IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/randje/v39y2008i3p683-698.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Illinois Walls: how barring indirect purchaser suits facilitates collusion

Author

Listed:
  • Maarten Pieter Schinkel
  • Jan Tuinstra
  • Jakob Rüggeberg

Abstract

In its landmark ruling in Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois in 1977, the U.S. Supreme Court restricted standing to sue for recovery of antitrust damages to direct purchasers. However, antitrust damages are typically (in part) passed on to intermediaries lower in the chain of production and ultimately to consumers. We show that the Illinois Brick rule facilitates collusion. It allows an upstream cartel to shield itself from private damage claims by forwarding a share of cartel profits to its direct purchasers. These benefits dissuade the direct purchasers from exercising their exclusive right to sue for private damages. The cartel can achieve this by rationing inputs at low prices. Several U.S. antitrust cases show symptoms of “Illinois Walls.”

Suggested Citation

  • Maarten Pieter Schinkel & Jan Tuinstra & Jakob Rüggeberg, 2008. "Illinois Walls: how barring indirect purchaser suits facilitates collusion," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(3), pages 683-698, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:randje:v:39:y:2008:i:3:p:683-698
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1756-2171.2008.00034.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-2171.2008.00034.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1756-2171.2008.00034.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dennis W. Carlton, 2007. "Does Antitrust Need to be Modernized?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 21(3), pages 155-176, Summer.
    2. William M. Landes, 1974. "An Economic Analysis of the Courts," NBER Chapters, in: Essays in the Economics of Crime and Punishment, pages 164-214, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Schinkel, M.P. & Tuinstra, J. & Rueggeberg, J., 2003. "Illinois walls," Research Memorandum 012, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    4. Greenhut, M L & Ohta, H, 1979. "Vertical Integration of Successive Oligopolists," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(1), pages 137-141, March.
    5. 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.
    6. Joseph E. Harrington, 2004. "Post‐Cartel Pricing During Litigation," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(4), pages 517-533, December.
    7. James W. Friedman, 1971. "A Non-cooperative Equilibrium for Supergames," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 38(1), pages 1-12.
    8. Margaret C. Levenstein & Valerie Y. Suslow, 2002. "What Determines Cartel Success?," UMASS Amherst Economics Working Papers 2002-01, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Department of Economics.
    9. 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 1326-1336, December.
    10. Maarten Pieter Schinkel & Jan Tuinstra & Jakob Rüggeberg, 2008. "Illinois Walls: how barring indirect purchaser suits facilitates collusion," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(3), pages 683-698, September.
    11. 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.
    12. Xavier Vives, 2001. "Oligopoly Pricing: Old Ideas and New Tools," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 026272040x, December.
    13. Baker, Jonathan B, 1988. "Private Information and the Deterrent Effect of Antitrust Damage Remedies," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 4(2), pages 385-408, Fall.
    14. McCutcheon, Barbara, 1997. "Do Meetings in Smoke-Filled Rooms Facilitate Collusion?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(2), pages 330-350, April.
    15. Aghion, Philippe & Bolton, Patrick, 1987. "Contracts as a Barrier to Entry," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(3), pages 388-401, June.
    16. Joseph J. Spengler, 1950. "Vertical Integration and Antitrust Policy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 58, pages 347-347.
    17. Bernstein, Lisa, 1992. "Opting Out of the Legal System: Extralegal Contractual Relations in the Diamond Industry," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 21(1), pages 115-157, January.
    18. Lovell, Michael C., 1982. "Are treble damages double damages?," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 263-268.
    19. F. M. Scherer, 1997. "How US Antitrust Can Go Astray: The Brand Name Prescription Drug Litigation," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(3), pages 239-256.
    20. Snyder, Edward A, 1985. "Efficient Assignment of Rights to Sue for Antitrust Damages," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 28(2), pages 469-482, May.
    21. 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 870-887, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sahuguet, Nicolas & Walckiers, Alexis, 2017. "A theory of hub-and-spoke collusion," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 353-370.
    2. Roman Inderst & Frank Maier-Rigaud & Ulrich Schwalbe, 2013. "Quantifizierung von Schäden durch Wettbewerbsverstöße," Working Papers 2013-ECO-08, IESEG School of Management.
    3. 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.
    4. Holler, Emanuel & Rickert, Dennis, 2022. "How resale price maintenance and loss leading affect upstream cartel stability: Anatomy of a coffee cartel," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    5. Salvatore Piccolo & Markus Reisinger, 2011. "Exclusive Territories and Manufacturers' Collusion," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(7), pages 1250-1266, July.
    6. Isabel Teichmann & Vanessa von Schlippenbach, 2014. "Collusive Effects of a Monopolist's Use of an Intermediary to Deliver to Retailers," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1440, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    7. Frank Maier-Rigaud & Ulrich Schwalbe, 2013. "Quantification of Antitrust Damages," Working Papers 2013-ECO-09, IESEG School of Management.
    8. Maarten Pieter Schinkel & Jan Tuinstra & Jakob Rüggeberg, 2008. "Illinois Walls: how barring indirect purchaser suits facilitates collusion," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(3), pages 683-698, September.
    9. Frank P. Maier-Rigaud, 2014. "Toward A European Directive On Damages Actions," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 10(2), pages 341-360.
    10. Markus Reisinger & Tim Paul Thomes, 2017. "Manufacturer collusion: Strategic implications of the channel structure," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(4), pages 923-954, December.
    11. FRANK VERBOVEN & THEON van DIJK, 2009. "Cartel Damages Claims And The Passing‐On Defense," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(3), pages 457-491, September.
    12. Hunold, Matthias, 2013. "The effects of cartel damage compensations," ZEW Discussion Papers 13-081, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    13. Nitish Jain & Sameer Hasija & Serguei Netessine, 2021. "Supply Chains and Antitrust Governance," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(11), pages 6822-6838, November.
    14. Boone, Jan & Müller, Wieland, 2012. "The distribution of harm in price-fixing cases," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 265-276.
    15. Salvatore Piccolo & Jeanine Miklós-Thal, 2012. "Colluding through suppliers," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 43(3), pages 492-513, September.
    16. 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.
    17. Matthias Hunold & Johannes Muthers, 2023. "Manufacturer Collusion and Resale Price Maintenance," Volkswirtschaftliche Diskussionsbeiträge 197-23, Universität Siegen, Fakultät Wirtschaftswissenschaften, Wirtschaftsinformatik und Wirtschaftsrecht.
    18. Bet, Germán & Cui, Shana & Sappington, David E.M., 2021. "The impact of vertical integration on losses from collusion," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).

    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. Schinkel, M.P. & Tuinstra, J. & Rueggeberg, J., 2003. "Illinois walls," Research Memorandum 012, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    2. Kaplow, Louis & Shapiro, Carl, 2007. "Antitrust," Handbook of Law and Economics, in: A. Mitchell Polinsky & Steven Shavell (ed.), Handbook of Law and Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 15, pages 1073-1225, Elsevier.
    3. Schinkel, Maarten Pieter & Tuinstra, Jan, 2006. "Imperfect competition law enforcement," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 1267-1297, November.
    4. Katsoulacos, Yannis & Motchenkova, Evgenia & Ulph, David, 2020. "Combining cartel penalties and private damage actions: The impact on cartel prices," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    5. Joseph E. Harrington, Jr, 2005. "Detecting Cartels," Economics Working Paper Archive 526, The Johns Hopkins University,Department of Economics.
    6. 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, February.
    7. Sylvain Bourjade & Patrick Rey & Paul Seabright, 2009. "Private Antitrust Enforcement In The Presence Of Pre‐Trial Bargaining," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(3), pages 372-409, September.
    8. de Roos, Nicolas, 2006. "Examining models of collusion: The market for lysine," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 1083-1107, November.
    9. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107687899, January.
    10. Hunold, Matthias, 2013. "The effects of cartel damage compensations," ZEW Discussion Papers 13-081, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    11. Andreea Cosnita-Langlais & Jean-Philippe Tropeano, 2018. "How procedures shape substance: institutional design and antitrust evidentiary standards," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 143-164, August.
    12. David BARTOLINI & Alberto ZAZZARO, 2008. "Are Antitrust Fines Friendly to Competition? An Endogenous Coalition Formation Approach to Collusive Cartels," Working Papers 325, Universita' Politecnica delle Marche (I), Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche e Sociali.
    13. Marc Escrihuela-Villar & Jorge Guillen, 2011. "On Collusion and Industry Size," Annals of Economics and Finance, Society for AEF, vol. 12(1), pages 31-40, May.
    14. Justus Haucap, 2008. "Whinston, M. D.: Lectures on Antitrust Economics (Cairoli Lecture Series)," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 93(3), pages 305-311, April.
    15. FRANK VERBOVEN & THEON van DIJK, 2009. "Cartel Damages Claims And The Passing‐On Defense," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(3), pages 457-491, September.
    16. Gianmaria Martini, 2005. "Hard Core Cartels and Avoidance of Investigation in the Presence of an Antitrust Authority," Working Papers 0505, Department of Management, Information and Production Engineering, University of Bergamo.
    17. McAfee, R. Preston & Mialon, Hugo M. & Mialon, Sue H., 2008. "Private v. public antitrust enforcement: A strategic analysis," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(10-11), pages 1863-1875, October.
    18. 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.
    19. Saglam, Ismail, 2023. "The Optimal Antitrust Policies for Vertical Price Restraints in a Non-Green Supply Chain," MPRA Paper 117587, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Schwartz, Warren F. & Wickelgren, Abraham L., 2011. "Optimal antitrust enforcement: Competitor suits, entry, and post-entry competition," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(7), pages 967-972.

    More about this item

    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:bla:randje:v:39:y:2008:i:3:p:683-698. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/randdus.html .

    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.