Antitrust

South Korea should reject fee caps that could weaken services and growth opportunities, enforce existing competition law, and help restaurants adopt technologies that reduce operating costs and improve productivity.

Jack Nicastro spoke on a CSIS panel examining how national security considerations should factor into antitrust decisions, the potential implications of structural remedies for U.S. competitiveness, and the role of alternative policy tools in addressing security concerns.

Join ITIF for a panel discussion with international experts on a forthcoming report analyzing a decade of previously uncompiled KFTC enforcement data, what its findings mean for U.S.–Korea economic relations, and how policymakers in both countries should respond.

Pricing software can facilitate collusion, but the relevant question is how firms use it. Policymakers should target practices that undermine competition rather than prohibit a technology with legitimate uses.

KFTC enforcement data suggests de facto bias against leading American technology companies. Given this record, U.S. policymakers should demand fair treatment for U.S. firms, and South Korean policymakers should reconsider expanding the KFTC’s authority over online platforms.

Policymakers should reject calls to intervene after the dismissal of Chegg’s and PMC’s antitrust lawsuits over Google’s AI-generated search summaries. Protecting businesses from the effects of technological change isn’t the same as promoting competition and innovation.

Jack Nicastro sat down with Richard Morrison to discuss antitrust law, the consumer welfare standard, how to be an entrepreneur, and the human value of economic growth.

Developing common AI safety standards does not, by itself, undermine competition. Policymakers should not force companies to choose between competing vigorously and working together to prevent serious safety risks. Antitrust law should allow both.

More troubling than any effects on competition the decree will have is what it does to antitrust itself: It uses competition law to enact industrial policy goals that have little to do with competition.

The Proposed Amendment would have the effect of “protecting” startups by frustrating larger firms from acquiring their founders and employees. Adopting such a policy would predictably chill incentives to innovate.