Competition policy evaluation through damage estimation in fuel retail cartel
Barra lateral de artigos
Conteúdo do artigo principal
Resumo
Este trabalho estima os danos causados pelo cartel nos postos de gasolina na regiao sul do Brasil usando tanto uma equacao reduzida quanto um modelo estrutural de demanda e oferta. Documentos do Conselho Administrativo de Defesa Economica (CADE) ajudam a caracterizar os postos envolvidos na colusao nos mercados de etanol e gasolina. O objetivo é avaliar os efeitos da politica de concorrencia comparando o montante do dano estimado com as multas aplicadas.Em adicional, esse trabalho tambem
contribui para a literatura sobre substituicao de gasolina, uma vez que os dados apontam que o etanol é percebido como substituto perfeito e é preco inelastico. Os resultados mostram que houve um sobrecusto causado pelo cartel de ordem de 4.6% a 6.6% no mercado de gasolina e de ate 12% no mercado de etanol. As multas aplicadas, contudo, devem considerar a probabilidade de o cartel ser descoberto e, dada sua baixa probabilidade, as multas aplicadas no presente caso parecem estar alinhadas com esse objetivo.
Downloads
Detalhes do artigo
Referências
Allain, M. L., Boyer, M., Kotchoni, R., & Ponssard, J. P. (2015). Are cartel fines optimal? Theory and evidence from the European Union. International Review of Law and Economics, 42, 38-47.
Anderson, S.T. (2012), The demand for ethanol as a gasoline substitute, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 62, 151–168.
Anfavea (2008), Vehicles – production, domestic sales and exports. Available at http://www.anfavea.com.br/anuario2008/capitulo2a.pdf.
Ashurst (2004), Analysis of Economic Models for the Calculation of Damages, Report for DG Comp.
Bonnet, C., & Dubois, P. (2010). Non linear contracting and endogenous buyer power between manufacturers and retailers: empirical evidence on food retailing in France. Mimeo.
Bolotova, Y., Connor, J. M., & Miller, D. J. (2008). Factors influencing the magnitude of cartel overcharges: An empirical analysis of the US Market. Journal of Competition Law and Economics, 5(2), 361-381.
Cade (2010). Processo 08012.011668-2007-30.
Cade (2014), Varejo de Gasolina, Cadernos do Cade.
Cade (2016), Prevenção Ótima de Cartéis: O Caso dos Peróxidos no Brasil. Documento de Trabalho 02/2016.
Clark, Robert C., Houde, Jean-François, 2013. Collusion with asymmetric retailers: evidence from a gasoline price-fixing case in Canada. Am. Econ. J. Microecon. 5 (3), 97–123.
Clark, Robert C., Houde, Jean-François, 2014. The effect of explicit communication on pricing: evidence from the collapse of a gasoline retail cartel. J. Ind. Econ. 62 (2), 191–228.
Connor, J. M. & Bolotova, Y. (2005), Cartel Overcharges: Survey and Meta-Analysis. International Journal of Industrial Organization, Vol. 24, 2006.
Connor, J. M. (2009), Cartels and Antitrust Portrayed: Market Effects and Damages. SSR1 Working Paper.
Covrig, C. (2014), How sugar and ethanol impact each other? Platts McGraw Hill Financial. Available at https://www.platts.com/IM.Platts.Content/ProductsServices/ConferenceandEvents/2014/sc451/presentations/Claudiu-Covrig.pdf
Davis, Peter and Garcés, Eliana (2010), Quantitative Techniques for Competition and Antitrust Analysis, Princeton University Press.
Houde, J. F. (2012), Spatial differentiation and vertical mergers in retail markets for gasoline. The American Economic Review, 102(5), 2147-2182.
Hüschelrath, K., Weigand, J. (2010), A Framework to Enforce Anti-predation Rules. World Competition, Issue 2, pp. 209–240.
Miller, N. H., & Osborne, M. (2014), Spatial differentiation and price discrimination in the cement industry: evidence from a structural model. The RAND Journal of Economics, 45(2), 221-247.
Ministry of Environment (2011), First National Emissions Inventory by Vehicles. Available at http://www.anp.gov.br/wwwanp/images/EmissoesAtmosfericas-1Inventariodeemissoes.pdf.
OCDE (2013), Assessment of the Impact of Competition Authorities’ Activities, DAF/COMP/WP2(2013)1.
OCDE (2013), Competition in Road Fuel, Policy Roundtables.
OCDE (2014), Guide for Helping Competition Authorities Assess the Expected Impact of their Activities.
OCDE (2016), Reference guide on ex-post evaluation of competition agencies’ enforcement decisions.
Oxera and A. Komninos (2009), Quantifying Antitrust Damages. Towards Non-Binding Guidance for Courts, Study prepared for the European Commission, DG COMP.
Petrin, A., & Train, K. (2010). A control function approach to endogeneity in consumer choice models. Journal of marketing research, 47(1), 3-13.
Ragazzo, C. E. J. e R. M. da Silva (2006), Aspectos Econômicos e Jurídicos sobre Cartéis na Revenda de Combustíveis: Uma Agenda para Investigações, Documento de Trabalho SEAE no 40, Secretaria de Acompanhamento Econômico, Ministério da Fazenda.
Salvo, A., Huse, C. (2011), Is arbitrage tying the price of ethanol to that of gasoline? Evidence from the up take of flexible-fuel technology, Energy Journal, 32, 119–148.
Salvo, A., Huse, C. (2013), Build it, but will they come? Evidence from consumer choice between gasoline and sugarcane ethanol, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Volume 66, Issue 2, 251-279.
Secretaria de Direito Econômico (2010), Nota Técnica para Averiguação Preliminar, Processo n.º 08012.000642/2010-61.
Verboven, F. and T. van Dijk (2007), Cartel damages claims and the passing-on defense, Working Paper, K.U. Leuven.
Villas-Boas, S. B. (2007). Using retail data for upstream merger analysis. Journal of Competition Law and Economics, 3(4), 689-715.