Ken Heyer, Jun 19, 2012
The author argues for using the total welfare standard, rather than the more commonly employed consumer welfare standard. In doing so, Heyer responds to three broad objections that have been raised. One is that use of a total welfare standard conflicts with antitrust law, or at least with legal precedent. A second is that employing a total welfare standard would clearly be more costly for antitrust agencies than employing one or another flavor of a consumer welfare standard. A third is that the total welfare standard ignores important distributional considerations—considerations that are better treated under some form of consumer welfare standard. Each of these objections is evaluated, and ultimately found unpersuasive.
Featured News
Perkins Coie Adds Former DOJ Antitrust Leader as Partner in Washington
Jan 22, 2026 by
CPI
Ryanair Boss Dismisses Musk’s Buyout as Starlink Feud Escalates
Jan 22, 2026 by
CPI
Paramount Extends Warner Bros Bid as Netflix Rivalry Heats Up
Jan 22, 2026 by
CPI
South Korea Breaks New Ground With Landmark AI Law
Jan 22, 2026 by
CPI
NYDFS Warns Banks They Can’t Outsource Vendor Risk
Jan 22, 2026 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Recidivism
Jan 21, 2026 by
CPI
Recidivism, Multiple Offending, and Serial Offending in Antitrust
Jan 21, 2026 by
Gregory Werden
Antitrust Recidivism: Why Repeat Cases Appear, and Why True Reoffending Is Rare in the United States
Jan 21, 2026 by
Lisa M. Phelan, Megan S. Golden, Adrienne Irmer & Nina Worth
99 Antitrust Problems – Is Recidivism One?
Jan 21, 2026 by
Brian A. Ratner & Kartik S. Madiraju
Holding A Cat by the Tail: A View of Cartel Recidivism in U.S. Antitrust Enforcement
Jan 21, 2026 by
Mark Rosman & KaDee L. Ru