|
||||
|
||||
Excluding Ringleaders from Leniency ProgramsJesko HerreUniversity of Cologne Wanda MimraETH Zürich - CER-ETH - Center of Economic Research at ETH Zurich Alexander RaschUniversity of Cologne April 1, 2012 Abstract: We analyze the impact of ringleader discrimination in leniency programs on the sustainability of collusion. An important role of leniency is to elicit cartel members’ evidence about collusive activity in order to increase the probability of convicting the cartel. We find that ringleader discrimination does not play a role when the ringleader’s relative amount of evidence is high as the collusive agreement will specify and compensate the ringleader to never blow the whistle in any case whereas ringleader discrimination has a pro-collusive (deterring) effect when the ringleader’s relative evidence is moderate (low). Furthermore, ringleader discrimination may deter collusion if the investigation probability of the antitrust authority is sufficiently high but not too high. In this case, the effect of asymmetry from exclusion — even if profits are redistributed — is stronger than the loss of ringleader evidence for conviction.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 33 Keywords: Cartel, collusion, leniency program, ringleader, whistle-blowing JEL Classification: L40, L41 working papers seriesDate posted: February 14, 2009 ; Last revised: April 26, 2012Suggested CitationContact Information
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
FAQ
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Copyright
This page was processed by apollo4 in 0.672 seconds