IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/revind/v54y2019i2d10.1007_s11151-018-9638-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Abuse of Market Dominance Under China’s Anti-Monopoly Law: The Case of Tetra Pak

Author

Listed:
  • Xiao Fu

    (Fudan University)

  • Guofu Tan

    (University of Southern California)

Abstract

In this paper, we analyze a recent antitrust case of abuse of dominance that was decided by a Chinese administrative enforcement agency under China’s Anti-Monopoly Law (“AML”). A key issue in this case involved the impact of loyalty rebate programs used by a dominant firm. We provide an overview of the case, highlight the main points of the decision, and focus on the assessment of loyalty rebates. As the first antitrust ruling in China involving loyalty discounts, we expect that the decision will serve as an important reference in antitrust enforcement in China.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiao Fu & Guofu Tan, 2019. "Abuse of Market Dominance Under China’s Anti-Monopoly Law: The Case of Tetra Pak," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 54(2), pages 409-434, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:revind:v:54:y:2019:i:2:d:10.1007_s11151-018-9638-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s11151-018-9638-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11151-018-9638-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11151-018-9638-8?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zhiyong Liu & Yue Qiao, 2012. "Abuse of Market Dominance Under China’s 2007 Anti-monopoly Law: A Preliminary Assessment," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 41(1), pages 77-107, August.
    2. Guofu Tan & Dennis Lu, 2013. "Economics And Private Antitrust Litigation In China," CPI Journal, Competition Policy International, vol. 9.
    3. Yong Chao & Guofu Tan & Adam Chi Leung Wong, 2018. "All†units discounts as a partial foreclosure device," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 49(1), pages 155-180, March.
    4. Greenlee, Patrick & Reitman, David & Sibley, David S., 2008. "An antitrust analysis of bundled loyalty discounts," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 1132-1152, September.
    5. Spector, David, 2005. "Loyalty Rebates : An Assessment of Competition Concerns and a Proposed Rule of Reason," CEPREMAP Working Papers (Docweb) 0514, CEPREMAP.
    6. Jeffrey Church & Roger Ware, 1998. "Abuse of Dominance under the 1986 Canadian Competition Act," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 13(1), pages 85-129, April.
    7. David Spector, 2005. "Loyalty Rebates: An Assessment of Competition Concerns and a Proposed Structured Rule of Reason," CPI Journal, Competition Policy International, vol. 1.
    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. Chao, Yong & Tan, Guofu & Wong, Adam Chi Leung, 2019. "Asymmetry in capacity and the adoption of all-units discounts," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 152-172.

    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. Calzolari, Giacomo & Denicolo, Vincenzo, 2010. "Competitive quantity discounts," CEPR Discussion Papers 8144, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    2. Nicholas Economides, 2014. "Bundling and Tying," Working Papers 14-22, NET Institute.
    3. Calzolari, Giacomo & Denicolò, Vincenzo, 2011. "On the anti-competitive effects of quantity discounts," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 337-341, May.
    4. Roman Inderst & Greg Shaffer, 2010. "Market‐share contracts as facilitating practices," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(4), pages 709-729, December.
    5. Enrique Ide & Juan-Pablo Montero & Nicolás Figueroa, 2016. "Discounts as a Barrier to Entry," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(7), pages 1849-1877, July.
    6. Adrian Majumdar & Greg Shaffer, 2009. "Market‐Share Contracts with Asymmetric Information," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(2), pages 393-421, June.
    7. Ravi Mantena & Rajib L. Saha, 2022. "Market Share Contracts in B2B Procurement Settings with Heterogeneous User Preferences," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(3), pages 1290-1308, March.
    8. Ordover, Janusz A. & Shaffer, Greg, 2013. "Exclusionary discounts," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 569-586.
    9. Adrian Majumdar & Greg Shaffer, 2007. "Market-Share Contracts with Asymmetric Information," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Competition Policy (CCP) 2007-17, Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    10. Elhauge, Einer & Wickelgren, Abraham L., 2015. "Robust exclusion and market division through loyalty discounts," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 111-121.
    11. David E. Mills, 2017. "Inducing Cooperation with a Carrot Instead of a Stick," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 50(2), pages 245-261, March.
    12. Calzolari, Giacomo & Denicolò, Vincenzo, 2020. "Loyalty discounts and price-cost tests," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    13. Janusz Ordover & Greg Shaffer, 2007. "Exclusionary Discounts," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Competition Policy (CCP) 2007-13, Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    14. Walter Beckert & Paolo Siciliani, 2018. "Protecting Vulnerable Consumers in "Switching Markets"," Birkbeck Working Papers in Economics and Finance 1808, Birkbeck, Department of Economics, Mathematics & Statistics.
    15. Zhiyong Liu & Yue Qiao, 2012. "Abuse of Market Dominance Under China’s 2007 Anti-monopoly Law: A Preliminary Assessment," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 41(1), pages 77-107, August.
    16. Fumagalli, Chiara & Motta, Massimo, 2020. "Tying in evolving industries, when future entry cannot be deterred," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    17. John Asker & Heski Bar-Isaac, 2012. "Vertical Practices Facilitating Exclusion," Working Papers 12-20, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
    18. Halmenschlager, Christine & Mantovani, Andrea, 2017. "On the private and social desirability of mixed bundling in complementary markets with cost savings," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 45-59.
    19. Philippe Choné & Laurent Linnemer, 2016. "Nonlinear pricing and exclusion:II. Must-stock products," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 47(3), pages 631-660, August.
    20. Alexandre de Cornière & Greg Taylor, 2024. "Anticompetitive Bundling When Buyers Compete," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 293-328, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Abuse of market dominance; AML; Antitrust enforcement; Loyalty discounts;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • K21 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Antitrust Law
    • L1 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance
    • L4 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies

    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:kap:revind:v:54:y:2019:i:2:d:10.1007_s11151-018-9638-8. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.