IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/iuiwop/0644.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Investment Liberalization - Why a Restrictive Cross-Border Merger Policy can be Counterproductive

Author

Listed:

Abstract

Investment liberalizing countries are often concerned that cross-border mergers & acquisitions, in contrast to greenfield investments, might have an adverse effect on domestic firms and consumers. However, given that domestic assets are sufficiently scarce, we identify a preemption effect and an asset complementarity effect, which imply that the acquisition price is substantially higher than the domestic seller's profits. Moreover, we show that for the acquisition to take place, the MNE must be sufficiently efficient when using the domestic assets, otherwise rivals will expand their business, thereby making the acquisition unprofitable. Consequently, restricting cross-border M&As may also hurt consumers.

Suggested Citation

  • Norbäck, Pehr-Johan & Persson, Lars, 2005. "Investment Liberalization - Why a Restrictive Cross-Border Merger Policy can be Counterproductive," Working Paper Series 644, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:hhs:iuiwop:0644
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ifn.se/Wfiles/wp/WP644.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. d'Aspremont, Claude & Jacquemin, Alexis, 1988. "Cooperative and Noncooperative R&D in Duopoly with Spillovers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(5), pages 1133-1137, December.
    2. Norbäck, Pehr-Johan & Persson, Lars, 2001. "Investment Liberalization - Who Benefits from Cross-Border Mergers & Acquisitions?," Working Paper Series 569, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    3. Neary, J Peter, 2002. "Foreign Competition and Wage Inequality," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10(4), pages 680-693, November.
    4. Leahy, Dermot & Neary, J Peter, 1997. "Public Policy towards R&D in Oligopolistic Industries," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(4), pages 642-662, September.
    5. Horn, Henrik & Persson, Lars, 2001. "Endogenous mergers in concentrated markets," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(8), pages 1213-1244, September.
    6. Fridolfsson, Sven-Olof & Stennek, Johan, 1999. "Why Mergers Reduce Profits, and Raise Share Prices," Working Paper Series 511, Research Institute of Industrial Economics, revised 03 Dec 2001.
    7. Morton I. Kamien & Israel Zang, 1987. "The Limits of Monopolization Through Acquisition," Discussion Papers 754, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    8. J. Peter Neary, 2007. "Cross-Border Mergers as Instruments of Comparative Advantage," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 74(4), pages 1229-1257.
    9. Ann E. Harrison & Brian J. Aitken, 1999. "Do Domestic Firms Benefit from Direct Foreign Investment? Evidence from Venezuela," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(3), pages 605-618, June.
    10. Robert E. Lipsey, 2000. "Interpreting Developed Countries' Foreign Direct Investment," NBER Working Papers 7810, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. James R. Markusen, 1995. "The Boundaries of Multinational Enterprises and the Theory of International Trade," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 169-189, Spring.
    12. Kjell Erik Lommerud & Odd Rune Straume & Lars Sørgard, 2006. "National versus international mergers in unionized oligopoly," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(1), pages 212-233, March.
    13. Horn, Henrik & Persson, Lars, 2001. "The equilibrium ownership of an international oligopoly," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 307-333, April.
    14. Perry, Martin K & Porter, Robert H, 1985. "Oligopoly and the Incentive for Horizontal Merger," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(1), pages 219-227, March.
    15. repec:hhs:iuiwop:511 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Rod Falvey, 1998. "Mergers in Open Economies," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(8), pages 1061-1076, November.
    17. Keith Head & John Ries, 1997. "International Mergers and Welfare under Decentralized Competition Policy," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 30(4), pages 1104-1123, November.
    18. Norbäck, Pehr-Johan & Persson, Lars, 2002. "Investment Liberalization - Who Benefits from Cross Border Mergers," CEPR Discussion Papers 3166, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    19. Mattoo, Aaditya & Olarreaga, Marcelo & Saggi, Kamal, 2004. "Mode of foreign entry, technology transfer, and FDI policy," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 95-111, October.
    20. James R. Markusen, 1997. "Trade versus Investment Liberalization," NBER Working Papers 6231, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    21. Pehr-Johan Norbäck & Lars Persson, 2005. "Privatization Policy in an International Oligopoly," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 72(288), pages 635-653, November.
    22. Mikhail Klimenko & Kamal Saggi, 2007. "Technical compatibility and the mode of foreign entry with network externalities," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 40(1), pages 176-206, February.
    23. Morton I. Kamien & Israel Zang, 1990. "The Limits of Monopolization Through Acquisition," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 105(2), pages 465-499.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Investment Liberalization; Mergers & Acquisitions; Development; Ownership;

    JEL classification:

    • F23 - International Economics - - International Factor Movements and International Business - - - Multinational Firms; International Business
    • K21 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Antitrust Law
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • O12 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Microeconomic Analyses of Economic Development

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:hhs:iuiwop:0644. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Elisabeth Gustafsson). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/iuiiise.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.