This presentation by John E. Kwoka, Neal F. Finnegan Distinguished Professor of Economics, Northeastern University, was made during the discussion “Ex-post Assessment of Merger Remedies” held at the 22nd meeting of the OECD Global Forum on Competition on 8 December 2023. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found out at oe.cd/eamr.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
This presentation by Anna Pisarkiewicz (Research Fellow, EUI Centre for a Digital Society) was made during a discussion on Remedies and commitments in abuse cases at the 21st meeting of the OECD Global Forum on Competition on 2 December 2022. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found out at https://oe.cd/rcac.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
Professor William Byrnes' powerpoint for the Regulatory Impact Analysis lectures in the Law & Economics course. Study the materials beforehand as class will only be a facilitated discussion of regulatory case studies and policy initiatives
Regulatory Impact Analysis - Law & Economics courseWilliam Byrnes
Regulatory Impact Analysis - Law & Economics course
Effective regulation is regulation that achieves the policy objective that led to it being made.
Efficient regulation achieves these objectives at the lowest total cost to all members of society
This presentation by the OECD Secretariat was made during the discussion “Ex-post Assessment of Merger Remedies” held at the 22nd meeting of the OECD Global Forum on Competition on 8 December 2023. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found out at oe.cd/eamr.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
This presentation by Anna Pisarkiewicz (Research Fellow, EUI Centre for a Digital Society) was made during a discussion on Remedies and commitments in abuse cases at the 21st meeting of the OECD Global Forum on Competition on 2 December 2022. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found out at https://oe.cd/rcac.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
Professor William Byrnes' powerpoint for the Regulatory Impact Analysis lectures in the Law & Economics course. Study the materials beforehand as class will only be a facilitated discussion of regulatory case studies and policy initiatives
Regulatory Impact Analysis - Law & Economics courseWilliam Byrnes
Regulatory Impact Analysis - Law & Economics course
Effective regulation is regulation that achieves the policy objective that led to it being made.
Efficient regulation achieves these objectives at the lowest total cost to all members of society
This presentation by the OECD Secretariat was made during the discussion “Ex-post Assessment of Merger Remedies” held at the 22nd meeting of the OECD Global Forum on Competition on 8 December 2023. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found out at oe.cd/eamr.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
Principles of Surgical Audit presented by Meeran Earfan, Kurdistan Board Trainee/General Surgery in Sulaimaniyah Teaching Hospital, As Sulaimaniyah, Iraq
Requirement prioritization is used in Software product management for determining which candidate requirements of a software product should be included in a certain release. Requirements are also prioritized to minimize risk during development so that the most important or high risk requirements are implemented first. Several methods for assessing a prioritization of software requirements exist.
Decision making, Importance of
Decision-Making, Characteristics of
Decision-Making, Essentials for effective
Decision-Making, Types/ categories of Problems and Decisions, TYPES OF BUSINESS DECISIONS, Open decision making System, Decision Making Environment, The Classical Model of decision making, Decision making process, Decision Making Style
This presentation by Charlotte Duke (Partner, London Economics) was made during the discussion “Integrating Consumer Behaviour Insights in Competition Enforcement” held for competition authorities’ officials on 24 June 2022. More materials on the topic can be found at oe.cd/bice.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
High-quality market data is a powerful tool for analyzing physician costs, negotiating competitive contracts, and documenting compliance of hospital-physician agreements. However, market data is not the all-in-one solution for every question or concern regarding physician contracting.
If your organization could use best practices for utilizing market data to evaluate physician contracts, view these slides which cover:
-Situations where market data excels
-When to consult an expert
-Understanding the limitations of market data
it provide you information about public policy, its elements , policy cycle and its importance it also provide you information about problem solving process..These 8 lectures provide you the complete knowledge about public policy analysis.
Presentation by Mohammad Zayyad, Regulatory Improvement Committee, United Kingdom, at the Workshop on the Elaboration and Evaluation of RIA at sub-national Level, Cuernavaca Morelos, Mexico, 11-12 November 2014, Session 3. Further information is available at http://www.oecd.org/gov/regulatory-policy/
Essential Elements of Physician Contracting Compliance ProgramsMD Ranger, Inc.
How does your organization ensure that its financial relationships with physicians are compliant with federal regulations like Stark? To help our subscribers leverage the power of MD Ranger data for documentation and FMV purposes, we have assembled a list of key pointers to help you streamline and improve your physician contracting compliance program.
Key Strategies for Compensating Physician Administrative PositionsMD Ranger, Inc.
Establishing rates for medical directorships has hidden challenges and risks. Even the most sophisticated market data benchmarks should be thoroughly examined and utilized properly. In addition to analyzing market data correctly, there’s an art to establishing rates policies for your organization. This webinar addresses challenges to determining appropriate rates and shares successful organizational policies.
This presentation by Morris Kleiner (University of Minnesota), was made during the discussion “Competition and Regulation in Professions and Occupations” held at the Working Party No. 2 on Competition and Regulation on 10 June 2024. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found out at oe.cd/crps.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
This presentation comprises highlights from the publication OECD Competition Trends 2024 published in Paris on 6 March 2024 during the OECD Competition Open Day. The full publication can be accessed at oe.cd/comp-trends.
More Related Content
Similar to Ex-post Assessment of Merger Remedies – KWOKA – December 2023 OECD discussion
Principles of Surgical Audit presented by Meeran Earfan, Kurdistan Board Trainee/General Surgery in Sulaimaniyah Teaching Hospital, As Sulaimaniyah, Iraq
Requirement prioritization is used in Software product management for determining which candidate requirements of a software product should be included in a certain release. Requirements are also prioritized to minimize risk during development so that the most important or high risk requirements are implemented first. Several methods for assessing a prioritization of software requirements exist.
Decision making, Importance of
Decision-Making, Characteristics of
Decision-Making, Essentials for effective
Decision-Making, Types/ categories of Problems and Decisions, TYPES OF BUSINESS DECISIONS, Open decision making System, Decision Making Environment, The Classical Model of decision making, Decision making process, Decision Making Style
This presentation by Charlotte Duke (Partner, London Economics) was made during the discussion “Integrating Consumer Behaviour Insights in Competition Enforcement” held for competition authorities’ officials on 24 June 2022. More materials on the topic can be found at oe.cd/bice.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
High-quality market data is a powerful tool for analyzing physician costs, negotiating competitive contracts, and documenting compliance of hospital-physician agreements. However, market data is not the all-in-one solution for every question or concern regarding physician contracting.
If your organization could use best practices for utilizing market data to evaluate physician contracts, view these slides which cover:
-Situations where market data excels
-When to consult an expert
-Understanding the limitations of market data
it provide you information about public policy, its elements , policy cycle and its importance it also provide you information about problem solving process..These 8 lectures provide you the complete knowledge about public policy analysis.
Presentation by Mohammad Zayyad, Regulatory Improvement Committee, United Kingdom, at the Workshop on the Elaboration and Evaluation of RIA at sub-national Level, Cuernavaca Morelos, Mexico, 11-12 November 2014, Session 3. Further information is available at http://www.oecd.org/gov/regulatory-policy/
Essential Elements of Physician Contracting Compliance ProgramsMD Ranger, Inc.
How does your organization ensure that its financial relationships with physicians are compliant with federal regulations like Stark? To help our subscribers leverage the power of MD Ranger data for documentation and FMV purposes, we have assembled a list of key pointers to help you streamline and improve your physician contracting compliance program.
Key Strategies for Compensating Physician Administrative PositionsMD Ranger, Inc.
Establishing rates for medical directorships has hidden challenges and risks. Even the most sophisticated market data benchmarks should be thoroughly examined and utilized properly. In addition to analyzing market data correctly, there’s an art to establishing rates policies for your organization. This webinar addresses challenges to determining appropriate rates and shares successful organizational policies.
Similar to Ex-post Assessment of Merger Remedies – KWOKA – December 2023 OECD discussion (20)
This presentation by Morris Kleiner (University of Minnesota), was made during the discussion “Competition and Regulation in Professions and Occupations” held at the Working Party No. 2 on Competition and Regulation on 10 June 2024. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found out at oe.cd/crps.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
This presentation comprises highlights from the publication OECD Competition Trends 2024 published in Paris on 6 March 2024 during the OECD Competition Open Day. The full publication can be accessed at oe.cd/comp-trends.
This presentation by Cristina Camacho, Head of Cabinet and Head of International Relations, Portuguese Competition Authority, was made during the discussion “Use of Economic Evidence in Cartel Cases” held at the 22nd meeting of the OECD Global Forum on Competition on 8 December 2023. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found out at oe.cd/egci.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
This presentation by William E. Kovacic, Global Competition Professor of Law and Policy and Director, Competition Law Center, The George Washington University, was made during the discussion “Ex-post Assessment of Merger Remedies” held at the 22nd meeting of the OECD Global Forum on Competition on 8 December 2023. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found out at oe.cd/eamr.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
This presentation by Amelia Fletcher CBE, Professor of Competition Policy, University of East Anglia, was made during the discussion “Ex-post Assessment of Merger Remedies” held at the 22nd meeting of the OECD Global Forum on Competition on 8 December 2023. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found out at oe.cd/eamr.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
This presentation by John Davies, Member, UK Competition Appeal Tribunal, was made during the discussion “Use of Economic Evidence in Cartel Cases” held at the 22nd meeting of the OECD Global Forum on Competition on 8 December 2023. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found out at oe.cd/egci.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
This presentation by Simon Roberts, Professor, Centre for Competition, Regulation and Economic Development, University of Johannesburg, was made during the discussion “Use of Economic Evidence in Cartel Cases” held at the 22nd meeting of the OECD Global Forum on Competition on 8 December 2023. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found out at oe.cd/egci.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
This presentation by Serbia was made during the discussion “Alternatives to Leniency Programmes” held at the 22nd meeting of the OECD Global Forum on Competition on 7 December 2023. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found out at oe.cd/atlp.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
This presentation by Italy was made during the discussion “Alternatives to Leniency Programmes” held at the 22nd meeting of the OECD Global Forum on Competition on 7 December 2023. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found out at oe.cd/atlp.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
This presentation by Daniel CRANE, Richard W. Pogue Professor of Law, University of Michigan, was made during the discussion “Out-of-Market Efficiencies in Competition Enforcement” held at the 141st meeting of the OECD Competition Committee on 6 December 2023. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found out at oe.cd/omee.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
This presentation by John DAVIES, Member, Competition Appeal Tribunal UK, was made during the discussion “Out-of-Market Efficiencies in Competition Enforcement” held at the 141st meeting of the OECD Competition Committee on 6 December 2023. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found out at oe.cd/omee.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
This presentation by Nancy ROSE, Head of the Department of Economics and Charles P. Kindleberger Professor of Applied Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), was made during the discussion “Out-of-Market Efficiencies in Competition Enforcement” held at the 141st meeting of the OECD Competition Committee on 6 December 2023. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found out at oe.cd/omee.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
This presentation by Nicole ROSENBOOM, Principal, Oxera Consulting LLP, was made during the discussion “Out-of-Market Efficiencies in Competition Enforcement” held at the 141st meeting of the OECD Competition Committee on 6 December 2023. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found out at oe.cd/omee.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
This presentation by Anna TZANAKI, Lecturer in Law, University of Leeds, was made during the discussion “Serial Acquisitions and Industry Roll-ups” held at the 141st meeting of the OECD Competition Committee on 6 December 2023. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found out at oe.cd/sair.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
This presentation by Sha'ista GOGA, Director, Acacia Economics, was made during the discussion “Serial Acquisitions and Industry Roll-ups” held at the 141st meeting of the OECD Competition Committee on 6 December 2023. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found out at oe.cd/sair.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
This presentation by Ioannis KOKKORIS, Chair in Competition Law and Economics and Director, Centre for Commercial Law Studies, Queen Mary University of London, was made during the discussion “Serial Acquisitions and Industry Roll-ups” held at the 141st meeting of the OECD Competition Committee on 6 December 2023. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found out at oe.cd/sair.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
This presentation by the OECD Secretariat was made during the discussion “Serial Acquisitions and Industry Roll-ups” held at the 141st meeting of the OECD Competition Committee on 6 December 2023. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found out at oe.cd/sair.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
This presentation by Simonetta VEZZOSO, Associate Professor, Economics Department, University of Trento, was made during the discussion “Competition and Innovation - The Role of Innovation in Enforcement Cases” held at the 141st meeting of the OECD Competition Committee on 5 December 2023. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found out at oe.cd/rbci.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
This presentation by the OECD Secretariat, was made during the discussion “Competition and Innovation - The Role of Innovation in Enforcement Cases” held at the 141st meeting of the OECD Competition Committee on 5 December 2023. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found out at oe.cd/rbci.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
This presentation by Moya DODD, Partner, Gilbert+Tobin Lawyers, and former vice-captain of the Australian women's football team, the Matildas, was made during the discussion “Competition and Professional Sports” held at the 76th meeting of the OECD Working Party No. 2 on Competition and Regulation on 4 December 2023. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found out at oe.cd/capfs.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
More from OECD Directorate for Financial and Enterprise Affairs (20)
0x01 - Newton's Third Law: Static vs. Dynamic AbusersOWASP Beja
f you offer a service on the web, odds are that someone will abuse it. Be it an API, a SaaS, a PaaS, or even a static website, someone somewhere will try to figure out a way to use it to their own needs. In this talk we'll compare measures that are effective against static attackers and how to battle a dynamic attacker who adapts to your counter-measures.
About the Speaker
===============
Diogo Sousa, Engineering Manager @ Canonical
An opinionated individual with an interest in cryptography and its intersection with secure software development.
Have you ever wondered how search works while visiting an e-commerce site, internal website, or searching through other types of online resources? Look no further than this informative session on the ways that taxonomies help end-users navigate the internet! Hear from taxonomists and other information professionals who have first-hand experience creating and working with taxonomies that aid in navigation, search, and discovery across a range of disciplines.
Acorn Recovery: Restore IT infra within minutesIP ServerOne
Introducing Acorn Recovery as a Service, a simple, fast, and secure managed disaster recovery (DRaaS) by IP ServerOne. A DR solution that helps restore your IT infra within minutes.
Sharpen existing tools or get a new toolbox? Contemporary cluster initiatives...Orkestra
UIIN Conference, Madrid, 27-29 May 2024
James Wilson, Orkestra and Deusto Business School
Emily Wise, Lund University
Madeline Smith, The Glasgow School of Art
Doctoral Symposium at the 17th IEEE International Conference on Software Test...
Ex-post Assessment of Merger Remedies – KWOKA – December 2023 OECD discussion
1. Methodology and Substance
in Ex Post Remedies Assessment
John Kwoka
Northeastern University
OECD Global Forum of Competition Roundtable
Paris, 8 December 2023
2. Ex Post Assessments of Mergers and Remedies
• Value of ex post assessments of mergers and merger policy is well
established
• Merger retrospectives have provided important insights into merger
outcomes and the effectiveness of merger control
• They have also highlighted some issues about methodology that apply to
remedies assessment as well
• Remedies retrospectives are very important
• Ineffective remedies can undermine merger policy itself
• Use of remedies quite frequent in major jurisdictions
• In US, of approximately 50 merger investigations each year, more than
half historically have concluded with consent order and remedy
• Methodological as well as substantive issues have been illuminated by
studies of remedies
3. Ex post studies of U.S. merger remedies
• (1) FTC study (1999) based on interviews with buyers of 37
divestitures
• Found that in 28 cases, the divested assets remained viable and in market
• Concluded that divesting entire line of business, rather than selected assets,
important in viability
• Comments:
• Viability is necessary but not sufficient for competition
• Even by that standard, one-quarter of divestitures failed
4. • (2) Second FTC study (2017) covered 89 remedy orders
• Of 50 case studies, 69% reported to have preserved competition in 3 years
• Cases with incomplete divestitures persisted, and continued to show high failure rates
• 39 other cases assessed either by questionnaires or by agency’s own internal
records
• “Success” for these others redefined as asset viability or by simply whether assets in fact
were transferred
• Reported higher rates of “success” by these lower standards (91%, 75%)
• Comments:
• Used three different methodologies and three definitions of “success”
• By criterion of preservation of competition, almost one-third failed
5. • (3) Statistical analysis of effectiveness of remedies (Kwoka, 2017)
• Matched actual outcomes from retrospectives on mergers with information
on type of remedy (if any) employed in each merger
• Found that mergers approved subject to divestitures resulted in significant
net price increases
• Mergers resolved with behavioral remedies resulted in yet higher prices
• Comments:
• Too few observations for statistical confidence in certain conclusions
• Contributed to increasing skepticism about remedies, especially behavioral
remedies
6. U.S. agencies increasingly skeptical of remedies
• This evidence together with experience with particular remedies have
made DOJ and FTC more skeptical about remedies
• Ticketmaster/Live Nation merger
• Comcast-NBCU
• Teva-Allergan merger
• Retail merges (supermarkets, drug stores)
• DOJ antitrust chief Delrahim (2017) quoted directly from my study in
criticizing behavioral remedies
• Expressed determination that DOJ would avoid them.
• FTC Chair Joe Simons (2018) noted unacceptable failure rates in FTC
studies and set goal of reducing if not eliminating them
• Established protocol and practice for merger retrospectives at FTC
7. • DOJ’s Jonathan Kanter (2022) has said:
• “Merger remedies short of blocking a transaction too often miss the mark.
Complex settlements, whether behavioral or structural, suffer from significant
deficiencies. When the division concludes that a merger is likely to lessen
competition, in most situations we should seek a simple injunction to block
the transaction.”
• FTC’s Lina Khan (2022) on agency negotiations on remedies:
• “This is not work that the agency should have to do. That’s something that
really should be fixed on the front end by parties being on clear notice about
what are lawful and unlawful deals. We are going to be focusing our
resources on litigating rather than settling.”
8. Remedies studies show that methodology matters
• Breadth of conclusions depends on number of studied cases
• Single case experience may suffice if that is sole focus of inquiry
• Broadest conclusions are based on larger number of cases (FTC study 2)
• Strength of conclusions depends on study technique
• Case studies provide detail but cannot readily control for other factors
• Difference in difference does so much better (Kwoka)
• Conclusions about effectiveness depend on criteria
• More stringent criterion—”preservation of competition”—associated with
lower success rate
• Methodology affects what substantive conclusions are possible
9. Implications for best practices in remedies assessment
• Step 1: Identify exact question to be addressed
• Remedy in uniquely important case (e.g., Sprint/T-Mobile)
• Remedies generally used in particular market (e.g., pharma)
• Remedies of specific type (structural vs. behavioral)
• Entirety of agency remedy program
• Step 2: Establish study criterion
• Preservation of competition is stated goal of remedies, and true meaning of
“success”
• Viability of assets within short period of time is useful information
• Successful transfer of assets or IP is lowest bar
10. • Step 3: Selection of case or cases that illuminate the question
• If a particular case experience is focus, no need to go farther
• If case comparison and difference-in-difference is required, important to
identify correct comparison case or group
• Should be similar to the treatment case in all respects except for remedy
• Sometimes can control for one or two factors that are not the same
• If full comprehensive conclusion sought, many cases both in the treatment
group and control group are required
• Step 4: Selection of technique capable of answering question
• If only interest is viability of assets, it may be sufficient simply to check post-
remedy market, and use interviews or questionnaires
• If criterion is preservation of competition, further analysis of pre and post
state of competition is required
• Statistical analysis offers more precise and objective conclusions
11. • Step 5: Examine any “second-order effects”
• Insights into circumstances where remedy might be more vs less effective
• Even if remedies are on average not effective, useful nonetheless to
determine if they may be effective with particular type of remedy, or
provision of remedy, or in certain industries, or with particular product
• For example, my work found that behavioral remedies least likely effective
• When the problematic behavior is not visible to third parties
• When the behavior can be quickly and strategically altered by the firm
• When technology moves quickly
• When the problematic behavior is key to profitability
• Step 6: Integrate conclusions into updated policy
• FTC study 2 reported continuing use of incomplete asset divestiture and
continued high failure rate, despite same finding 20 years earlier
12. Methodological issues to be aware of
• Selection: Choice of cases to be examined should not be skewed
• Any disproportionate attention to industry, time period, etc. may compromise
soundness of study—or at least, the appearance of soundness
• Best if choice is a sizeable group of “random” cases
• Risk of “bias” greatest in examining single case
• Causation: Distinguishing the effect of merger from effect of remedy
• Can be difficult to isolate remedy effect from effect of merger itself
• For example, If comparison shows no effect, it could be either a merger that is
not anticompetitive in which case the remedy is unnecessary and irrelevant,
or an anticompetitive merger subject to a completely effective remedy
• If comparison shows price rise, merger must be anticompetitive but the
remedy could either be completely ineffective, or partially effective
• Possible to disentangle by finding comparable merger without remedy
• DID analysis of merger, paired with DID on merger-plus-remedy will isolate effect of
remedy
13. Other issues and conclusions
• Cost of conducting remedies assessment may not be trivial
• But incremental costs after merger assessment may not be too large
• Can compel on-going data from merging parties when remedy put in place
• Important that conclusions must match study
• Conclusions of FTC study 2 controversial, partially disavowed
• Important that conclusions be implemented
• Assessments have great potential to improve policy
• Better design of remedies: Examine ability and incentive to defeat
• Limiting reliance on remedies altogether