Antitrust & Competition Policy Blog

Editor: D. Daniel Sokol
University of Florida
Levin College of Law

A Member of the Law Professor Blogs Network

Friday, February 27, 2009

Compulsory or Voluntary Pre-merger Notification? Theory and Some Evidence

Posted by D. Daniel Sokol

Chongwoo Choe (Monash U. - Economics) and Chander Shekhar (U. Melbourne - Economics) discuss Compulsory or Voluntary Pre-merger Notification? Theory and Some Evidence.

ABSTRACT: We compare the prevailing system of compulsory pre-merger notification with the Australian system of voluntary pre-merger notification. It is shown that, for a non-trivial set of parameter values, a perfect Bayesian equilibrium exists in mixed strategies in which the regulator investigates un-notified mergers with probability less than one and the parties choose notification with probability less than one. Thanks to the signaling opportunity that arises when notification is voluntary, voluntary notification leads to lower enforcement costs for the regulator and lower notification costs for the merging parties. Some of the theoretical predictions are supported by exploratory empirical tests using merger data from Australia. Overall, our results suggest that voluntary merger notification may achieve objectives similar to those achieved by compulsory systems at lower costs to the merging parties as well as to the regulator.

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/antitrustprof_blog/2009/02/compulsory-or-v.html

| Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef0111688f9682970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Compulsory or Voluntary Pre-merger Notification? Theory and Some Evidence:

Comments

Post a comment