IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-03617569.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Merger selection, evidence provision and the timing of merger control

Author

Listed:
  • Andreea Cosnita-Langlais

    (EconomiX - EconomiX - UPN - Université Paris Nanterre - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Jean-Philippe Tropeano

Abstract

Merger control impacts the type of merger projects that are submitted, as well as the information provided by the merging parties upon assessment. In this paper, we consider the outcomes in terms of selection of merger types and evidence provision of alternative timings for merger review, pre‐ or postconsummation of the merger. We show that the selection effect induced by the ex post merger review is welfare‐improving due to the deterrence of the most anticompetitive merger projects. In contrast, the welfare impact of evidence provision under ex post assessment is ambiguous. Balancing these two effects makes possible the welfare comparison between the ex ante and the ex post merger policy enforcement.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Andreea Cosnita-Langlais & Jean-Philippe Tropeano, 2023. "Merger selection, evidence provision and the timing of merger control," Post-Print hal-03617569, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03617569
    DOI: 10.1111/boer.12365
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Clougherty, Joseph A. & Duso, Tomaso & Lee, Miyu & Seldeslachts, Jo, 2016. "Effective European Antitrust : Does EC Merger Policy Generate Deterrence?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 54(4), pages 1884-1903.
    2. Lagerlof, Johan N.M. & Heidhues, Paul, 2005. "On the desirability of an efficiency defense in merger control," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(9-10), pages 803-827, December.
    3. Ormosi, Peter L., 2012. "Claim efficiencies or offer remedies? An analysis of litigation strategies in EC mergers," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 578-592.
    4. Roberto Burguet & Ramon Caminal, 2015. "Bargaining Failures And Merger Policy," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 56(3), pages 1019-1041, August.
    5. Joseph Farrell & Michael Katz, 2006. "The Economics of Welfare Standards in Antitrust," CPI Journal, Competition Policy International, vol. 2.
    6. Neven, Damien J. & Roller, Lars-Hendrik, 2005. "Consumer surplus vs. welfare standard in a political economy model of merger control," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(9-10), pages 829-848, December.
    7. Loss, Frederic & Malavolti-Grimal, Estelle & Verge, Thibaud & Berges-Sennou, Fabian, 2008. "European competition policy modernization: From notifications to legal exception," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 77-98, January.
    8. Ottaviani, Marco & Wickelgren, Abraham L., 2011. "Ex ante or ex post competition policy? A progress report," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 356-359, May.
    9. Roberto Burguet & Ramon Caminal, 2015. "Bargaining Failures And Merger Policy," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 56, pages 1019-1041, August.
    10. Eckbo, B Espen, 1992. "Mergers and the Value of Antitrust Deterrence," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 47(3), pages 1005-1029, July.
    11. Joseph A. Clougherty & Jo Seldeslachts, 2013. "The Deterrence Effects of US Merger Policy Instruments," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 29(5), pages 1114-1144, October.
    12. Besanko, David & Spulber, Daniel F, 1993. "Contested Mergers and Equilibrium Antitrust Policy," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 9(1), pages 1-29, April.
    13. Orley Ashenfelter & Daniel Hosken & Matthew Weinberg, 2014. "Did Robert Bork Understate the Competitive Impact of Mergers? Evidence from Consummated Mergers," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 57(S3), pages 67-100.
    14. Markus Dertwinkel-Kalt & Christian Wey, 2021. "Evidence Production in Merger Control: The Role of Remedies," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 59(1), pages 1-12, August.
    15. Lars Sørgard, 2009. "Optimal Merger Policy: Enforcement Vs. Deterrence," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(3), pages 438-456, September.
    16. Paul L. Joskow, 2002. "Transaction Cost Economics, Antitrust Rules, and Remedies," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(1), pages 95-116, April.
    17. Volker Nocke & Michael D. Whinston, 2013. "Merger Policy with Merger Choice," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(2), pages 1006-1033, April.
    18. Neven, Damien J., 2001. "How should "protection" be evaluated in Article III GATT disputes?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 421-444, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jovanovic, Dragan & Wey, Christian, 2012. "An equilibrium analysis of efficiency gains from mergers," DICE Discussion Papers 64, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    2. Cosnita-Langlais Andreea & Sørgard Lars, 2018. "Enforcement and Deterrence in Merger Control: The Case of Merger Remedies," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 14(3), pages 1-22, November.
    3. Markus Dertwinkel-Kalt & Christian Wey, 2016. "Merger Remedies in Oligopoly under a Consumer Welfare Standard," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(1), pages 150-179.
    4. Eileen Fumagalli & Tore Nilssen, 2019. "Sweetening the Pill: a Theory of Waiting to Merge," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 351-388, September.
    5. Redkina, Anastasia (Редькина, Анастасия) & Lagodyuk, Ekaterina (Лагодюк, Екатерина), 2016. "The deterrent effect of Russian control of mergers: An Empirical Study [Сдерживающие Эффекты Российского Контроля Слияний: Эмпирическое Исследование]," Ekonomicheskaya Politika / Economic Policy, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, vol. 1, pages 79-104, February.
    6. Lars Sørgard, 2009. "Optimal Merger Policy: Enforcement Vs. Deterrence," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(3), pages 438-456, September.
    7. Bisceglia, Michele & Piccolo, Salvatore & Tarantino, Emanuele, 2023. "M&A advisory and the merger review process," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    8. Tropeano, Jean-Philippe, 2020. "Ex ante or Ex post? When the timing of merger assessment is up to the merging firms," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    9. Lars Sorgard & Andreea Cosnita-Langlais, 2013. "Enforcement vs Deterrence in Merger Control: Can Remedies Lead to Lower Welfare?," Post-Print hal-01668416, HAL.
    10. Russell Pittman, 2007. "Consumer Surplus as the Appropriate Standard for Antitrust Enforcement," EAG Discussions Papers 200709, Department of Justice, Antitrust Division.
    11. Cosnita-Langlais, Andreea & Tropeano, Jean-Philippe, 2012. "Do remedies affect the efficiency defense? An optimal merger-control analysis," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 58-66.
    12. Andreea Cosnita-Langlais & Jean-Philippe Tropeano, 2013. "Ex post or ex ante? On the optimal timing of merger control," EconomiX Working Papers 2013-22, University of Paris Nanterre, EconomiX.
    13. Cabolis, C. & Manasakis, C. & Moreno, D. & Petrakis, E., 2021. "The interactions of R&D investments and horizontal mergers," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 187(C), pages 507-534.
    14. Andreea Cosnita & Jean-Philippe Tropeano, 2006. "On the effective design of the efficiency defence," Cahiers de la Maison des Sciences Economiques v06030, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
    15. Chiara Fumagalli & Massimo Motta & Emanuele Tarantino, 2020. "Shelving or Developing? The Acquisition of Potential Competitors under Financial Constraints," Working Papers 1197, Barcelona School of Economics.
    16. Choe, Chongwoo & Shekhar, Chander, 2010. "Compulsory or voluntary pre-merger notification? Theory and some evidence," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 10-20, January.
    17. Choné, Philippe & Linnemer, Laurent, 2008. "Assessing horizontal mergers under uncertain efficiency gains," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 913-929, July.
    18. Gürtler, Oliver & Kräkel, Matthias, 2006. "Mergers, Litigation and Efficiency," Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems 185, Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich.
    19. Kaplow, Louis, 2021. "Horizontal merger analysis," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    20. Markus Dertwinkel-Kalt & Christian Wey, 2021. "Evidence Production in Merger Control: The Role of Remedies," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 59(1), pages 1-12, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    [No keyword available];

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03617569. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.