Publications: Trelysa Long

Larger firms are generally more productive because of scale economies, but some U.S. industries still have too high a share of small firms. Policymakers should encourage, not discourage, greater consolidation in these industries.

Policymakers should ignore neo-Brandeisian calls to regulate or break up large companies. Another study has found large firms can benefit the economy and are crucial for optimal productivity.

While ITIF applauds the Commission for its efforts to evaluate the adequacy of California’s competition laws and consider possible changes, this comment highlights concerns with both the single-firm and concentration reports, and specifically regarding their respective legal and economic findings.

Policymakers should not follow neo-Brandeisian calls to break up large companies because such actions will only hurt the economy and small firms

Monopoly power is not the main explanation for changes in workers’ earnings after a merger or acquisition, and including labor monopsony power in the updated Merger Guidelines will not only disincentivize greater consolidation but will also harm consumers. The FTC and DOJ should ignore the guideline on labor monopsony when reviewing mergers.

A report by the Economic Innovation Group (EIG) concludes that declining knowledge diffusion is the underlying cause of declining business dynamism. However, its theoretical model is based on flawed assumptions, while its mathematical model has methodological issues.

A recent paper found that the average innovative target firm received a takeover premium and cumulative abnormal stock returns that were 4.2 and 5.6 percentage points, respectively, higher than their non-innovative counterparts.

The proposed revival of the Robinson-Patman Act will not only have consequences for consumers but also for the small businesses they are trying to protect.

Congress should pass the Tax Relief for American Families and Workers Act to restore full R&D expensing to drive U.S productivity, growth, and global competitiveness.

A recent article contends that an increase in concentration in the last two decades is amplifying price increases. But ITIF has found that corporate concentration has not increased, nor have price markups increased.