Anu Bradford

International Antitrust Negotiations and the False Hope of the WTO

Multinational corporations (“MNCs”) operate today in an increasingly open global trade environment. While tariff barriers have collapsed dramatically, several states and numerous scholars have raised concerns that the benefits of trade liberalization are undermined by various non-tariff barriers (“NTBs”) to trade, including the anticompetitive business practices of private enterprise. As a result, demands to link trade and antitrust policies more closely by extending the coverage of the World Trade Organization (“WTO”) to incorporate antitrust law have gathered momentum over the last decade.

Sharing the Risks and Rewards of Economic Migration

International cooperation on economic migration has been difficult to achieve. The interests of emigration countries (“source countries”) and immigration countries (“destination countries”) seem impossible to align. These countries disagree on who should migrate: source countries resist migration that leads to a brain drain, while destination countries welcome these very migrants given that they are likely to be the most productive citizens and the least likely to become fiscal burdens on the destination country. In addition, destination countries resist migration that leads to domestic unemployment through labor replacement. As a result, international economic migration remains restricted at a substantial cost to world welfare.

Antitrust Law in Global Markets

One might mistakenly think that the long tradition of economic analysis in antitrust law would mean there is little new to say. Yet the field is surprisingly dynamic and changing. The specially commissioned chapters in this landmark volume offer a rigorous analysis of the field’s most current and contentious issues.

Is E.U. Merger Control Used for Protectionism? An Empirical Analysis: Is E.U. Merger Control Used for Protectionism?

The European Commission has often used its merger-review power to challenge high-profile acquisitions involving non-EU companies, giving rise to concerns that its competition authority has evolved into a powerful tool for industrial policy. The Commission has been accused of deliberately targeting foreign—especially American—acquirers, while facilitating the creation of European national champions. These concerns, however, rest on a few famous anecdotes. In this Article, we introduce a unique dataset that allows us to provide the first rigorous examination of these claims. Our analysis of the over 5,000 mergers reported to the Commission between 1990 and 2014 reveals no evidence that the Commission has systematically used its authority to protectionist ends. If anything, our results suggest that the Commission is less likely to challenge transactions involving non-EU acquirers. Our analysis therefore challenges the common notion of European antitrust protectionism and shifts the burden of proof to those advancing this view.