Regulation and Antitrust
The Schumpeterian perspective represents a new intellectual framework for practical antitrust reforms that enable the innovation economy. That is the mission of ITIF’s Schumpeter Project: to advance dynamic competition policy in which innovation is a central concern for antitrust enforcement, not a secondary consideration.
May 2, 2022
A recent Treasury report on labor market competition provided a misleading narrative about labor market concentration and its effect on workers. Labor market power is largely due to labor market frictions, not concentration. Firms are not profiting at the expense of workers.
April 28, 2022
Dynamic Antitrust Discussion Series: “Chief Economists’ Perspectives on Horizontal Merger Guidelines”
Please join ITIF for the latest in a series of discussions on “dynamic antitrust.” In this installment, Julie Carlson will sit down with former chief economists from the DOJ and FTC to discuss their views on the planned revisions to the guidelines.
April 18, 2022
Protecting American innovation is especially critical in an environment in which the military increasingly depends on dual-use technologies such as the memory products at issue in this transaction. We should not allow China to weaponize antitrust for theft of American intellectual property.
April 14, 2022
ITIF’s Schumpeter Project on Competition Policy and George Washington University’s Regulatory Studies Center co-hosted a special conference for antitrust scholars and practitioners to gather and reflect on the Schumpeterian approach to antitrust as we paid tribute to Jerry Ellig’s seminal work on dynamic antitrust.
April 8, 2022
Please join ITIF’s Schumpeter Project on Competition Policy and the Classical Liberal Institute at NYU School of Law for a joint conference to discuss the shifting antitrust paradigm and its implications for the rule of law and innovation.
April 4, 2022
The Senate’s main antitrust bills—the American Innovation and Choice Online Act and the Open App Markets Act—emulate a stalled House package and the EU’s deeply flawed Digital Markets Act. They err on many fronts, and the main arguments for them are at odds with reality.
April 1, 2022
Anticorporate Neo-Brandeisians have a big stake in painting a dystopian picture of rampant monopolists—killing small businesses, jacking up prices, and crushing wages—all in their attempts to achieve a wholesale restructuring of U.S. antitrust law and practice. But these claims to date have largely been hortatory.
April 1, 2022
Please join ITIF for the latest in a series of discussions on “dynamic antitrust,” in which ITIF’s Schumpeter Project on Competition Policy hosts leading scholars and antitrust enforcers to discuss the path forward in making antitrust a foundation for innovation.
March 31, 2022
Accepting Epic’s arguments and preventing Apple from continuing to operate its closed mobile ecosystem would eliminate a signature attractive feature of Apple’s products, to the detriment of consumer welfare, competition, and innovation.
March 28, 2022
Facebook’s business justification for limiting platform access for rival app developers was self-evident: It did not want to help them replicate its core functions, nor did it want to share its intellectual property—certainly not for free. That is rational competition, not unlawful anticompetitive behavior.