Premium
Illinois Walls: how barring indirect purchaser suits facilitates collusion
Author(s) -
Pieter Schinkel Maarten,
Tuinstra Jan,
Rüggeberg Jakob
Publication year - 2008
Publication title -
the rand journal of economics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.687
H-Index - 108
eISSN - 1756-2171
pISSN - 0741-6261
DOI - 10.1111/j.1756-2171.2008.00034.x
Subject(s) - cartel , damages , collusion , supreme court , business , price fixing , economics , law , law and economics , commerce , industrial organization , political science
In its landmark ruling in Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois in 1977, the U.S. Supreme Court restricted standing to sue for recovery of antitrust damages to direct purchasers. However, antitrust damages are typically (in part) passed on to intermediaries lower in the chain of production and ultimately to consumers. We show that the Illinois Brick rule facilitates collusion. It allows an upstream cartel to shield itself from private damage claims by forwarding a share of cartel profits to its direct purchasers. These benefits dissuade the direct purchasers from exercising their exclusive right to sue for private damages. The cartel can achieve this by rationing inputs at low prices. Several U.S. antitrust cases show symptoms of “Illinois Walls .”