|
||||
|
||||
Rethinking Merger EfficienciesDaniel A. CraneUniversity of Michigan Law School March 4, 2011 Michigan Law Review, Vol. 110, 2011 University of Michigan Law & Econ, Empirical Legal Studies Center Paper No. 11-001 University of Michigan Public Law Working Paper No. 230 Abstract: The two leading merger systems - those of the United States and the European Union - treat the potential benefits and risks of mergers asymmetrically. Both systems require considerably greater proof of efficiencies than they do of potential harms if the efficiencies are to offset concerns over the accumulation or exercise of market power. The implicit asymmetry principle has important systemic effects for merger control. Not only does it stand in the way of some socially desirable mergers, but it may indirectly facilitate the clearance of some socially undesirable mergers. Neither system explicitly justifies this asymmetry and none of the plausible justifications is normatively supportable. The most likely positive explanations for the asymmetry stem from institutional frictions between the lawyer and economist classes in the antitrust agencies, self-preservationist biases by antitrust regulators, and misplaced ideological opposition to industrial concentration. In principle, the probability-adjusted net present value of merger risks should be treated symmetrically with the probability-adjusted net present value of merger efficiencies.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 54 Keywords: Merger Efficiencies, United States, European Union, Clayton Act JEL Classification: K21 Accepted Paper SeriesDate posted: March 5, 2011Suggested CitationContact Information
|
|
|||||||||||||||
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
FAQ
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Copyright
This page was processed by apollo5 in 0.938 seconds