Private Versus Public Enforcement of Fines
38 Pages Posted: 25 Jun 2004 Last revised: 5 Dec 2022
Date Written: April 1979
Abstract
The present paper analyzes the competitive, monopolistic, and public enforcement of fines allowing for the costs of enforcement to differ by the choice of the enforcer. There are a number of reasons to expect such differences. First, the benefits from coordinating enforcement -- for example, avoiding duplication of investigative effort and exploiting economies of scale in information processing -- are obtained under public enforcement and monopolistic enforcement, but not under competitive enforcement. Second, the profit motive might be imagined to lead to lower costs under either form of private enforcement relative to public enforcement. Third, when the revenue from fines under public enforcement is not sufficient to finance enforcement costs, there may be a deadweight burden incurred in making up the deficit from other sources. Conversely, if the fine revenue exceeds enforcement costs, the effective cost of enforcement would be lower. On balance, these considerations suggest that monopolistic enforcement may be cheaper than competitive enforcement, but that public enforcement could be more or less expensive than private enforcement.
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?
Recommended Papers
-
Property Rules Versus Liability Rules
By Louis Kaplow and Steven Shavell
-
A Model of the Socially Optimal Use of Liability and Regulation
-
On the Superiority of Corrective Taxes to Quantity Regulation
By Louis Kaplow and Steven Shavell
-
On the Superiority of Corrective Taxes to Quantity Regulation
By Louis Kaplow and Steven Shavell
-
Decoupling Liability: Optimal Incentives for Care and Litigation
By A. Mitchell Polinsky and Yeon-koo Che
-
By Paul Mensink