This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Illinois Walls: How barring indirect purchaser suits facilitates collusion

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Rüggeberg, J. (Universiteit van Maastricht)
Schinkel, M.P.
Tuinstra, J. () (Universiteit van Amsterdam)

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

In its landmark ruling in Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois, the U.S. Supreme Court restricted standing to sue for recovery of damages suffered from a breach of federal antitrust law to direct purchasers only. Even though typically antitrust injury is, at least in part, passed on to firms lower in the production chain and ultimately to consumers, Illinois Brick is binding precedent in a majority of states. In this paper, we draw attention to a strategic abuse of the rule as a shield against antitrust damages claims. We show that Illinois Brick facilitates upstream firms in engaging horizontally in a collusive arrangement, allowing them to focus concealed vertical side-payments to discourage civil action on their direct purchasers only. Downstream firms are passed part of the upstream cartel profits through a symmetric rationing of their inputs at low prices. This `Illinois Wall' arrangement sustains collusion in the production chain to the detriment of consumers and reducing total welfare. The more competitive the up- and downstream industries otherwise are, the more scope there is for the arrangement. Illinois Walls are shown to be resilient to entry, as well as to variations in the legal system. Several recent U.S. cartel cases display some of their symptoms, suggesting that the abuse of Illinois Brick is a reality in U.S. industry.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www1.fee.uva.nl/cendef/publications/papers/IWSTR0505.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Universiteit van Amsterdam, Center for Nonlinear Dynamics in Economics and Finance in its series CeNDEF Working Papers with number 05-10.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 2005
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ams:ndfwpp:05-10

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Dept. of Economics and Econometrics, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Roetersstraat 11, NL - 1018 WB Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Phone: + 31 20 525 52 58
Fax: + 31 20 525 52 83
Web page: http://www.fee.uva.nl/cendef/
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Cees C.G. Diks).

Related research
Keywords:

Other versions of this item:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
  1. Baker, Jonathan B, 1988. "Private Information and the Deterrent Effect of Antitrust Damage Remedies," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 4(2), pages 385-408, Fall.
  2. Joseph E. Harrington, Jr., 2004. "Cartel Pricing Dynamics in the Presence of an Antitrust Authority," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 35(4), pages 651-673, Winter.
    Other versions:
  3. Schinkel, M.P. & Tuinstra, J. & Rueggeberg, J., 2004. "Illinois Walls," CeNDEF Working Papers 04-03, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Center for Nonlinear Dynamics in Economics and Finance. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
    • Schinkel,Maarten Pieter & Rüggeberg,Jakob & Tuinstra,Jan, 2003. "Illinois Walls," Research Memoranda 027, Maastricht : METEOR, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization. [Downloadable!]
  4. Lovell, Michael C., 1982. "Are treble damages double damages?," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 263-268. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  5. Greenhut, M L & Ohta, H, 1979. "Vertical Integration of Successive Oligopolists," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(1), pages 137-41, March.
  6. Joseph J. Spengler, 1950. "Vertical Integration and Antitrust Policy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 58, pages 347. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  7. Joseph E. Harrington, 2004. "Post-Cartel Pricing During Litigation," Journal of Industrial Economics, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 52(4), pages 517-533, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  8. Salant, Stephen W, 1987. "Treble Damage Awards in Private Lawsuits for Price Fixing," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 95(6), pages 1326-36, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  9. Friedman, James W, 1971. "A Non-cooperative Equilibrium for Supergames," Review of Economic Studies, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 38(113), pages 1-12, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  10. Snyder, Edward A, 1985. "Efficient Assignment of Rights to Sue for Antitrust Damages," Journal of Law & Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 28(2), pages 469-82, May.
  11. Besanko, David & Spulber, Daniel F, 1990. "Are Treble Damages Neutral? Sequential Equilibrium and Private Antitrust Enforcement," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(4), pages 870-87, September. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  12. Hugh C. Briggs III & Kathleen D. Huryn & Mark E. McBride, 1996. "Treble Damages and the Incentive to Sue and Settle," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 27(4), pages 770-786, Winter. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Cited by:
(explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)

  1. Schinkel, M.P. & Tuinstra, J., 2005. "Illinois Walls in alternative market structures," CeNDEF Working Papers 05-11, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Center for Nonlinear Dynamics in Economics and Finance. [Downloadable!]
  2. Boone, J. & Müller, W., 2008. "The Distribution of Harm in Price-Fixing Cases," Discussion Paper 2008-68, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  3. Van Dijk, Theon & Verboven, Frank, 2007. "Cartel Damages Claims and the Passing-on Defence," CEPR Discussion Papers 6329, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Iwan Bos & Maarten Pieter Schinkel, 2009. "Tracing the Base: A Topographic Test for Collusive Basing-Point Pricing," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 09-007/1, Tinbergen Institute. [Downloadable!]
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? A few items listed on IDEAS are over 2000 years old!

This page was last updated on 2009-11-8.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.