IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Testing which proposed regulations need “competition-proofing”

Listed author(s):
  • Sean Lyons


    (Department of Economics, Trinity College)

When assessing the likely net impact of regulation, many jurisdictions test for specific effects on areas of concern, such as small businesses or the environment, as well as for more generalised costs and benefits. This paper considers how best to design a negative-clearance test for the competition effects of regulations. We start by examining the well-documented UK “competition filter”, which proves to have serious shortcomings. Important classes of potentially damaging measures will not trigger the UK filter, and we illustrate this by applying the filter to four controversial measures that are currently, or were recently, on the statute books in Ireland. Structural and other features of the UK filter that lead to these outcomes are identified. We then outline an alternative test structure that should reduce such “false negatives” while remaining practical to apply.

If 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.

File URL:
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Trinity College Dublin, Department of Economics in its series Trinity Economics Papers with number tep20020.

in new window

Length: 31 pages
Date of creation: Oct 2005
Handle: RePEc:tcd:tcduee:tep20020
Contact details of provider: Postal:
Trinity College, Dublin 2

Phone: (+ 353 1) 6081325
Fax: 6772503
Web page:

More information through EDIRC

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:tcd:tcduee:tep20020. 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: (Patricia Hughes)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.