|
||||
|
||||
Private v. Public Antitrust Enforcement: A Strategic Analysis
R. Preston McAfee California Institute of Technology - Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences Hugo M. Mialon Emory University - Department of Economics Sue H. Mialon Emory University Journal of Public Economics, Forthcoming Emory Law and Economics Research Paper No. 05-20 Emory Public Law Research Paper No. 06-4 Abstract: We compare private and public enforcement of the antitrust laws in a simple strategic model of antitrust violation and lawsuit. The model highlights the tradeoff that private firms are initially more likely than the government to be informed about antitrust violations, but are also more likely to use the antitrust laws strategically, to the disadvantage of consumers. Assuming coupled private damages, if the court is sufficiently accurate, adding private enforcement to public enforcement always increases social welfare, while if the court is less accurate, it increases welfare only if the government is sufficiently inefficient in litigation. Pure private enforcement is never strictly optimal. Public enforcement can achieve the social optimum with a fee for public lawsuit that induces efficient information revelation. Private enforcement can also achieve the social optimum with private damages that are efficiently multiplied and decoupled.
Keywords: Private and Public Enforcement, Antitrust Laws, Strategic Abuse, Free-riding, Information Revelation, Social Welfare JEL Classifications: L44, H11, H41, K21, D82 Working Paper SeriesDate posted: August 11, 2005 ; Last revised: May 11, 2008Suggested CitationContact Information
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
© 2010 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
FAQ
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Copyright
This page was served by apollo5b in 0.375 seconds.