Introduction: Observations on the 2023 Merger Guidelines

Blair, Roger D.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11151-024-09969-7

2024-06-07

Review of Industrial Organization

Abstract:This is the introduction to a Special Issue on the 2023 Merger Guidelines.

economics,management

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The 2023 Merger Guidelines: A Post-Chicago and Neo-Brandeisian Integration

Steven C. Salop

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11151-024-09959-9

2024-04-10

Review of Industrial Organization

Abstract:This article is designed to explicate the somewhat misunderstood analysis in the 2023 Merger Guidelines (MGs) and situate the MGs in the context of the legal as well as economic environment in which they operate. The MGs refine economic analyses in previous MGs, renew emphasis on certain competitive concerns and approaches, and add several emerging new competitive issues. They also integrate certain goals of post-Chicago and Neo-Brandeisian approaches to merger analysis. The MGs integrate the economic analysis into the traditional legal structure of the "prima facie" and "rebuttal" evidentiary stages and place greater weight on avoiding false negatives over false positives in various places, which is a principal element in both post-Chicago and Neo-Brandeisian approaches. An important theme that runs through the 2023 MGs is that competitive effects analysis should not be limited to static competitive effects analysis of the immediate unilateral or coordinated price effects of a merger. They stress that the analysis should also account for the dynamic effects that result from the change in market structure that follows from the merger as well as the changes in the incentives of the firms. As in the seminal Spence-Dixit models, the entrant would rationally anticipate that the lower marginal costs of the merged firm could produce more intense post-entry price competition and a higher likelihood that the entry would be unprofitable. Thus, higher barriers to entry or expansion may result, which means that the merged firm's rebuttal burden of production under the sliding scale should be increased accordingly under the decision theory risk analysis that places greater weight on avoiding false negatives.

economics,management
Getting Merger Guidelines Right

Keith N. Hylton

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11151-024-09967-9

2024-05-21

Review of Industrial Organization

Abstract:This paper is on the new (2023) Merger Guidelines. It makes several arguments: First, that the Guidelines should be understood as existing in a political equilibrium. Second, that the new structural presumption of the Merger Guidelines– HHI = 1,800—is too strict, and that an economically reasonable revision in the structural presumption would have increased rather than decreased the threshold. Whereas the new Guidelines lowers the threshold to HHI 1,800 from HHI 2,500, an economically reasonable revision would have increased the threshold to HHI 3,200. I justify this argument using a bare-bones model of Cournot competition. Third, it seems unlikely, as an empirical matter, that merger enforcement under the existing Guidelines is socially desirable. Fourth, that federal merger enforcement raises serious constitutional issues–which were originally discussed in 1904—and that it may be time now, in view of the new Guidelines, to return to these foundational constitutional questions.

economics,management
Potential Competition and the 2023 Merger Guidelines

Richard J. Gilbert,A. Douglas Melamed

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11151-024-09964-y

2024-06-26

Review of Industrial Organization

Abstract:The 2023 Merger Guidelines devote a section to mergers that eliminate potential competition. This is an important contribution because agency guidelines have not discussed the subject in detail for almost 50 years. The new Guidelines follow the traditional distinction that has been upheld in the courts between a merger's effects on incumbent responses to perceived potential competition and the potential effects of actual entry. Antitrust enforcement should assess both possible aspects of potential competition in an integrated fashion because harm from a merger occurs not infrequently from the elimination of actual potential competition; and when the elimination of perceived potential competition has an effect, it often occurs along with and as a consequence of the elimination of actual potential competition. Economic studies suggest that the benefits of perceived potential competition are less than some courts have assumed and that the benefits of actual potential competition are greater. Rather than focusing solely on the probability of harm from the elimination of a potential entrant, antitrust enforcement should adopt a sliding scale that takes into account the magnitude of the benefits for consumers or suppliers if entry is successful. Mergers with potential and nascent competitors can be harmful even if the probability of actual entry absent the merger is small.

economics,management
The 2023 Merger Guidelines and The Role of Economics

Michael A. Salinger

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11151-024-09957-x

2024-05-09

Review of Industrial Organization

Abstract:Relying heavily on legal analysis, the 2023 Merger Guidelines argue for a fundamental shift in antitrust enforcement that places more emphasis on protecting competitors and less on protecting the beneficiaries of competition. It is up to courts, not economists, to ascertain whether this interpretation of antitrust law is correct. But economists can and should analyze the likely economic effects. Evidence that antitrust enforcement has permitted some markets to be overly concentrated justifies the tightening of horizontal merger enforcement that is signaled by these guidelines. Evaluating the elimination of double marginalization from vertical mergers as a part of an efficiency defense rather than as a primary economic effect reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of the economics of vertical mergers. At a minimum, these guidelines will further damage the reputation of the DOJ and FTC among competition policy enforcers in other countries. A potentially more serious cost will be if foreign competition authorities use these guidelines to justify enforcing their own laws to protect inefficient domestic firms against foreign competition.

economics,management
Illumina-GRAIL in Retrospect

Roger D. Blair,Christine Piette Durrance

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11151-024-09960-2

2024-05-09

Review of Industrial Organization

Abstract:In 2023, the Antitrust Agencies released updated Merger Guidelines. These Guidelines outline policies and procedures in enforcing § 7 of the Clayton Act as it relates to horizontal, vertical, and complementary mergers. In this paper, we consider the application of these guidelines to a recently challenged vertical merger: the Illumina-GRAIL merger. The FTC found the merger to be anticompetitive; and on appeal, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals largely agreed. While we show that the positions taken by the FTC are consistent with the Guidelines, we provide an economic analysis that reveals that these positions and the subsequent judicial decision are inconsistent with economic theory, fail to protect competition, and fail to promote consumer welfare. Consequently, the Merger Guidelines may deter procompetitive mergers and lead the Agencies astray in their enforcement efforts.

economics,management
Evolution of the Merger Guidelines: Is This Fox Too Clever by Half?

Carl Shapiro

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11151-024-09956-y

2024-04-07

Review of Industrial Organization

Abstract:The 2023 Merger Guidelines make some notable improvements over the 2010 Horizontal Merger Guidelines. They give greater emphasis to the idea that predicting the competitive effects of a proposed merger is inherently difficult and that to block a merger the government need only show a risk that the merger may substantially lessen competition – not that it will do so. They also give greater emphasis to dynamic competition and innovation – especially with regard to acquisitions of potential entrants – and they add useful material on multi-sided platforms. However, the treatment of market definition in the 2023 Merger Guidelines may weaken horizontal merger enforcement by demoting the role of the "hypothetical monopolist test," which is used to define markets for the purpose of measuring market shares, and by removing extensive material from prior guidelines that explained why market shares measured in narrower markets tend to be more informative than market shares measured in broader markets. The 2023 Merger Guidelines lower the market concentration thresholds that trigger a presumption by the antitrust enforcement agencies that a merger may substantially lessen competition, but the enforcement data suggest that change will have little effect in practice. The 2023 Merger Guidelines also may lead to less effective deterrence of harmful mergers because they are not well targeted at the mergers that are most likely to substantially lessen competition. One cannot prioritize everything.

economics,management
The 2023 Merger Guidelines and Market Definition: Doubling Down or Folding?

Louis Kaplow

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11151-024-09958-w

2024-06-19

Review of Industrial Organization

Abstract:Disputes about market definition are often regarded to be dispositive of litigated merger cases. Yet the market definition process is illogical—circular at best but actually far worse because it distorts or discards much of the available information on a proposed merger's effects. Against this background, the 2023 Merger Guidelines present a paradox. On one hand, they double down on market definition through what may be their most important change: tightening and augmenting the so-called structural presumption, under which high market shares are sufficient to presumptively block a merger. The importance of market definition is thereby elevated because one cannot know what market shares to use unless a market is defined. On the other hand, the 2023 Merger Guidelines' longest segment—on market definition and market shares—demotes the familiar methods (including the hypothetical monopolist test) and expresses a clear preference for the use of direct evidence on a proposed merger's effects. But direct evidence, as is well known, is a substitute for market definition, not a way to define a market in which market shares can then be calculated. This change thus disables the structural presumption. The analysis here identifies and deepens the resulting conundrum by elaborating the disconnect between the proper economic analysis of mergers and the market definition paradigm.

economics,management
The Year in Review: Economics at the Antitrust Division 2023–2024

Athey, Susan,Gross, Alex,Marinescu, Ioana,Shanefelter, Jennifer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11151-024-09998-2

2024-11-05

Review of Industrial Organization

Abstract:The publication of the 2023 Merger Guidelines (MG) by the DOJ and FTC marked a significant event in the expanding influence of economics on public guidance in antitrust. The economic frameworks that are outlined in the MG are not limited to purely horizontal or vertical mergers. The MG more explicitly embrace an approach of assessing risk of harm to competition, which in turn supports the consideration of dynamic theories such as entrenchment or expansion of market power. The MG also elaborate on mergers that involve multi-product firms, platforms, and labor market competition. During this eventful year, the Division also successfully blocked JetBlue's proposed acquisition of Spirit and obtained conduct relief to protect a specific type of labor market – chicken growers – from anticompetitive conduct by processors who compete for their services.

economics,management
A Counterfactual Analysis of Amazon's Acquisitions Under the 2023 Merger Guidelines

Edward A. Snyder,Ian Simmons,Sergei Zaslavsky

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11151-024-09965-x

2024-07-25

Review of Industrial Organization

Abstract:The fact that Amazon was allowed to acquire hundreds of companies as it rose to become the fourth most valuable U.S. company in terms of market capitalization and a leader in three lines of business has been viewed by some as damning evidence of underenforcement by the United States antitrust authorities. In this article we ask the obvious question: If the 2023 Guidelines had been in place instead of prior guidelines, what effects would they have had on Amazon's development? To provide an answer, we identify relevant changes in the guidelines and then select for review a subset of Amazon's 280 acquisitions over the period 1998 to 2022. In our counterfactual, we analyze five horizontal acquisitions, four vertical acquisitions, and two sets of serial acquisitions . We find that the 2023 Guidelines would have broadened the bases for potential challenges and thereby would have increased the likelihood that Amazon would have faced greater resistance from antitrust authorities. The lack of safe harbors, the plasticity of individual Guidelines, and the optionality to challenge mergers under alternative theories would have exposed most of Amazon's acquisitions to challenge. The lack of meaningful guidance about which individual transactions would have been challenged suggests that going forward enforcer discretion will play a yet larger role. Regarding Amazon's serial acquisitions of nearly one hundred technology firms, we find that the 2023 Guidelines would have provided multiple rationales for intervention. Therein lies a weakness in the Guidelines and in antitrust policy: the lack of a framework for assessing both the anticompetitive and procompetitive effects of such acquisitions in high-tech industries.

economics,management
The proposal for an EU Regulation on foreign subsidies distorting the internal market: how will it impact corporate mergers and acquisitions?

Jan Blockx

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3936624

2021-01-01

SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract:The European Commission’s proposal for an EU Regulation on foreign subsidies distorting the internal market was provoked by the failure to reach international agreement on the regulation of foreign subsidies and the increased amount of Chinese investment in the EU. The proposal allows the Commission to review foreign subsidies and requires notification of such subsidies in the context of concentrations and public procurement procedures. While explicitly aimed at levelling the playing field, the notification regime for concentrations may disadvantage investors which received foreign subsidies compared to those which benefited from State aid from EU Member States. By taking into account “financial contributions” from third countries rather than foreign subsidies, the second notification threshold may cast its net wider than required. Several open questions remain on the application of the Proposed Regulation, if adopted: in terms of its interaction with the EU merger control regime, the ability of the Commission to enforce it, the meaning of several terms, and the procedures for the review.
Merger Control in a Globalized Economy: A Review of Supor Case

Xiaorong Li

2010-01-01

Abstract:Merger control is one of the cornerstones of competition policy, aiming at protecting competition and economics efficiency. Based on a recent merger case, the paper presents a general economic analysis of merger control. And some challenges are discussed considering the merger control policy in a globalized economics environment. The last section analyzes the current features of the mergers with or acquisitions of domestic firms by the foreign companies, and finally some basic principles are recommended at the end of the paper.
Which Mergers Should the European Commission Review under the Digital Markets Act?

Christophe Carugati

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4366703

2023-01-01

SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract:Large digital platforms acquired 1149 firms in various economic sectors between 1987 and July 2022. The European Commission reviewed only 21 of these mergers as most did not meet the European Union merger control turnover threshold. This suggests under-enforcement, with some problematic mergers escaping merger review and thus posing competition risks.The EU Digital Markets Act, which entered into force in November 2022, imposes obligations on firms that are considered ‘gatekeepers’ in relation to some core platform services, such as online search engines. In particular, these firms must now inform the Commission of all their intended acquisitions. This, in combination with Commission guidance on referrals by EU national competition authorities of mergers for review, should ensure more merger reviews in the digital sector.Current European Commission guidance on referring cases for merger review is flexible but impractical as it relies on theories of harm rather than clear and objective criteria. Without clarification, there could be over-enforcement in which unproblematic mergers are reviewed, human resources are allocated inefficiently and legal uncertainty persists.The Commission should issue new guidance on which digital mergers are likely to be problematic, thus triggering referral for merger review. This is likely to be the case when the target’s user base overlaps with that of the acquirer, when the target is a leader in a future critical market and when the target is active in a core platform service.
Competition Policy in Media and Content Industry: Case Studies and Implications for Regulators

Jan R. Kim,Sungjin Cho

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1226508x.2024.2433279

2024-11-30

Global Economic Review

Abstract:This article provides an overview of some of the most high-profile mergers between major media and content corporations, both in domestic and international scope. After reviewing the market situation at the time of each merger and the concerns around potentially anti-competitive consequences, we examine the conditions under which the proposed mergers were approved. In doing so, we summarise the views competition authorities had about the proposed mergers and draw some implications for regulators and potential applicants in future mergers in the media and content industry.

economics
Essays on Mergers and Acquisitions.

Di Li

2012-01-01

Abstract:. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii
"Recent Trends in Mergers and Acquisitions," with a special focus on the sub-topics "Interplay Between Corporate M&A and IPR Laws" and "Corporate M&A and the Digital Economy."

Nageshwar Singh -

DOI: https://doi.org/10.36948/ijfmr.2024.v06i01.12100

2024-01-18

International Journal For Multidisciplinary Research

Abstract:Mergers and Acquisitions (M&A) have long been a dynamic and ever-evolving facet of the corporate landscape, with a profound impact on the global business environment. The interaction between Corporate M&A and IPR Laws represents a complex and multifaceted landscape. As businesses continue to recognize the value of intellectual property, transactions involving patents, trademarks, copyrights, and trade secrets have gained prominence. Recent trends reveal a shifting landscape where IPR considerations are becoming increasingly central to M&A strategies. The abstract discusses how IPR due diligence, valuation, and protection have become integral components of M&A deals. It examines the legal, economic, and strategic implications of the interplay between M&A and IPR, emphasizing the need for meticulous analysis and strategic planning in this domain. In tandem, the Digital Economy has emerged as a transformative force in the corporate world. The second sub-topic underscores how Corporate M&A is adapting to the digital age. With the proliferation of technology companies, the digital transformation of traditional industries, and the rise of e-commerce, M&A activity is characterized by a surge in deals related to digital assets, data-driven acquisitions, and disruptive technologies. This abstract analyzes the challenges and opportunities presented by this new landscape, emphasizing the importance of digital due diligence, regulatory compliance, and the integration of tech-savvy talent. Additionally, it explores how emerging digital business models, such as platform-based marketplaces and blockchain technologies, are shaping M&A strategies.
Digital Platform Ecosystems and Conglomerate Mergers: A Review of the Brazilian Experience

Nicolo Zingales,Bruno Renzetti

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4264806

2021-01-01

SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract:This paper highlights some of the key challenges for the Brazilian merger control regime in dealing with mergers involving digital platform ecosystems (DPEs). After a quick introduction to DPEs, we illustrate how conglomerate effects that are raised by such mergers remain largely unaddressed in the current landscape for merger control in Brazil. The paper is divided in four sections. First, we introduce the reader to the framework for merger control in Brazil. Second, we identify the possible theories of harm related to conglomerate mergers, and elaborate on the way in which their application may be affected by the context of DPEs. Third, we conduct a review of previous mergers involving DPEs in Brazil, aiming to identify the theories of harm employed (and those that could have been explored) in each case. Fourth and finally, we summarize and results and suggest adaptations to the current regime, advancing proposals for a more consistent and predictable analysis.
Introduction to the special issue "China and the global economy"

Peter H. Egger,Jie Li,Miaojie Yu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/roie.12725

IF: 1.234

2024-01-18

Review of International Economics

Abstract:This is the introduction to the Special Issue on "China and the global economy". It provides a brief overview of the articles it contains.

economics
Introduction to special section on global trading system with the New American administration: China, United States and Europe

K. C. Fung

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14765284.2021.1960138

2021-07-03

Journal of Chinese Economic and Business Studies

Abstract:In this Introduction to the Special IIssue on Global trading system with the New American Administration: China, United States and Europe, three excellent papers are presented. The first paper highlights the central and eastern European countries' views on their relationships with China in the era of the pandemic. The second paper by Gao and Shaffer (forthcoming) presents a detailed legal discussion on the global value chains, including new development in intellectual property rights laws in China. The third paper by Wen (forthcoming) proposes that China should continue to participate in the global trading system and further reduce unnecessary government interventions in trade, investment and innovation. Finally, the Introduction highlights various important papers published by this Journal that are relevant to the theme. For example, Fung, Aminian, Fu and Tung (2018) and Fung, Amininian, Fu, Rhee and Tung (2020) are the first to introduce a formal, analytical digital firm model in the discussions of U.S.-China relations. Other outstanding papers include Lau (2019a), Cheng, hitten and Hua (2019), Garcia Herrero (2019) and Lin and Wang (forthcoming), all published in this Journal.
Effects of the 2010 Horizontal Merger Guidelines on Merger Review: Based on Ten Years of Practical Experience

Dennis W. Carlton,Mark A. Israel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11151-020-09798-4

2020-11-10

Review of Industrial Organization

Abstract:We assess how the 2010 Merger Guidelines have been applied by agencies and courts. We conclude that:

economics,management
The Pre-Deal Phase of Mergers and Acquisitions: A Review and Research Agenda

Xena Welch,Stevo Pavićević,Thomas Keil,Tomi Laamanen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206319886908

IF: 13.5

2019-11-12

Journal of Management

Abstract:Despite the long-standing research interest in the pre-deal phase of mergers and acquisitions, many important questions remain unanswered. We review and synthesize the extensive but rather fragmented research on this topic area in the fields of management, finance, accounting, and economics. We organize our review according to six themes, that is, deal initiation, target selection, bidding and negotiation, valuation and financing, announcement, and closure, which represent the main categories of activities performed during the pre-deal phase. Our review shows that most of the existing research relies on a rather high-level, simplified, and static conception of the pre-deal phase. On the basis of our review, we put forward a research agenda that calls for a more granular examination of individual activities and decisions, a more comprehensive analysis of the interplay among the different actors involved in the pre-deal phase, a better understanding of the role of the temporal dynamics, and the extension of the theoretical base from variance-based to process-based theorizing.

management,business,psychology, applied

Introduction: Observations on the 2023 Merger Guidelines

The 2023 Merger Guidelines: A Post-Chicago and Neo-Brandeisian Integration

Getting Merger Guidelines Right

Potential Competition and the 2023 Merger Guidelines

The 2023 Merger Guidelines and The Role of Economics

Illumina-GRAIL in Retrospect

Evolution of the Merger Guidelines: Is This Fox Too Clever by Half?

The 2023 Merger Guidelines and Market Definition: Doubling Down or Folding?

The Year in Review: Economics at the Antitrust Division 2023–2024

A Counterfactual Analysis of Amazon's Acquisitions Under the 2023 Merger Guidelines

The proposal for an EU Regulation on foreign subsidies distorting the internal market: how will it impact corporate mergers and acquisitions?

Merger Control in a Globalized Economy: A Review of Supor Case

Which Mergers Should the European Commission Review under the Digital Markets Act?

Competition Policy in Media and Content Industry: Case Studies and Implications for Regulators

Essays on Mergers and Acquisitions.

"Recent Trends in Mergers and Acquisitions," with a special focus on the sub-topics "Interplay Between Corporate M&A and IPR Laws" and "Corporate M&A and the Digital Economy."

Digital Platform Ecosystems and Conglomerate Mergers: A Review of the Brazilian Experience

Introduction to the special issue "China and the global economy"

Introduction to special section on global trading system with the New American administration: China, United States and Europe

Effects of the 2010 Horizontal Merger Guidelines on Merger Review: Based on Ten Years of Practical Experience

The Pre-Deal Phase of Mergers and Acquisitions: A Review and Research Agenda