IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/tuiedp/343557.html

Strategic compliance under the Digital Markets Act: A game-theoretic analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Hey, Florian
  • Budzinski, Oliver

Abstract

We develop a sequential game-theoretic model to analyze the compliance incentives of digital gatekeepers under the European Union's Digital Markets Act (DMA). A gatekeeper chooses between full compliance and strategic compliance - a strategy of tactical, superficially lawful implementation that preserves a larger share of monopoly rents. The European Commission decides whether to accept the gatekeeper's compliance or initiate enforcement proceedings. Using backward induction, we show that in high-impact markets, the gatekeeper's equilibrium strategy is strategic compliance, investing in legal complexity to deter enforcement. In low-impact markets, full compliance is the equilibrium outcome. We extend the base model by endogenizing the Commission's enforcement incentives, modeled as increasing in the fine imposed, and derive conditions under which raising fines may paradoxically fail to induce full compliance. The model contributes to an emerging literature on regulatory compliance in digital markets and identifies the negotiation-oriented nature of DMA enforcement as a key determinant of strategic gatekeeper behavior.

Suggested Citation

  • Hey, Florian & Budzinski, Oliver, 2026. "Strategic compliance under the Digital Markets Act: A game-theoretic analysis," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 215, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:tuiedp:343557
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/343557/1/1982676825.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Roland Kirstein, 2014. "Doping, the Inspection Game, and Bayesian Enforcement," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 15(4), pages 385-409, August.
    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. Wolfgang Maennig & Viktoria C. E. Schumann, 2022. "Prevention Effect of News Shocks in Anti-Doping Policies," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 23(4), pages 431-459, May.
    2. Berno Buechel & Eike Emrich & Stefanie Pohlkamp, 2016. "Nobody’s Innocent," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 17(8), pages 767-789, December.
    3. Nourinejad, Mehdi & Gandomi, Amir & Roorda, Matthew J., 2020. "Illegal parking and optimal enforcement policies with search friction," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    4. Anthony Rossiter & Susan M Hester, 2017. "Designing Biosecurity Inspection Regimes to Account for Stakeholder Incentives: An Inspection Game Approach," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 93(301), pages 277-301, June.
    5. Guy Elaad & Artyom Jelnov, 2018. "Cheating in a contest with strategic inspection," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 85(3), pages 375-387, October.
    6. Jelnov, Artyom & Tauman, Yair & Zeckhauser, Richard, 2017. "Attacking the unknown weapons of a potential bomb builder: The impact of intelligence on the strategic interaction," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 177-189.
    7. Andreas Goetsch & Christian Salzmann, 2018. "The Role of Ex Post Audits in Doping Enforcement," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 19(7), pages 960-976, October.
    8. David Hirschmann, 2017. "May Increasing Doping Sanctions Discourage Entry to the Competition?," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 18(7), pages 720-736, October.
    9. Lihi Dery & Dror Hermel & Artyom Jelnov, 2021. "Cheating in Ranking Systems," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 58(2), pages 303-320, March.
    10. Widodo, Erwin & Rochmadhan, Oryza Akbar & Lukmandono, & Januardi,, 2022. "Modeling Bayesian inspection game for non-performing loan problems," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 9(C).
    11. Daniel Westmattelmann & Marius Sprenger & Sascha Hokamp & Gerhard Schewe, 2020. "Money matters: The impact of prize money on doping behaviour," Sport Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(4), pages 688-703, October.
    12. Dimant, Eugen & Deutscher, Christian, 2014. "The Economics of Corruption in Sports – The Special Case of Doping," MPRA Paper 60566, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Music, Kasim & Salzmann, Christian, 2020. "Why biased agencies could be the best monitors," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    14. Wladimir Andreff, 2022. "Oldies but Goldies! Twenty Years After, the Journal of Sports Economics at a Crossroads?," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 23(6), pages 659-727, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • K20 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - General
    • K21 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Antitrust Law
    • L40 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - General
    • L51 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy - - - Economics of Regulation
    • L86 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Information and Internet Services; Computer Software
    • M21 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Economics - - - Business Economics

    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:zbw:tuiedp:343557. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ivtuide.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.