Posted by D. Daniel Sokol
Keith Hylton (BU) and Haizhen Lin (Indiana University) have posted Innovation and Optimal Punishment, with Antitrust Applications
ABSTRACT: This paper modifies the optimal penalty analysis by incorporating investment incentives with external benefits. In the models examined, the recommendation that the optimal penalty should internalize the marginal social harm is no longer valid as a general rule. We focus on antitrust applications. In light of the benefits from innovation, the optimal policy will punish monopolizing firms more leniently than suggested in the standard static model. It may be optimal not to punish the monopolizing firm at all, or to reward the firm rather than punish it. We examine the precise balance between penalty and reward in the optimal punishment scheme.
Featured News
Google ExecAdmitted Firm’s Goal Was to “Crush” Digital Ad Rivals, According to Court Docs
Sep 11, 2024 by
CPI
Former Michigan Football Stars File $50 Million Antitrust Lawsuit Against NCAA
Sep 11, 2024 by
CPI
Oasis Fans Could Be in Line for Ticket Refunds Amid Antitrust Concerns
Sep 11, 2024 by
CPI
FCC Chair Calls for More Competition to SpaceX’s Starlink Network
Sep 11, 2024 by
CPI
Singapore Salon Director Jailed for Contempt in Consumer Protection Case
Sep 11, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Canada & Mexico
Sep 3, 2024 by
CPI
Competitive Convergence: Mexico’s 30-Year Quest for Antitrust Parity with its Northern Neighbor
Sep 3, 2024 by
CPI
Competition and Digital Markets in North America: A Comparative Study of Antitrust Investigations in Mexico and the United States
Sep 3, 2024 by
CPI
Recent Antitrust Development in Mexico: COFECE’s Preliminary Report on Amazon and Mercado Libre
Sep 3, 2024 by
CPI
The Cost of Making COFECE Disappear
Sep 3, 2024 by
CPI