Responding with Equality: The case for combating extreme inequality to tackle crises, strengthen democracy and foster a fairer future in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic

For decades, our flawed economic and governance systems have allowed inequality and social exclusion to grow to extreme and dangerous levels, and now coronavirus has driven an even greater wedge between the haves and have nots. Without immediate action, the pandemic could cause the biggest spike in inequality ever seen, and further destabilize the democratic systems we need to ensure a recovery for all. Governments must take action to tackle the inequality and climate crises, rein in extreme wealth and monopoly power, and deliver universal public services and social protection.

Non-linear pricing in E-commerce: an exploration

PurposeTo understand the new non-linear pricing in E-commerce. The present paper aims to put forth an idea of using tie-in agreement in the electronic commerce market in the name of trust in India. According to the Indian antitrust law, tie-in agreement is not allowed to use as compulsory in an offer to the buyer. This means that a tie-in agreement cannot be a compulsion or only an option to the buyer. This means it can be an extra option.Design/methodology/approachThe paper shows that using this logic the sellers are giving two options simultaneously to the buyer: (1) a commodity with a tie-in agreement and (2) the same commodity without a tie-in agreement. Therefore, there are two price mechanisms that are present. Now it is the decision of the buyer to choose between the two. These two price mechanisms create a new variable called trust. If the buyer selects the first option, then that buyer will not be treated as a trustworthy buyer, but in the second case, the buyer would be treated as a trustworthy or the affianced buyer. Therefore, the buyer would be leaning toward the second option. The paper proves that in the second option it would be difficult to minimize the consumer expenditure. As a result, there would be a situation of non-linear pricing in the name of trust which is hidden in the offer. The present work gives both theoretical models and empirical justifications.FindingsWe find that E-wallet is often used when a consumer orders food online but offline cash payment is preferred. Therefore, the offer does matter for the consumer. Hence, the offer can be used to make a tie-in arrangement. Therefore, even if there is a tie-in arrangement in online food servicing applications, the Competition Commission of India can restrict such practices as for illegal tying, the firm has to have the monopoly power in one market and there should be compulsory tie-arrangement in another market. But it does not mean that E-wallet tie-arrangement cannot be ignored as the monopoly power in the online food servicing market can influence the market share in the E-wallet market. Tie-in arrangement is also important, as the consumer has to spend more under cashback offer conditions which reduce the long-run gain of consumers.Originality/valueThe paper considered trust as a new element in forming non-linear pricing. This is new to this literature.

Indikasi Praktek Monopoli Dalam Pembayaran Tiket Kereta Api (KAI Access) Melalui Dompet Elektronik di Indonesia

This article, which aims to analyze the indications of unfair business competition by PT. Kereta Api Indonesia in selling local train tickets through the KAI Access application with payment methods via electronic wallets regulated under Law Number 5 of 1999 concerning the Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition and also aims to determine whether the occurrence of deadweight loss is caused by on the existence of a monopoly in a market. This writing uses a normative research method, namely by researching the applicable laws and regulations by using a statutory approach, conceptual approach, and case study. Monopoly is a condition where there is only one business actor in a market, this condition becomes a problem if the business actor uses his monopoly power to dominate the market so that there are barriers to entry into the market. In this case, the purchase of local train tickets through KAI Access can only be paid for using the LinkAja electronic wallet.Keywords: Monopoly; Deadweight Loss; Elecronic Wallet.AbstrakDalam artikel ini yang bertujuan untuk menganalisis dari adanya indikasi persaingan usaha yang tidak sehat oleh PT. Kereta Api Indonesia dalam penjualan tiket kereta api lokal melalui aplikasi KAI Access dengan metode pembayaran melalui dompet elektronik yang diatur berdasarkan oleh Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 tentang Larangan Praktek Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat dan juga bertujuan untuk mengetahui apakah terjadinya deadweight loss di sebabkan atas adanya monopoli dalam suatu pasar. Penulisan ini menggunakan metode penelitian normatif yaitu dengan cara meniliti terhadap peraturan perudang-undangan yang berlaku dengan menggunakan pendekatan perundang-undangan, pendekatn konseptual dan case study. Monopoli merupakan kondisi dimana hanya ada satu pelaku usaha dalam suatu pasar, kondisi tersebut menjadi masalah apabila pelaku usaha menggunakan kekuatan monopoli nya untuk menguasai pasar sehingga adanya hambatan masuk ke dalam pasar tersebut. Dalam hal ini terdapat pembelian tiket kereta api lokal melalui KAI Access hanya dapat di bayar menggunakan dompet elektronik LinkAja. Kata Kunci: Monopoli; Deadweight Loss; Dompet Elektronik.

5. The legal framework

‘The legal framework’ outlines the key competition provisions currently in the US and EU. Like in most other jurisdictions, EU and US laws include competition provisions that are used to address antitrust violations such as anti-competitive agreements or abuse of monopoly power. They also include laws dealing with proposed mergers and acquisitions. The US Antitrust Law prohibits contracts and agreements between two or more individuals or entities in restraint of trade or commerce. Meanwhile, EU competition law prohibits agreements between ‘undertakings’ that have, as their object or effect, the prevention, restriction, or distortion of competition, and affect trade between the EU member states.

9. Monopolies and the abuse of market power

‘Monopolies and the abuse of market power’ studies monopolies and the abuse of market power. The first step in applying competition law to misuse of market power is the identification of such power. How powerful should you be to be deemed to have market power that could trigger antitrust intervention? Many jurisdictions will use the benchmark of ‘dominant position’, some will use ‘monopoly power’ or ‘monopolization’, while others may focus on the presence of ‘superior bargaining position’. There is a difference in approach between the US and EU competition laws which can be seen through several categories of abuse and monopolization, including predatory pricing, excessive pricing, and refusal to supply or license.

Time for a New Antitrust Era: Refocusing Antitrust Law to Invigorate Competition in the 21st Century

U.S. antitrust laws have repeatedly responded to the changing needs of the nation’s economy. As the marketplace grows ever more data-driven, we find ourselves at yet another critical economic juncture that requires us to revisit antitrust practices to ensure healthy and sustainable competition. In this article, we propose two new antitrust approaches that fit into the existing regulatory landscape, detect signs of anticompetitive behavior early, and handle the unique nature of the digital marketplace. First, we advocate for an expanded definition of monopoly power under the Sherman Act that takes corporate data ownership into account. While current proxies for monopoly power, namely market share and price control, are symptoms of anticompetitive behavior, data ownership is increasingly its harbinger. Second, we advocate for an expanded premerger review process that seeks to prevent nascent competitors from being swallowed up by dominant players, a widespread practice that can be shown to reduce competitiveness. To this end, we leverage new insights from network science and empirical data to anticipate which types of mergers are most likely to have anticompetitive effects. Finally, we propose scalable regulatory strategies to discourage the anticompetitive behaviors we describe in their incipiency, without requiring case-by-case review.

Post and Cargo Monopoly Practices by Airport Management (Case Study of Hasanudin Airport dan Kualanamu Airport)

The continued development of the world economy with increasing competition in various businesses including the aviation business. Indonesia's own aviation business where management is centralized which is given to PT Angkasa Pura I and II as companies that manage large airports throughout Indonesia. The airport management rights were later misused by PT Angkasa Pura I and II to conduct monopolistic practices. Based on the decisions of the Commission, both companies should be excluded from the application of the Competition Law, proved to have committed abuse of monopoly power by creating barriers to entry for other business actors. And the activities carried out by the airport management in the process of cargo and mail at airports not included exceptions contained in the Act. No. 5 of 1999 regarding monopolistic practices and unfair business competition because of what was done by the airport management have broad impact to the national economy due pentetapan too high a rate which causes the price of goods that dikirimakan through cargo and mail also increased, as well as their indekasi monopolistic practices such as other businesses can not carry on business without government approval of airport and PT. Angkasa Pura I and II