IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/revind/v67y2025i2d10.1007_s11151-025-10020-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Understanding Early-Stage Merger Investigations: What Drives the Antitrust Agencies?

Author

Listed:
  • John W. Mayo

    (Georgetown University)

  • Robert Press

    (Georgetown University)

  • Mark Whitener

    (Georgetown University)

Abstract

Academicand popular scrutiny of merger challenges and their subsequent outcomes have captured increasing attention in recent years. Yet, while the FTC and the DOJ (Agencies) are tasked with investigating an average of 1,624 (2001–2023) mergers annually, the Agencies’ early-stage merger investigations filter out the vast majority of mergers and leave those mergers unchallenged. In this paper, we provide what we believe to be the first quantitative analysis of the earliest stage in the merger enforcement process: the determination formally to assign a merger for early-stage scrutiny by one of the Agencies. Consistent with established Agency guidelines and economic theory, we find that industries with higher levels of intra-industry mergers and industry concentration have higher rates of early-stage scrutiny, while industries with more competitors and new entrants are less likely to face such scrutiny. Furthermore, we find that industries with higher levels of prior merger challenges are more likely to face early-stage investigations.

Suggested Citation

  • John W. Mayo & Robert Press & Mark Whitener, 2025. "Understanding Early-Stage Merger Investigations: What Drives the Antitrust Agencies?," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 67(2), pages 133-159, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:revind:v:67:y:2025:i:2:d:10.1007_s11151-025-10020-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s11151-025-10020-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11151-025-10020-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11151-025-10020-6?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Malcolm B. Coate, 2016. "A Retrospective On Merger Retrospectives In The United States," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 12(2), pages 209-232.
    2. Jeffrey T Macher & John W Mayo, 2021. "The Evolution of Merger Enforcement Intensity: What do the Data Show?," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 17(3), pages 708-727.
    3. Carl Shapiro & Howard Shelanski, 2021. "Judicial Response to the 2010 Horizontal Merger Guidelines," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 58(1), pages 51-79, February.
    4. George L. Priest & Benjamin Klein, 1984. "The Selection of Disputes for Litigation," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 13(1), pages 1-56, January.
    5. Gervais, Antoine & Jensen, J. Bradford, 2019. "The tradability of services: Geographic concentration and trade costs," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 331-350.
    6. Maddala,G. S., 1986. "Limited-Dependent and Qualitative Variables in Econometrics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521338257, November.
    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. Carl Shapiro, 2024. "Evolution of the Merger Guidelines: Is This Fox Too Clever by Half?," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 65(1), pages 147-175, August.
    2. Pyle, William, 2006. "Resolutions, recoveries and relationships: The evolution of payment disputes in Central and Eastern Europe," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 317-337, June.
    3. Giuseppe Dari-Mattiacci & Bruno Deffains, 2007. "Uncertainty of Law and the Legal Process," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 163(4), pages 627-656, December.
    4. Hildegunn K. Nordås & Dorothée Rouzet, 2017. "The Impact of Services Trade Restrictiveness on Trade Flows," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(6), pages 1155-1183, June.
    5. Schankerman, Mark & Lanjouw, Jean, 2001. "Enforcing Intellectual Property Rights," CEPR Discussion Papers 3093, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    6. Vashishtha, Ashutosh & Sharma, Anil K., 2012. "Indian financial market regulation: A dialectic model," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 77-89.
    7. Fotis, Panagiotis & Tselekounis, Markos, 2020. "Optimal Reduction of Cartel Fines induced by the Settlement Procedure," MPRA Paper 99154, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Ana Maria Santacreu & Michael Sposi & Jing Zhang, 2021. "What Determines State Heterogeneity in Response to US Tariff Changes?," Working Papers 2021-007, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, revised 08 Mar 2023.
    9. Luca Grilli, 2005. "Internet start-ups access to the bank loan market: evidence from Italy," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(3), pages 293-305.
    10. Cox, Thomas L. & Briggs, Hugh, 1989. "Heteroscedastic Tobit Models: The Household Demand for Fresh Potatoes Revisited," Staff Papers 200482, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    11. Shawn W Ulrick & Mark D Williams, 2024. "“Multi-Product Critical Loss: Allowing for Varying Margins, Prices, and Quantities in the Candidate Antitrust Market”," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(1-2), pages 60-84.
    12. Beyene, Abebe D. & Mekonnen, Alemu & Bluffstone, Randall & Tesfaye, Yemiru, 2022. "Does Participatory Forest Management Increase Forest Resource Use to Cope with Shocks? Empirical Evidence from Ethiopia," EfD Discussion Paper 22-12, Environment for Development, University of Gothenburg.
    13. Awudu Abdulai & Wallace Huffman, 2014. "The Adoption and Impact of Soil and Water Conservation Technology: An Endogenous Switching Regression Application," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 90(1), pages 26-43.
    14. Eric, Van den Steen, 2002. "Skill or Luck? Biases of Rational Agents," Working papers 4255-02, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    15. Chen, Daniel L. & Levonyan, Vardges & Yeh, Susan, 2016. "Policies Affect Preferences: Evidence from Random Variation in Abortion Jurisprudence," IAST Working Papers 16-58, Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse (IAST).
    16. Maren Radeny & Elizaphan J. O. Rao & Maurice Juma Ogada & John W. Recha & Dawit Solomon, 2022. "Impacts of climate-smart crop varieties and livestock breeds on the food security of smallholder farmers in Kenya," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 14(6), pages 1511-1535, December.
    17. Tranos, Emmanouil & Incera, Andre Carrascal & Willis, George, 2022. "Using the web to predict regional trade flows: data extraction, modelling, and validation," OSF Preprints 9bu5z, Center for Open Science.
    18. Frederick Schauer & Richard Zeckhauser, 2010. "The Trouble with Cases," NBER Chapters, in: Regulation vs. Litigation: Perspectives from Economics and Law, pages 45-70, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Berger, Helge & Neugart, Michael, 2011. "Labor courts, nomination bias, and unemployment in Germany," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 659-673.
    20. Asmussen, Katherine E. & Mondal, Aupal & Bhat, Chandra R., 2022. "Adoption of partially automated vehicle technology features and impacts on vehicle miles of travel (VMT)," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 156-179.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:67:y:2025:i:2:d:10.1007_s11151-025-10020-6. 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.