The Deterrence Effects of U.S. Merger Policy Instruments
AbstractWe estimate the deterrence effects of U.S. merger policy instruments with respect tothe composition and frequency of future merger notifications. Data from the Annual Reports bythe U.S. DOJ and FTC allow industry based measures over the 1986-1999 period of theconditional probabilities for eliciting investigations, challenges, prohibitions, court-wins andcourt-losses: deterrence variables akin to the traditional conditional probabilities from theeconomics of crime literature. We find the challenge-rate to robustly deter future horizontal(both relative and absolute) merger activity; the investigation-rate to slightly deter relativehorizontalmerger activity; the court-loss-rate to moderately affect absolute-horizontal mergeractivity; and the prohibition-rate and court-win-rate to not significantly deter future horizontalmergers. Accordingly, the conditional probability of eliciting an antitrust challenge (i.e.,remedies and prohibitions) involves the strongest deterrence effect from amongst the differentmerger policy instruments.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Tinbergen Institute in its series Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers with number 11-095/1.
Date of creation: 15 Jul 2011
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.tinbergen.nl
antitrust; deterrence; merger policy;
Other versions of this item:
- Clougherty, Joseph A. & Seldeslachts, Jo, 2011. "The Deterrence Effects of U.S. Merger Policy Instruments," CEPR Discussion Papers 8482, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Clougherty, Joseph A. & Seldeslachts, Jo, 2012. "The deterrence effects of U.S. merger policy instruments," Open Access publications from Katholieke Universiteit Leuven urn:hdl:123456789/350833, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.
- Clougherty, Joe & Seldeslachts, Jo, 2012. "The deterrence effects of U.S. merger policy instruments," Open Access publications from Katholieke Universiteit Leuven urn:hdl:123456789/358675, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.
- L40 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - General
- L49 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - Other
- K21 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Antitrust Law
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.:
- Arellano, M & Carrasco, R, 1996.
"Binary Choice Panel Data Models with Predetermined Variables,"
9618, Centro de Estudios Monetarios Y Financieros-.
- Arellano, Manuel & Carrasco, Raquel, 2003. "Binary choice panel data models with predetermined variables," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 115(1), pages 125-157, July.
- Carrasco, Raquel & Arellano, Manuel, 2003. "Binary choice panel data models with predetermined variables," Open Access publications from Universidad Carlos III de Madrid info:hdl:10016/4685, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid.
- Dale Cloninger & Roberto Marchesini, 2006. "Execution moratoriums, commutations and deterrence: the case of Illinois," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(9), pages 967-973.
- Donohue III, John J. & Wolfers, Justin, 2006.
"Uses and Abuses of Empirical Evidence in the Death Penalty Debate,"
IZA Discussion Papers
1949, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
- John J. Donohue III & Justin Wolfers, 2006. "Uses and Abuses of Empirical Evidence in the Death Penalty Debate," NBER Working Papers 11982, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Donohue, John J & Wolfers, Justin, 2006. "Uses and Abuses of Empirical Evidence in the Death Penalty Debate," CEPR Discussion Papers 5493, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Golbe, Devra L & White, Lawrence J, 1993. "Catch a Wave: The Time Series Behavior of Mergers," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 75(3), pages 493-99, August.
- Albert Banal‐Estañol & Paul Heidhues & Rainer Nitsche & Jo Seldeslachts, 2010.
"Screening And Merger Activity,"
Journal of Industrial Economics,
Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(4), pages 794-817, December.
- Banal-Estanol, Albert & Heidhues, Paul & Nitsche, Rainer & Seldeslachts, Jo, 2009. "Screening and Merger Activity," Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems 270, Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich.
- Cameron, Samuel, 1988. "The Economics of Crime Deterrence: A Survey of Theory and Evidence," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(2), pages 301-23.
- Hashem Dezhbakhsh & Paul H. Rubin & Joanna M. Shepherd, 2003. "Does Capital Punishment Have a Deterrent Effect? New Evidence from Postmoratorium Panel Data," American Law and Economics Review, Oxford University Press, vol. 5(2), pages 344-376, August.
- Jo Seldeslachts & Joseph A. Clougherty & Pedro Pita Barros, 2009. "Settle for Now but Block for Tomorrow: The Deterrence Effects of Merger Policy Tools," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 52(3), pages 607-634, 08.
- Paul R. Zimmerman, 2006. "The Deterrent Effect of Alternative Execution Methods," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 65(4), pages 909-941, October.
- Doern, G. Bruce & Wilks, Stephen (ed.), 1996. "Comparative Competition Policy: National Institutions in a Global Market," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198280620.
- Andrade, Gregor & Stafford, Erik, 2004. "Investigating the economic role of mergers," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 1-36, January.
- Paul R. Zimmerman, 2009. "Statistical Variability and the Deterrent Effect of the Death Penalty," American Law and Economics Review, Oxford University Press, vol. 11(2), pages 370-398.
- Mocan, H Naci & Gittings, R Kaj, 2003. "Getting Off Death Row: Commuted Sentences and the Deterrent Effect of Capital Punishment," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 46(2), pages 453-78, October.
- Eckbo, B Espen & Wier, Peggy, 1985. "Antimerger Policy under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act: A Reexamination of the Market Power Hypothesis," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 28(1), pages 119-49, April.
- Cameron, Samuel, 1994. "A review of the econometric evidence on the effects of capital punishment," The Journal of Socio-Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(1-2), pages 197-214.
- Eckbo, B Espen, 1992. " Mergers and the Value of Antitrust Deterrence," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 47(3), pages 1005-29, July.
- Long, William F & Schramm, Richard & Tollison, Robert D, 1973. "The Economic Determinants of Antitrust Activity," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(2), pages 351-64, October.
- Dertwinkel-Kalt, Markus & Wey, Christian, 2012. "The effects of remedies on merger activity in oligopoly," DICE Discussion Papers 81, Heinrich‐Heine‐Universität Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Antoine Maartens (+31 626 - 160 892)).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.