1938, "A Reformulation of Certain Aspects of Welfare Economics." Bergson demonstrated that economic efficiency conditions could be precisely formulated without fully specifying
12760-702: Was frequently applied by courts to competition cases. However, the period was characterized by the lack of competition law enforcement. From 1936 to 1972 courts' application of antitrust law was dominated by the structure-conduct-performance paradigm of the Harvard School. From 1973 to 1991, the enforcement of antitrust law was based on efficiency explanations as the Chicago School became dominant, and through legal writings such as Judge Robert Bork 's book The Antitrust Paradox . Since 1992 game theory has frequently been used in antitrust cases. With
12876-434: Was held to be a restriction on trade. English courts subsequently decided a range of cases which gradually developed competition related case law, which eventually were transformed into statute law . Europe around the 16th century was changing quickly. The new world had just been opened up, overseas trade and plunder was pouring wealth through the international economy and attitudes among businessmen were shifting. In 1561
12992-445: Was in a case involving a medical company named Commercial Solvents . When it set up its own rival in the tuberculosis drugs market, Commercial Solvents were forced to continue supplying a company named Zoja with the raw materials for the drug. Zoja was the only market competitor, so without the court forcing supply, all competition would have been eliminated. Forms of abuse relating directly to pricing include price exploitation. It
13108-530: Was in force well before the Norman Conquest . The Domesday Book recorded that " foresteel " (i.e. forestalling, the practice of buying up goods before they reach market and then inflating the prices) was one of three forfeitures that King Edward the Confessor could carry out through England. But concern for fair prices also led to attempts to directly regulate the market. Under Henry III an act
13224-510: Was passed in 1266 to fix bread and ale prices in correspondence with grain prices laid down by the assizes . Penalties for breach included amercements , pillory and tumbrel . A 14th-century statute labelled forestallers as "oppressors of the poor and the community at large and enemies of the whole country". Under King Edward III the Statute of Labourers of 1349 fixed wages of artificers and workmen and decreed that foodstuffs should be sold at reasonable prices. On top of existing penalties,
13340-546: Was published in 2013, the Global Competitiveness Index suggests that Armenia ranks lowest among ECA (Europe and Central Asia) countries in the effectiveness of anti-monopoly policy and the intensity of competition. This low ranking somehow explains the low employment and low incomes in Armenia. A merger or acquisition involves, from a competition law perspective, the concentration of economic power in
13456-412: Was witnessed during the recent (2009) financial turmoil " Competition law, or antitrust law, has three main elements: Substance and practice of competition law varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Protecting the interests of consumers ( consumer welfare ) and ensuring that entrepreneurs have an opportunity to compete in the market economy are often treated as important objectives. Competition law
#760239