Publications: Giorgio Castiglia

The recent trial in FTC v. Meta shows the important role that economic experiments can play in establishing a relevant market in antitrust cases. The evidence provided by Meta’s expert economists significantly hampers the FTC’s definition of the relevant market and thus its overall case.

Giorgio Castiglia appeared on the Technocracy podcast, hosted by Heena Goswami of the Institute for Governance, Policies & Politics, to discuss whether the United States is moving toward a tech oligarchy and what that would mean for the future of democracy.

While U.S. antitrust enforcement is likely to shift under a second Trump administration, ongoing cases against Big Tech are expected to continue. Rather than doubling down on neo-Brandeisian antitrust, the Trump administration should use evidence-based policymaking that recognizes how firms evolve in response to incentives and market dynamics.

Rather than adopt the European Union’s model for regulating competition, policymakers considering how to govern digital markets should carefully evaluate whether digital antitrust regulation is justified and consider whether concerns about anticompetitive behavior can be addressed with less intrusive and more cost-effective tools.

Critics on both sides of the aisle view the “private power” of dominant tech firms as unassailable and protected by anticompetitive conduct, but their alleged monopoly power is often overstated.

By deciding not to pursue digital competition regulation, Australia can avoid the problems that are already materializing as a result of ex-ante regimes like the EU’s DMA.

Sustaining technological advancement and innovation requires the scale of larger enterprises. If antitrust enforcers are serious about promoting innovation as a key policy goal (as they should be), they should not deter industry concentration.