Discovering the Miracle of Large Numbers of Antitrust Investigations in Russia: The Role of Competition Authority Incentives

S. Avdasheva, D. Tsytsulina, S. Golovanova, E. Sidorova
{"title":"Discovering the Miracle of Large Numbers of Antitrust Investigations in Russia: The Role of Competition Authority Incentives","authors":"S. Avdasheva, D. Tsytsulina, S. Golovanova, E. Sidorova","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2588989","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Many antitrust investigations in Russia continue to present a challenge for the assessment of competition policy and international enforcement ratings. On the one hand, many infringement decisions may be interpreted as an indicator of high enforcement efforts in the context of rigid competition restrictions and the significant related harm to social welfare. On the other hand, many investigations proceed under poor legal and economic standards; therefore, the impact of decisions and remedies on competition is questionable. In fact, large number of investigations may indicate the ineffectiveness of antitrust enforcement. The article explains the possible effects of antitrust enforcement in Russia. Using a unique dataset of the appeals of infringement decisions from 2008-2012, we classify the investigated cases according to their potential impact on competition. A case-level analysis reveals that the majority of cases would never be investigated under an appropriate understanding of the goals of antitrust enforcement, restrictions on competition and basic cost-benefit assessments of agency activity. There are diverse explanations for the distorted structure of enforcement, including the incompleteness and imperfection of sector-specific regulations, rules concerning citizen complaints against the executive authorities and the incentives of competition authorities. Our analysis shows that competition agencies tend to pay more attention to the investigation of cases, which requires less input and, at the same time, results in infringement decisions with a lower probability of being annulled","PeriodicalId":345107,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Antitrust (Topic)","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSN: Antitrust (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2588989","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Many antitrust investigations in Russia continue to present a challenge for the assessment of competition policy and international enforcement ratings. On the one hand, many infringement decisions may be interpreted as an indicator of high enforcement efforts in the context of rigid competition restrictions and the significant related harm to social welfare. On the other hand, many investigations proceed under poor legal and economic standards; therefore, the impact of decisions and remedies on competition is questionable. In fact, large number of investigations may indicate the ineffectiveness of antitrust enforcement. The article explains the possible effects of antitrust enforcement in Russia. Using a unique dataset of the appeals of infringement decisions from 2008-2012, we classify the investigated cases according to their potential impact on competition. A case-level analysis reveals that the majority of cases would never be investigated under an appropriate understanding of the goals of antitrust enforcement, restrictions on competition and basic cost-benefit assessments of agency activity. There are diverse explanations for the distorted structure of enforcement, including the incompleteness and imperfection of sector-specific regulations, rules concerning citizen complaints against the executive authorities and the incentives of competition authorities. Our analysis shows that competition agencies tend to pay more attention to the investigation of cases, which requires less input and, at the same time, results in infringement decisions with a lower probability of being annulled
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
发现俄罗斯大量反垄断调查的奇迹:竞争管理机构激励的作用
俄罗斯的许多反垄断调查继续对竞争政策和国际执法评级的评估提出挑战。一方面,在严格的竞争限制和对社会福利的重大相关损害的背景下,许多侵权判决可能被解释为高度执法力度的指标。另一方面,许多调查是在糟糕的法律和经济标准下进行的;因此,决定和救济对竞争的影响是值得怀疑的。事实上,大量的调查可能表明反垄断执法的无效。这篇文章解释了俄罗斯反垄断执法可能产生的影响。利用2008年至2012年的侵权裁决上诉的独特数据集,我们根据其对竞争的潜在影响对调查案件进行了分类。个案层面的分析表明,如果对反垄断执法的目标、对竞争的限制和对机构活动的基本成本效益评估有适当的了解,大多数案件永远不会得到调查。对执法结构扭曲的解释多种多样,包括部门特定规定的不完整和不完善、有关公民对行政当局投诉的规则以及竞争当局的激励措施。我们的分析表明,竞争机构往往更关注案件的调查,这需要较少的投入,同时也导致侵权判决被撤销的可能性较低
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Can Collusion Promote Sustainable Consumption and Production? Private Enforcement of EU Competition Law: A Comparison with, and Lessons from, the US Worlds Colliding: Competition Policy and Bankruptcy Asset Sales The Passing-On of Price Overcharges in European Competition Damages Actions: A Matter of Causation and an Issue of Policy How to Fix Unreasonable Merger Regulation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1