Michele Polo

Leniency Programs and Cartel Prosecution

We study the enforcement of competition policy against collusion under Leniency Programs, which give reduced fines to firms revealing information to the Antitrust Authority. Such programs give firms an incentive to break collusion, but may also have a pro-collusive effect, since they decrease the expected cost of misbehaviour. We analyze the optimal policy under alternative rules, obtaining a ranking of the different schemes and showing when the use of reduced fines may improve antitrust enforcement.

Are judges biased by labor market conditions

When a firing litigation is taken to court, only the characteristics of the employees misconduct should be relevant for the judges decision. Using detailed data from an Italian bank and aggregate macro data, this paper shows that, instead, local labor market conditions influence the courts decision: The same misconduct episode may be considered sufficient for firing in a tight labor market but insufficient otherwise. We reach this conclusion after taking carefully into consideration the non-random selection of firing litigations for trial. Although these results refer to the specific situation considered, they raise more general issues. For macroeconomists they suggest that higher unemployment rates may increase firing costs via the effect on courts’ decision criteria; thus, the real extent of firing rigidities cannot be assessed without considering the role of courts. For labor law scholars, these findings are important because, following traditional principles, the law should be applied in the same way for all citizens and over the entire national territory.

Buyer power and quality improvements

This paper analyses the sources of buyer power and its effect on sellers’ investment in quality improvements. In our model retailers make take-it-or-leave-it offers to a producer and each of them obtains its marginal contribution to total profits (gross of sunk costs). In turn, this depends on the rivalry between retailers in the bargaining process. Rivalry increases when retailers are less differentiated and when decreasing returns to scale in production are larger. The allocation of total surplus affects the incentives of the producer to invest in product quality, an instance of the hold-up problem. An increase in buyer power not only makes the supplier and consumers worse off, but it may even harm retailers, that obtain a larger share of a smaller surplus. A repeated game argument shows that efficient quality improvements can be supported as an equilibrium outcome if the producer and retailers are involved in a long-term relationship.

Entry Without Competition

This paper examines competition in a liberalized market, with reference to some key features of the natural gas industry. Each firm has a low (zero) marginal cost core capacity, due to long term contracts with take or pay obligations, and additional capacity at higher marginal costs. The market is decentralized and the firms decide which customers to serve, competing then in prices. We show that under both sequential and simultaneous entry, there is a strong incentive to segment the market: when take-or-pay obligations are still to be covered, entering and competing for the same customers implies low margins. If instead a firm is left as a monopolist on a fraction of the market, exhausting its obligation, it has no further incentive to enter a second market, where the rival will be monopolist as well. Hence, we obtain entry without competition. Antitrust ceilings do not prevent such an outcome while a wholesale pool market induces generalized competition and low margins in the retail segment.

Liberalizing the Gas Industry: Take‐Or‐Pay Contracts, Retail Competition and Wholesale Trade

This paper examines retail competition in a liberalized gas market. Vertically integrated firms run both wholesale activities (buying gas from the producers under take-or-pay obligations) and retail activities (selling gas to final customers). The market is decentralized and the firms decide which customers to serve, competing then in prices. We show that TOP clauses limit the incentives to face-to-face competition and determine segmentation and monopoly pricing even when entry of new competitors occurs. The development of wholesale trade, instead, may induce generalized entry and retail competition. This equilibrium outcome is obtained if a compulsory wholesale market is introduced, even when firms are vertically integrated, or under vertical separation of wholesale and retail activities when firms can use only linear bilateral contracts.

The Optimal Prudential Deterrence of Price Fixing Agreements

We analyze the optimal antitrust enforcement against collusion under asymmetric information with a continuum of types. We focus on prudential deterrence, by imposing that expected fines cannot induce losses even off the equilibrium path. Due to incentive compatibility, efficient cartels enjoy positive rents even when prosecution is costless, created through reduced fines and price cost margins. In equilibrium this distortion is lower for more efficient types, while full collusion can be tolerated for high cost cartels. Moreover, regulation with positive transfers is better than antitrust enforcement, which, however, allows to implement more efficient outcomes than price caps.

Political exchange and the allocation of surplus: a model of two-party competition

We discuss a simple model of political competition which is explicitly grounded on economic analysis of the political exchange. We argue that an act of exchange always gives rise to a common surplus on which both “parties” in the exchange are entitled to make a claim. We investigate exchange and competition in a political setting from this abstract perspective. A party’s platform specifies the amount of surplus which will be distributed to society (thus stating, by subtraction, the surplus appropriated by parties) and the way in which it will be distributed among society’s agents.

The Development of Gas Hubs in Europe

This paper investigates the development of wholesale markets for natural gas at the different stages of market liberalization. We identify three steps in the process: wholesale trade initially develops to cope with balancing needs when the shippers and suppliers segments become more fragmented; once the market becomes more liquid, it turns out to be a second source of gas procurement in alternative to long term contracts; finally, to manage price risk financial instruments are traded. We review in detail the different regulatory measures that must be introduced to create an efficient and functioning wholesale gas market. Finally, we analyze the evolution of gas hubs in the UK, the Netherlands, Germany and Italy in terms of market rules and market liquidity. We argue that each of these country cases can be easily located into the evolutionary path we have highlighted at the beginning, with the UK and the Netherlands leading the process, Germany and Italy constrained by limited supply; Italy is also showing an interesting counterfactual.

Antitrust, Legal Standards and Investment

We study the interaction of a firm that invests in research and, if successful, undertakes a practice to exploit the innovation, and an enforcer that sets legal standards, fines and accuracy. In this setting deterrence on actions interacts with deterrence on research. When the practice increases expected welfare the enforcer commits not to intervene by choosing a more rigid per-se legality rule to boost investment, moving to a more flexible discriminating rule combined with type-I accuracy for higher probabilities of social harm. Patent and antitrust policies act as substitutes in our setting; additional room for per-se (illegality) rules emerges when fines are bounded. Our results on optimal legal standards extend from the case of (uncertain) investment in research to the case of (deterministic) investment in physical assets.

Take or Pay Contracts and Market Segmentation

This paper examines competition in the liberalized natural gas market. Each .firm has zero marginal cost core capacity, due to long term contracts with take or pay obligations, and additional capacity at higher marginal costs. The market is decentralized and the firms decide which customers to serve, competing then in prices. In equilibrium each .firm approaches a different segment of the market and sets the monopoly price, i.e. market segmentation. Antitrust ceilings do not prevent such an outcome while the separation of wholesale and retail activities and the creation of a wholesale market induces generalized competition and low margins in the retail segment.