The fight against cartels: a transatlantic perspective
AbstractThe fight against cartels is a priority for antitrust authorities on both sides of the Atlantic. What differs between the EU and the US is not the basic toolkit for achieving deterrence, but to whom it is targeted. In the EU, pecuniary sanctions against the firm are the only instruments available to the Commission, while in the US criminal sanctions are also widely employed. The aim of this paper is to compare two different types of fines levied on managerial firms when they collude. We consider a profit based fine as opposed to a delegation based fine, with the latter targeting the manager in a more direct way. Under the assumption of revenue equivalence, we find that the delegation based fine, although distortive, is more effective in deterring cartels than the profit based one. When evaluating social welfare, a trade-off between deterrence and output distortion can arise. However, if the antitrust authority focuses on consumer surplus, then the delegation based fine is to be preferred.
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 Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB) in its series Working Papers with number 2013/31.
Length: 31 pages
Date of creation: 2013
Date of revision:
Cartel policy; managerial firms; collusion;
Other versions of this item:
- Emilie Dargaud & Andrea Mantovani & Carlo Reggiani, 2013. "The fight against cartels: a transatlantic perspective," Working Papers 2013/25, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
- E. Dargaud & A. Mantovani & C. Reggiani, 2013. "The fight against cartels: a transatlantic perspective," Working Papers wp894, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
- K21 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Antitrust Law
- L44 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - Antitrust Policy and Public Enterprise, Nonprofit Institutions, and Professional Organizations
- K42 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Illegal Behavior and the Enforcement of Law
- L21 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Business Objectives of the Firm
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2013-10-11 (All new papers)
- NEP-BEC-2013-10-11 (Business Economics)
- NEP-COM-2013-10-11 (Industrial Competition)
- NEP-LAW-2013-10-11 (Law & Economics)
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.:
- Spagnolo, Giancarlo, 2005.
"Managerial incentives and collusive behavior,"
European Economic Review,
Elsevier, vol. 49(6), pages 1501-1523, August.
- Fershtman, Chaim & Judd, Kenneth L, 1987.
"Equilibrium Incentives in Oligopoly,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 77(5), pages 927-40, December.
- Motta, Massimo & Polo, Michele, 2000.
"Leniency Programs and Cartel Prosecution,"
CEPR Discussion Papers
2349, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Motta, M. & Polo, M., 1999. "Leniency Programs and Cartel Prosecution," Economics Working Papers eco99/23, European University Institute.
- Massimo Motta & Michele Polo, . "Leniency Programs and Cartel Prosecution," Working Papers 150, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
- Marie-Laure Allain & Marcel Boyer & Rachidi Kotchoni & Jean-Pierre Ponssard, 2011.
"The Determination of Optimal Fines in Cartel Cases - The Myth of Underdeterrence,"
CIRANO Working Papers
- Marie-Laure Allain & Marcel Boyer & Rachidi Kotchoni & Jean-Pierre Ponssard, 2011. "The Determination of Optimal Fines in Cartel Cases The Myth of Underdeterrence," Working Papers hal-00631432, HAL.
- Russ Pittman, 2007.
"Consumer Surplus as the Appropriate Standard for Antitrust Enforcement,"
Competition Policy International, vol. 3.
- Russell Pittman, 2007. "Consumer Surplus as the Appropriate Standard for Antitrust Enforcement," EAG Discussions Papers 200709, Department of Justice, Antitrust Division.
- Friedman, James W, 1971. "A Non-cooperative Equilibrium for Supergames," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(113), pages 1-12, January.
- Besanko, David & Spulber, Daniel F, 1989. "Antitrust Enforcement under Asymmetric Information," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(396), pages 408-25, June.
- Joseph E Harrington, 2001.
"Optimal Cartel Pricing in the Presence of an Antitrust Authority,"
Economics Working Paper Archive
460, The Johns Hopkins University,Department of Economics, revised Jul 2002.
- Joseph E. Harrington, 2005. "Optimal Cartel Pricing In The Presence Of An Antitrust Authority," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 46(1), pages 145-169, 02.
- Joseph E Harrington Jr & Joe Chen, 2002.
"Cartel Pricing Dynamics with Cost Variability and Endogenous Buyer Detection,"
Economics Working Paper Archive
514, The Johns Hopkins University,Department of Economics, revised Sep 2004.
- Harrington, Joseph Jr. & Chen, Joe, 2006. "Cartel pricing dynamics with cost variability and endogenous buyer detection," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 1185-1212, November.
- Joseph E. Harrington, Jr. & Joe Chen, 2005. "Cartel Pricing Dynamics with Cost Variability and Endogenous Buyer Detection," CIRJE F-Series CIRJE-F-359, CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, University of Tokyo.
- Joseph E Harrington Jr, 2002.
"Cartel Pricing Dynamics in the Presence of an Antitrust Authority,"
Economics Working Paper Archive
487, The Johns Hopkins University,Department of Economics, revised May 2003.
- 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.
- Joseph E. Harrington, Jr., 2003. "Cartel Pricing Dynamics in the Presence of an Antitrust Authority," Computing in Economics and Finance 2003 26, Society for Computational Economics.
- Saïd Souam, 1997.
"Optimal Antitrust Policy Under Different Regimes of Fines,"
97-37, Centre de Recherche en Economie et Statistique.
- Souam, Said, 2001. "Optimal antitrust policy under different regimes of fines," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(1-2), pages 1-26, January.
- Gary S. Becker, 1968.
"Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach,"
Journal of Political Economy,
University of Chicago Press, vol. 76, pages 169.
- Zhijun Chen & Patrick Rey, 2013.
"On the Design of Leniency Programs,"
Journal of Law and Economics,
University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 917 - 957.
- Spagnolo, Giancarlo, 2004. "Divide et Impera: Optimal Leniency Programmes," CEPR Discussion Papers 4840, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ().
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.