|
Home Ā» News Articles Ā» Hal Singer Answers Questions from House Subcommittee on Antitrust

Services

Econ One’s expert economists have experience across a wide variety of services including antitrust, class certification, damages, financial markets and securities, intellectual property, international arbitration, labor and employment, and valuation and financial analysis.

Resources

Econ One’s resources including blogs, cases, news, and more provide a collection of materials from Econ One’s experts.

News
Get an Inside look at Economics with the experts.
Hal Singer answers questions
March 30, 2020

Hal Singer Answers Questions from House Subcommittee on Antitrust

At the invitation of the House Subcommittee on Antitrust, Econ Oneā€™s managing director Hal Singer submitted answersĀ to questions about the scope of antitrust inĀ policing anticompetitive conduct in the digital marketplace. In particular, the Subcommittee asked Dr. Singer three questions: (1) Whether existing antitrust laws areĀ adequate to address any potentially anticompetitive conduct; (2) Whether existing laws are sufficient to address potentially anticompetitive vertical and conglomerate mergers, serial acquisitions data acquisitions, or acquisitions of potential competitors; and (3)Ā Whether the institutional structure of antitrust enforcement is adequate to promote the robust enforcement of antitrust laws. Dr. Singer explained thatĀ antitrust is not a perfect solution for addressing certain categories of potentially anticompetitive conduct, particularly the problem of self-preferencing by the dominant tech platforms. He also described whyĀ existing antitrust laws are inadequate at assessing and anticipating the cumulative harm of a series of seemingly inconsequential mergers.Ā With regard to remedies, he advocated for theĀ Federal Trade Commission or some new digital agency to be authorized to enforce a new nondiscrimination standard, and for merger statutes to be refined to make vertical acquisitions under certain fact patters (such as by dominant platforms) to be presumptively illegal, thereby shifting the burden of proof onto the merger proponents.

 

 

Share this Article
Latest Related Resources and Insights