Antimonopoly activities of the state - abstract. State regulation Material on the topic of state antimonopoly policy

Introduction

The topic of my coursework “Antimonopoly policy of the state” is currently very relevant, since in most countries the market economy predominates. The action of market competition, the free market, inevitably gives rise to a monopoly, which changes the conditions of competition, and the functioning mechanisms are put under attack market system.

Monopolies, due to the high level of concentration of economic resources, create opportunities for accelerating technical progress. However, these opportunities are realized in cases where such acceleration contributes to the extraction of monopoly high profits. The problems of monopolization of economic life and competition in commodity markets today attract the close attention of not only specialists, but also the general public. This is evidenced by various articles and statements: “Strategic success is achieved only in conditions open economy, and not behind a protectionist fence. The same rules are better for everyone special regimes and individual exceptions. Monopoly corrupts, absolute monopoly corrupts absolutely. Without competition, only prices rise. Property rights are sacred. Private property is more effective than state property. The state is not an effective entrepreneur and should not be involved in business.”

Since the early 90s of the 20th century, these problems have become acute for Russia: without taking firm and consistent measures against monopolism, one cannot hope for the success of economic reform and the transition to a market economy. Trying to compensate for market imperfections, the state, resorting to various methods and methods, selects the most adequate for a particular task.

The most important of these tasks is to eliminate the consequences generated by market imperfections.

To counter the monopolization of markets and protect competition, the state:

Develops laws on the basis of which it is possible to identify and punish firms caught in monopolization;

Creates organizations that monitor developments in markets and identify cases of their monopolization (in Russia, such activities are carried out by the State Antimonopoly Committee);

Helps create new firms that can counteract or destroy the monopolization of markets (this is done in our country by the Small Business Support Committee).

To begin with, we will define the concept of monopoly itself, some of its character traits and negative impact on the country's economy, in order to understand the significance of antitrust regulation.

Chapter 1. general characteristics monopolized market

1.1. Definition of monopoly.

Monopoly (from Greek monos- one, poleo- sell) in a narrow sense - this is the market dominance of one seller. However, in a broad sense, it refers to any dominant position of one or a group of persons in any field of activity. The market turns out to be monopolized when products that do not have close substitutes are offered to many buyers by one seller due to the fact that entry into this market is closed for other sellers. Market closure can be defined as a legislative ban on certain types of economic activity(patented technologies for manufacturing products, a state monopoly on alcoholic beverages or the gambling business), and the need to make large one-time investments in fixed capital, which cannot be returned in the event of an unsuccessful attempt to “enter” the industry (the cost of creating highly specialized equipment).

In a pure monopoly:

There is only one company in the industry that produces of this product or this service. Therefore, the concepts of “firm” and “industry” are identical;

There are no close substitute products. The product of this company is unique, and the buyer has no acceptable alternatives;

Monopolized access to any economic resources;

A monopolist firm controls the volume of supply in a given market and exercises control over price;

It is impossible for another enterprise to enter this industry. Entry to the industry is blocked.

There is no competition.

1.2. Negative features of a monopolized market

Like everything else in the world, monopoly in economics has its pros and cons. “All monopoly and all pursuit of profit is evil,” says Ford knowledgeably (68-17). Let us define some negative aspects of monopolistic domination:

Being the only seller of a unique product, monopolies can increase its price without limit.

Example. Consumer prices for gasoline in March 2005. on average in Russia increased by 0.3% compared to February 2005. and amounted to 13.92 rubles. per liter In particular, consumer prices for A-76 gasoline increased by 0.1% and amounted to 12.23 rubles. per liter, for AI-92 - by 0.4%, amounting to 14.19 rubles. per liter, for AI-95 - also by 0.4% - to 15.33 rubles. per liter Reported this today federal Service state statistics (Rosstat).

In March 2005 an increase in consumer prices for gasoline was noted in 30 regions Russian Federation. It was the most significant in the Republic of Karelia - by 3.7%. Compared with the previous month gasoline prices remained unchanged in 40 constituent entities of the Russian Federation. A decrease in gasoline prices was observed in 19 constituent entities of the Russian Federation, including in the Republic of Tyva - by 1.5%.

In Moscow, consumer prices for gasoline in March increased by an average of 1.4%; in St. Petersburg, consumer prices for gasoline decreased by 0.8%.

We have been observing an increase in gasoline prices not only during this period, but over a long period of time.

It is not profitable for monopolies to create products that replace their goods, so their activities slow down the pace of scientific and technological progress;

The activities of monopolies weaken competition, along with a positive impact on economic processes. In the economy, monopolists (oligarchs) can suppress free and fair competition, subjugate less powerful businesses, and can impose their discriminatory conditions on society: low wages for their workers, poor quality of goods, forced “add-ons” to their products (like a program for logging into the Internet , fastened by Microsoft to operating system"Windows") and so on.

1.3. Features of the monopoly position

The peculiarity of the monopoly position is that the industry demand curve is the demand curve for its products. Therefore, for a monopoly, price is not an exogenous parameter, but a decreasing function of its output. Having made a decision on the volume of output, the monopolist, given a given demand, simultaneously determines the price at which he can sell the produced products. Which output-price combination he chooses depends not only on costs, but also on his goal. Unlike a perfect competitor, for him it does not necessarily have to be profit maximization. The position of the only seller allows the monopolist to set other goals, such as maximizing revenue or profit margins. In addition, under certain conditions, a monopoly can sell the same products at the same time at different prices.

The main goal of every monopolist is to obtain maximum profit. To show at what price and what volume of output the monopolist's marginal revenue will be as close as possible to marginal costs and the resulting profit will be the greatest, let us turn to a numerical example. Let's imagine that the company is the only manufacturer of this product on the market, and summarize the data on its costs and income in table. 1.

We assumed that 1 thousand units. A monopolist can sell its products at a price of 500 rubles. In the future, when expanding sales by 1 thousand units. he is forced to reduce its price by 2 rubles each time, so marginal income is reduced by 4 rubles. with every increase in sales volume. The firm will maximize profit by producing 14 thousand units. products. It is at this volume of output that its marginal revenue is closest to marginal cost. If it produces 15 thousand units, then this additional 1 thousand units. will add more to costs than to income, thereby reducing profits.

In a competitive market, when the price and marginal revenue of the firm are the same, 15 thousand units would be produced. products, and the price of the products would be lower than under monopoly conditions.

Table 1. Dynamics of costs and income of a company under monopoly conditions.

Graphically, the process of choosing price and production volume by a monopolist firm is shown in Figure 2:

Since in our example production is possible only in whole units of production, and point A on the graph lies between 14 and 15 thousand units, 14 thousand units will be produced. products. The 15th thousand not produced by the monopolist means a loss for consumers, since some of them refused to purchase due to the high price set by the manufacturer.

Any firm whose demand for its product is not perfectly elastic will face a situation where marginal revenue is less than price. Therefore, the price and volume of production that brings it maximum profit will be respectively higher and lower than under conditions of perfect competition. In this sense, in imperfectly competitive markets, each firm has a certain amount of monopoly power, which is strongest in a pure monopoly.

The development of large production monopolies significantly changed the market of perfect competition. It practically ceased to exist in its classic version. Manufacturers find themselves in unequal conditions, and the nature of competition changes. A fierce struggle is unfolding between large commodity producers using a wide variety of competition methods.

Chapter 2. Methodological approaches, trends and resolution of problems of antimonopoly regulation.

2.1. General provisions and directions of the state's antimonopoly policy.

One of the functions of the state in a market economy is to maintain competition as economic basis market mechanism. Therefore, practically in all developed countries ah, where monopolies have a fairly strong position, the state creates anti-monopoly legislation and carries out anti-monopoly policy. A monopoly has a certain power over the price, based on various prerequisites: market concentration, secret and explicit agreements on the division of markets and price levels, the creation of artificial shortages, etc. In these conditions, the state, to one degree or another, is forced to control the activities of business entities to prevent monopolization of the economy countries. Antimonopoly policy refers to the system government measures legal, economic, financial, tax, psychological nature, preventing manifestations of anti-competitive behavior and promoting the effective functioning of a market economy. Antimonopoly policy is the main direction of government activity in creating competitive market structures.

The main directions of the state's antimonopoly policy are:

State control over prices and product range, capital centralization processes;

Prohibition of secret agreements between firms;

Conduct, if necessary, disaggregation of monopolies;

Safeguarding and protecting the competitive environment: preventing monopolistic mergers, liberalizing markets and facilitating access to foreign goods and capital, supporting small businesses, venture capital firms, etc.

These measures form a kind of antimonopoly prevention. At the same time, the state should not fight any manifestation of monopoly, but only those forms of it that limit competition to a threatening scale. The state must clearly define the zones of monopoly where it is economically justified (natural monopolies, based on leadership in scientific and technical progress), and create a mechanism for regulating it.

For any legislation, the definition of the very concept of monopoly is key. Despite the fact that we defined the concept of monopoly above, we will once again designate a somewhat different formulation. Monopoly here refers to the conquest or maintenance by a firm or a group of firms of a dominant position in any market through the practice of limiting or weakening competition. It is important to keep in mind that the dominant position of a company is not necessarily identical to the concept of monopoly and is prosecuted in accordance with the law. So, if a company gained a dominant position as a result of reducing production costs and prices for its products, conducting active and effective innovation activities, releasing fundamentally new products, i.e. Due to the improvement of its own activities and financial policies, it is considered a monopoly and is not prosecuted. The law does not pursue the natural economic growth of an enterprise, but its use of non-economic methods aimed at ousting a competitor.

2.2. Antimonopoly legislation

Antitrust law is legislation aimed at preventing firms from accumulating monopoly power that is dangerous to society.

Antitrust legislation was first developed in the United States, the country with the highest level of monopolization of the economy, at the end of the 19th century. It is based on the “three pillars”, three main legislative acts:

1. The Sherman Act (1890), according to which secret monopolization of trade, sole control in a particular industry, and price collusion are prohibited. Punishments included fines, damages, imprisonment, and even dissolution of the guilty company. The main feature of the Sherman Act is its focus on combating existing monopolies. Its disadvantages were the vagueness of basic definitions, the absence of a permanent body monitoring the implementation of the law and preventive antimonopoly measures.

2. Clayton Act (1914). The law not only clarified the basic concepts of antitrust legislation, but also expanded the concept antimonopoly activities. This law prohibits restrictive business practices in sales, price discrimination, certain types of mergers, interlocking directorates, etc. The government's Federal Trade Commission was charged with enforcing antitrust laws.

3. The Robinson-Patman Act (1936) prohibits restrictive trade practices, price scissors, price discrimination, etc.

General scheme price corridor:

________|______________________|_____

S/s Starting

product price

The dynamics of the price corridor is determined by the system of the market mechanism itself, which cannot be in a state of stagnation. However, it is not formed completely spontaneously.

Thanks to these laws, the prevention of “monopoly struggle” expanded. Subsequently, US antitrust legislation increasingly

moved from a narrow to a broad interpretation of monopolistic behavior. The Wheeler-Lee Act (1938) was aimed at protecting consumer rights (against false advertising and misrepresentation); the Keller-Kefauver law (1950) drew attention to the interaction of monopolists in the sphere of tangible assets.

In the 70s, antimonopoly legislation received further development. The law began to prosecute:

Horizontal price fixing;

Horizontal collusion in market share;

An agreement between competitive firms to limit areas of activity;

Group boycott, i.e. agreed refusal to trade;

Agreement between firms on mutual sales and purchases;

Related sales, i.e. sale of products only in the range established by the supplier.

In the 80s, strict regulation of the activities of American companies came into conflict with economic situation. Limiting the flexibility of firms threatened to weaken their positions, both in the global and non-domestic markets. In the more liberal antimonopoly policy of the 80s, more attention was paid to industry specifics and the presence of competitors from foreign firms. As a result, estimates of the level of concentration of industry markets decreased, and mergers of firms began to be allowed.

In Western Europe, antimonopoly regulation is also an important element of state economic policy. It was created in parallel in all countries of Western Europe after the Second World War and received final design in the 70s. In general terms, two main directions can be distinguished:

1. Control over anti-competitive activities to create monopolies: division of markets based on division production programs firms, exchange of patents and licenses, organizational agreements on joint implementation economic activity, mergers, etc.

2. Monitoring (observation) of individual anti-competitive practices of firms, which take advantage of the firm’s advantageous position in a given market.

In all countries of Western Europe, the acquisition of a dominant position by an individual company or their group is considered an anti-competitive factor and is the object of close attention of the state. In France, mergers of enterprises are prohibited if control over ¼ of the market for a given product is achieved. In Germany, an enterprise is considered dominant if it has no significant competitors or occupies 1/3 of the market for goods and services. In England, if the share of one company or group of companies controls ¼ of the market, it is recognized as a monopoly.

2.3. Antimonopoly legislation in Russia.

The first law concerning antimonopoly regulation of the economy appeared in Russia in 1991 - the law “On competition and restriction of monopolistic activities in commodity markets” dated March 22, 1991.

From 1991 to 1999 it was introduced a large number of objectively necessary laws that constituted the organizational and legal basis for regulating monopolies. For example, the laws “On the privatization of state and municipal enterprises in the Russian Federation” dated July 3, 1991, “On the supply of products for federal state needs" dated December 13, 1994, "On financial and industrial groups" dated November 30, 1995, "On natural monopolies" dated August 17, 1995, "On joint stock companies" dated December 26, 1995, "On non-profit organizations" dated January 12, 1996, "On advertising" dated July 18, 1996, "On measures to protect the economic interests of the Russian Federation in foreign trade" dated April 14, 1998 .and others, as well regulations The President of the Russian Federation and the government.

But in 1999, eight years after the start of reforms, antimonopoly legislation was in dire need of improvement, mainly based on a generalization of law enforcement practice. There is a need to update the entire legal framework so that it will make it possible to more reliably suppress abuse of market power, infringement of the interests of business entities, and apply penalties to legal entities and individuals, including officials federal and regional executive authorities and local governments to better regulate the safety and quality of goods and services.

As a result of this need, Russian government in 1999, the Ministry of Antimonopoly Policy and Entrepreneurship Support (MAP) was created. It was created on the basis of the State Committee for Antimonopoly Policy that already existed by that time, which, in my opinion, failed to achieve tangible success in creating a full-fledged competitive environment.

MAP consists of several bodies - it includes the Federal Service of Russia for the Regulation of Natural Monopolies in Transport (FSEMT), the Federal Service of Russia for the Regulation of Natural Monopolies in the Field of Communications (FSEMS), the State Committee for the Support and Development of Small Business (SCRP) and, possibly , the Federal Energy Commission (FEC) will be included.

But despite all the measures taken, the level of competition development in our country is clearly insufficient. In Russia, during the period of transition economy, the task of combating monopolism is quite acute. The manifestation of monopolism in countries with transition economies has a number of features. This is primarily due to the fact that the centralized state deliberately created administrative monopoly in almost all spheres of society. IN planned economy monopolism was imposed “from above” in contrast to market economy, where monopolistic associations were formed “from below” as a result of natural development. The state in a planned economy, trying to limit the volume of managerial and economic ties, concentrated the production of each type of product within minimum number enterprises. As a result, a highly monopolized economy was formed. Thus, by the beginning of the 90s in the USSR, 1800 types of products were produced in only one enterprise or association, more than 1100 enterprises were absolute monopolists. The production of many important types of products was dominated by 2-3 enterprises.

In a number of industries, it is impossible to avoid the formation of monopolies. You cannot have two gas pipelines from two competing companies, several heat transfer lines, alternative sources of electricity, etc. in an apartment. The most important task of antimonopoly regulation in Russia at present is not only the elimination of the previously established system of monopolism, but also the creation of a competitive market environment. According to Russian antimonopoly legislation, the position of firms is recognized as dominant only if their market share of the relevant product exceeds 35%. The antimonopoly policy of the state in a transition economy includes two directions:

Demonopolization of the economy, promotion of competition. In Russia in the spring of 1994. The State Program for Demonopolization of the Economy was approved. She identified areas for priority demonopolization measures: trade, construction, communications industries, transport and road complex (excluding railway transport), mechanical engineering. However, this program is of a general nature and does not contain effective measures to develop competition. Sectoral and regional demonopolization programs developed by ministries and regional authorities within the framework of the State program often preserve the existing organizational structures and also do not contain measures to transform monopoly industry structures.

Regulation of the activities of monopolistic enterprises, namely, ensures the prevention, limitation and suppression of monopolistic activities and unfair competition. Unfair competition refers to actions aimed at acquiring advantages that are contrary to the law, business customs, the requirements of integrity, reasonableness and fairness and which have caused (may cause) losses to competitors or damaged their business reputation. It's about about the dissemination of false, inaccurate or distorted information that could cause loss or damage, misleading consumers regarding the nature, method, place of manufacture, consumer properties and quality of the product, as well as incorrect comparison of one’s own product with similar products of competitors. Unfair competition also includes the receipt, use, disclosure of scientific, technical, production, trade information or trade secret without the consent of the owner

Under prevention of monopolistic activity is understood as a set of measures taken by the antimonopoly authority to create economic, organizational and legal conditions in which the emergence of monopolism and the concentration of market power in individual economic entities become impossible due to the characteristics of the commodity market (demonopolization of the economy, elimination of barriers to entry into the market, liberalization of foreign trade, deconcentration markets and expanding their geographical boundaries).

Restriction of monopolistic activities - the process of forming and implementing conditions that do not allow economic entities dominating the market to abuse their market power, limiting competition and infringing on the interests of other economic entities or citizens. This includes, for example, such functions of the antimonopoly authority as maintaining a register of business entities that occupy a market share of a certain product exceeding 35 percent, monitoring economic concentration, and conducting inspections of compliance with antimonopoly legislation.

- Suppression of monopolistic activities - the actual enforcement activities of the antimonopoly authority to identify facts of violation of prohibitions and other restrictions established by antimonopoly legislation, the initiation and consideration of cases and the adoption of decisions on them, mandatory for violators, monitoring the implementation of decisions and orders..

It is carried out through direct (administrative) and indirect (economic) methods of regulation:

Direct methods of antimonopoly regulation:

Prohibition of agreements between producers or consumers in order to limit competitors' access to the market and establish a monopoly price.

constant control over the activities of commodity producers dominating in a certain market sector. As a rule, these are large enterprises that are not subject to disaggregation. The state exercises control over the prices and quality of products of such enterprises;

Forced disaggregation of all forms of associations of enterprises occupying a monopoly position in the market.

For example, American experience shows the benefits of such disaggregation. Thus, after the division of the monopolistic giant AT&T [American Telephone and Telegraph Company] in the 1980s, the newly formed companies immediately carried out previously hampered innovations and doubled their (!) reduced prices.

If we take Russia, then the antimonopoly policy of the 1990s was mainly aimed not against the abuses of monopolists (electricity, gas, transport and other companies) in inflating prices, but only at forcing the latter to fully share with the state the excess profits they received .

Prevention of new monopoly formations or control over increasing economic concentration. It occurs:

· as a result of the creation, reorganization or merger of enterprises and associations;

· when it becomes possible for a group of organizations to pursue a coordinated policy in the market. According to the law “On Competition and Restriction of Monopolistic Activities in Product Markets,” if an enterprise reaches a certain threshold in terms of the volume of operations, it is obliged to obtain the consent of the antimonopoly authority for its actions (preliminary control) or notify it about them (subsequent control).

Firstly, the creation, merger and accession of commercial organizations, associations, unions and associations are preliminarily controlled if their assets exceed 100 thousand minimum wages; secondly, the liquidation and separation (spin-off) of state and municipal unitary enterprises whose assets exceed 50 thousand minimum wages, if this leads to the emergence of an enterprise whose share in the product market exceeds 35% (except for cases where the enterprise is liquidated by court decision ).

All these measures come into force only if one or more firms have a dominant position.

Indirect (economic) methods of antimonopoly regulation:

Control over the prices of monopolistic enterprises, limiting their growth (establishing limit values). The law prohibits setting monopolistically high or monopolistically low prices, withdrawing goods from circulation in order to create or maintain a shortage or increase the price, imposing contract terms on the counterparty that are unfavorable for him or not related to the subject of the contract, including in the contract discriminatory conditions that impose on the counterparty in an unequal position compared to other enterprises, to prevent other enterprises from entering (or leaving) the market, to encourage the counterparty to refuse to enter into contracts with individual buyers (customers), despite the fact that it is possible to produce or supply the desired product.

Monopoly high price: it is set by the dominant economic entity (manufacturer) in the market for a given product in order to compensate for unreasonable costs caused by underutilization of production capacity and (or) to obtain additional profit by reducing the quality of the product.

Monopoly low price: the price of the purchased product, set by the buyer dominating the market for this product in order to obtain additional profit and (or) compensate for its unreasonable costs at the expense of the seller; a price deliberately set by the dominant seller in the market for a given product at a level that generates losses from the sale in order to force competitors out of the market.

The ban on establishing monopoly prices is the most stable, although there are many problems here too. In particular, "Temporary guidelines on identifying monopoly prices" dated April 21, 1994, propose to simultaneously use the concept of profit limitation and the concept of market comparison. The application of the first concept is complicated by the fact that production costs must be installed taking into account that production capacity may be exhausted. But given the general decline in production in Russia, this is unrealistic. It is also unrealistic to find out the actual cost, profit and profitability of an enterprise in the conditions of the dominance of barter and “black cash”. Therefore, the concept of comparing markets is preferable, within the framework of which the antimonopoly agency does not need to check the production indicators of the monopolist enterprise, it is sufficient on the basis external factors identify monopoly high or monopolistically low prices.

Nowadays in Russia monopolistic high prices are more often practiced, and in countries with developed competition - monopolistically low prices, sometimes even dumping. Russian monopolism manifests its anti-competitive behavior primarily in relations with consumers or suppliers, rather than with competitors. But as competition develops, the likelihood of monopolistic use increases. low prices: powerful multi-industry companies, thanks to cross-subsidization due to the profitability of some sectors, can lower prices for the products of others and thereby block competitors. In this part, it is especially necessary to control financial and industrial groups.

Establishment of the maximum level of profitability (profitability);

Comprehensive government support for small and new firms ( tax benefits, subsidies from the budget, preferential lending, government orders, etc.)

Assumption foreign capital and assistance to foreign companies and joint ventures.

Antimonopoly policy also uses prohibitions on anti-competitive actions of government and management bodies. The development of market relations involves the elimination of direct intervention government agencies authorities in the activities of enterprises. The law prohibits the adoption of regulations and actions that limit the independence of enterprises, create discriminatory or favorable conditions for some to the detriment of others, and thereby limit competition and infringe on the interests of enterprises or citizens.

However, the authorities of the constituent entities of the Federation and local governments commit numerous violations, in particular, they unreasonably provide benefits, limit the creation of enterprises, impose bans on their activities, the sale or purchase of goods, indicate the priority of certain agreements, arbitrarily set the size of the registration fee, and prevent entry of goods into the market and services of “out-of-town” enterprises, and so on.

The register is widely used as a tool for antimonopoly control. Based on the results of an analysis of the state of the commodity market and the share of enterprises on it (more or less 35%), they are included or excluded from the state register. MAP does this if we are talking about Russian market in general, or its territorial administrations in the case of regional markets. The register is compiled in order to have information base about the largest market entities and monitor their compliance with antimonopoly legislation.

The register must include enterprises that are the only producers in Russia of certain types of products. It includes, for example, the Bryansk Machine-Building Plant (isothermal cars), Kalugaputmash (rail welding machines, laying cranes) and so on.

2.5. General characteristics of natural monopolies.

Natural monopolies are included in a special category, which become the only producers of products not because the market is closed, but due to a long-term increase in economies of scale. A natural monopoly exists when economies of scale are so large that one firm can supply the entire market at lower unit costs than a number of competing firms would have. Such conditions are typical for public enterprises. In these cases, economies of scale in the production and distribution of a product are so large that large-scale operations are necessary to obtain low unit costs and low prices. This is clearly visible from the graph. As production volume increases significantly, long-term

average costs Figure 1 (long-term average costs). If the market were divided among many producers, economies of scale would not be achieved, unit costs would be high, and high prices would be required to cover these costs. As possible means to ensure socially acceptable behavior on the part of a natural monopoly, two alternatives are presented. One is state property, and the other is government regulation. If competition is not possible, then regulated monopolies must be created to avoid possible abuses of uncontrolled monopoly power. Most monopolistic industries are natural monopolies and are therefore subject to public regulation. In particular, the prices and rates that public utilities - railroads, telephone companies, natural gas and electricity suppliers - can charge are determined by federal and local regulatory commissions or agencies. Figure 2 shows the demand and cost parameters of a natural monopoly. Because fixed costs are high, the demand curve intersects the average cost curve at a point where average costs fall further. Obviously, it would be impractical to have a number of firms in such an industry, because by dividing the market, each firm would move further to the left along its average cost curve, so that unit costs would become much higher. The relationship between market demand and costs is such that achieving low unit costs allows for one producer.

The state must clearly define the markets of natural monopolies and control their activities, determining the level of prices and tariffs, the main parameters of the volume and range of goods and services they produce. In relation to natural monopolies, the state is also forced to carry out direct or indirect regulation. Modern antimonopoly policy is primarily aimed at using the advantages of a natural monopoly under the control of society and the state and at preventing or limiting artificial monopoly. For these purposes, measures are being taken against excessive concentration of economic power, artificial shortages, and price abuses. At the same time, free and fair competition in the economy is stimulated.

2.6. A method for rationing the profits of natural monopolies.

The concept of determining the level of profit included in regulated prices bears a clear imprint of a transitional state Russian economy, its market institutions, private property and competition. The method of rationing profits in regulated chains significantly influences investment activity natural monopolies and their effectiveness capital investments. According to the market approach to price regulation, investors will invest in those investment projects that provide a rate of return on invested capital that covers the opportunity cost of capital (interest). Here is a typical statement: “The form of collecting investments in the electric power industry depends on the choice of the country’s development strategy. If the electric power industry is considered as a necessary link in the rise of industry, then investments should be included in the cost of electricity production, which will lead to the smallest increase in tariff. If the electric power industry is considered as an industry that provides receipt of dividends, then investments must be received from profits, and in this case the increase in tariffs will be the greatest, since an increase in profits allocated to investments leads to an increase in income taxes." Needless to say, supporters of this position not only seek tax benefits, but also cross out the fundamental difference between current expenses and capital expenses (the latter are not expenses of a given year), as well as the generally accepted rules for reflecting them in the cost of production.

Let's consider the analysis of sources of financing for fixed capital by average and large enterprises industries of natural monopolies in Russia in 1999-2000. based on the table below.

As can be seen from the table data, in 1999 communications are the only industry in which, among the sources of financing capital investments,

issue of shares (0.3%). It is characterized by a significant share of bank loans in the total volume of funds allocated for investments (12.3%), as well as the highest share of profits in financing capital investments (28.2%).

Thus, communications as an industry is most focused on external market sources of financing capital investments, since

More than other sectors of natural monopolies, it is subject to market incentives.

This is explained by the fact that some of its tariffs are not regulated, and those that are regulated attract less attention from the government and the population, since communication services occupy a relatively modest place in the expenses of most consumers.

In the gas industry in 1999, the share of profit in the sources of financing capital investments was only 0.6%, which is significantly less than in the electric power industry, railway and pipeline transport (15-17%). But the share" borrowed money other organizations" is two orders of magnitude more (30.6%) than in the electric power industry (0.4%) and in railway transport (0.1%). In general, in 1999, the electric power industry, railway transport, gas industry and pipeline transport relied primarily on non-market forms of raising funds for investment in fixed assets.

In 2000, at first glance, the situation in the analyzed industries changed noticeably compared to 1999. On average, for five industries, the share of own funds in the sources of financing capital investments fell to 38%, and the share of raised funds increased to 62%. However, a closer examination of the data leads to the conclusion that the situation in the circulation of enterprises in these industries to the capital market has remained virtually unchanged.

The volume of funds raised increased due to sharp growth other sources. In 2000, other funds raised amounted (on average across five industries) to 41.7% of all sources of financing investments in fixed assets (versus 7.1% in 1999). The volumes of other sources are especially large in the gas industry and railway transport. In the latter industry, huge funds are centralized in the ministry's fund, and then directed to specific enterprises for the acquisition and creation of fixed assets. Enterprises show these sources in statistical reporting as “other”. Something similar is apparently happening in the system of OAO Gazprom, which transferred a significant part of fixed assets to the balance sheet of the parent organization and leases them to subsidiaries and dependent organizations.

As we see, the structure of sources of financing investments in fixed assets that changed in 2000 indicates mainly the development of processes of centralization and redistribution of funds within systems of interdependent organizations. However, in the electric power industry financial policy enterprises are becoming more and more market-oriented, judging by the structure of sources of financing capital investments.

Based on the analysis of the above data, expert assessments and information on the issue of corporate bonds by the largest companies, a general conclusion can be drawn. In the gas industry and pipeline transport, the share of external market sources of financing capital investments is 3-4%, and according to a more realistic estimate - 1-2%. In railway transport their share is even smaller. In the electric power and communications industries, the share of market sources is 10 and 15%, respectively, or, most likely, 8 and 13%.

The structure of sources of financing investments of natural monopolies in Russia differs little from the structure inherent in the unregulated sector of the economy. This can be explained by the peculiarities of Russian capitalism. In 1999, all economic organizations in Russia allocated only 2.4% of the profits of profitable organizations to pay dividends and interest. In industry this figure was 1.4%, in transport in general - 1%, in the communications industry - 4.3%.

It should be noted that the policy of regulating prices for the products of natural monopolies indirectly impedes the formation of a capital market in Russia. This impact should not be overlooked, since investments from natural monopolies make up a significant portion (about 30%) of all investments in the Russian economy.

2.7. Reforming natural monopolies in Russia.

Currently, in Russia, essentially, two alternative approaches to reforming natural monopolies have emerged. Supporters of the first consider the presence of competition not only as the main condition, but also as a criterion for the efficiency of the entire economy. They demand the rapid expansion of competition relations to all sectors of the economy. In the field of natural monopolies this means separation transport networks(maintaining a monopoly position) from producers of gas, electricity and heat, transport services, which must be placed in competitive conditions. Proponents of the second approach do not deny positive effect from the spread of competition, but consider it necessary to evaluate the specific magnitude of such an effect in comparison with the magnitude of the transformation costs inevitable in such cases.

As the experience of our largely pseudo-market economy shows, the disaggregation of such giants as the Ministry of Railways, OJSC Gazprom, RAO UES of Russia is fraught not with the revival of competition with all the positive consequences for the economy, but with the formation of numerous intermediaries, as happened in the coal industry after the disaggregation of organizational and management structures and the separation of mines into independent legal entities.

A number of features of the activities of natural monopolies can cause an increase in total costs in the national economy. First, due to the lack of sufficient incentives for the monopolist to minimize its internal costs, its interest in carrying out large-scale reorganization or innovation is much less than that of firms selling their products in competitive markets. Secondly, there are opportunities to “inflate” those overhead items that allow managers of such large companies improve your personal well-being.

An objective obstacle to the development of competition in the infrastructure sector is the high barriers to entry for new firms. The “magnitude” of such barriers is determined by the amount of investment required to create an infrastructure network. The contradictory organizational and economic conditions in which natural monopolies operate led M. Friedman to the conclusion that, unfortunately, there is no acceptable solution to the problem of technological monopoly. Only a choice of three evils is possible - “a private unregulated monopoly, a private monopoly regulated by the state, and direct economic activity of the state” 1 .

The approach to reforming natural monopolies, which involves separating transport networks from production with a corresponding division of the infrastructure sector into competitive and non-competitive sectors, was tested in its purest form in the UK during the reform railways, which was carried out in the following areas:

Separating the railroad network from operations by creating a company that owns all railroad tracks and stations but does not operate them;

Sale of leasing companies - owners of rolling stock for passenger transportation;

A company that owns all railway tracks and stations, but is not involved in their operation;

Organization of bidding for a franchise for passenger transportation;

Sale of leasing companies - owners of rolling stock for passenger transportation;

Sale of enterprises engaged in freight transportation;

Sale of other companies in the railway industry.

A modern approach to the regulation of natural monopolies should be based on the provision according to which natural monopolies - component what J. Galbraith called the “planning system”. In a modern highly developed economy, it includes the largest corporations. The laws of their behavior differ from the laws of the functioning of the traditional market system, which plays a subordinate role in the modern economy. The market itself is not able to either manage or control the “planning system”. These functions can only be performed by the state and society as a whole. For natural monopolies, such controls should relate to costs, prices and profit distribution.

The economic activities of monopolies, including natural ones, should be considered in the context of the globalization of the world economy and the tightening of international competition of transnational corporations. It is transnational corporations that act as the main subjects of the global economy, accumulating most of the income generated in it. The creation and successful development of these companies require enormous effort, time, a favorable climate, and support, including at the government level. National economy Without such companies, it is doomed to a passive role in global economic relations. Today, in our country there is the only truly transnational company that has undeniable weight on the European continent - OJSC Gazprom.

Reforms of natural monopolies should not be reduced to their primitive fragmentation, but, in fact, to destruction and degradation. This policy generates archaic market relations, which in advanced industrial countries are actively being pushed to the margins. economic life. The Russian economy is still afloat thanks to the functioning of natural monopolies. It is clear that they have “outgrown” the primitive relations (and time) of the “perfectly competitive” market.

The functioning of natural monopolies should become a priority direction of the coordinating industrial policy of the Ministry of Economy of the Russian Federation, which should be built on the basis of long-term forecast estimates of the needs for services and products of natural monopolies in the domestic and world markets. Predictive assessments of the development of natural monopolies must take into account a number of circumstances. Firstly, the need to form interconnected strategies for the internal development of relevant industries (national strategies) and global strategies oriented towards their active role as subjects of competitive relations in global economy. Secondly, the need to link the developed strategies with the periodization of the development of the Russian economy until 2015, including the stages of financial and industrial stabilization, economic growth and finally, the stage of large-scale entry into the world market. Thirdly, the need to take into account the “sectoral” features of the development of natural monopolies, determined by their organizational, economic and financial state, and the place they occupy in the macroeconomic system.

Conclusion

Antimonopoly regulation is the most important component of the economic policy of the state in all countries with developed market economy. Antimonopoly regulation is a purposeful government activity carried out on the basis and within the limits permitted current legislation, to establish and implement rules for conducting economic activity in commodity markets in order to protect fair competition and ensure the efficiency of market relations.

It should be noted that the main negative side of economic monopolization is the excessive power of monopolistic firms. Market power is the ability to influence the price of a product. The goal of antitrust policy is to prevent firms from gaining unlimited market power, expanding the scope of competition and converting it into non-price competition.

To summarize the above, it can be argued that antimonopoly legislation is the most important component modern economy. The scope of its functioning affects the interests of not only producers, but also consumers, providing some with the opportunity to sell their goods on the market in a competitive environment, and others with optimal prices for goods and services.

Antimonopoly policy in Russia is not yet well developed, but there are all tendencies towards further improvement in this area. Unfortunately, our legal system has not yet reached the appropriate level necessary to protect small businesses and combat monopolistic entities.

This is another problem modern Russia, which remains to be solved.

Perhaps these problems and the difficulties associated with their solution arise due to the fact that Russia relatively recently embarked on the path of reforms, most of which, by the way, were unsuccessful or ineffective. It is impossible to rebuild the economy in one decade. In addition, monopolies in our country are not the result of natural development, but deliberately created entities. Moreover, I am sure that antimonopoly policy will develop fruitfully both in relation to closed and closed monopolies open type, and in relation to natural monopolies, which is perhaps the most important for the Russian economy at the moment.

How will antimonopoly policy develop in the near future?

This question can be partially answered by quoting a statement from the head of the bureau’s sector economic analysis A. E. Shastitko. He noted that: “... expanding the domestic market is a means of ensuring national and economic security countries, however, the formation of a tough competitive environment requires adjustments in the behavior of enterprises. And in this regard, the choice of antimonopoly policy measures will be based on the benefits and costs expected by the state. Antimonopoly policy in Russia is going through the process of formation, improvement of laws and their active application.” .

I absolutely agree with him that antimonopoly policy in Russia will soon receive additional adjustments and clarifications.

Reasonable, clear and confident reform of antimonopoly policy can help the Russian economy improve and improve. At the same time, Russia should not rely so much on Foreign experience how much to look for our own ways out of the current situation, since the reasons that gave rise to monopolies are not the same, but they differ radically from each other. And if the economy develops, so will life Russian population in general it will certainly get better.

List of used literature

1. Kulikov L.M. " Economic theory": Textbook. - M.: TK Welby, Prospekt Publishing House, 2004.

2. Economic theory: Tutorial. Part 1 / Ed. E.G. Efimova - M.: MGIU, 2002.

3. Nureyev R.M. Microeconomics course: Textbook for universities. – 2nd ed. – M.: Norma, 2004.

4. Economic theory: Textbook. For students higher textbook institutions / Ed. V.D. Kamaeva. – 9th ed., revised. and additional – M.: Humanite. ed. VLADOS center, 2003.

5. Galperin V.M., Grebennikov P.I., Leussky A.I., Tarasevich L.S. Macroeconomics. S.-Pb. Ed. Economic school, 1997

6. Pindyck R., Rubinfeld D. Microeconomics. –M.: Delo, 1992

7. Lipsits I.V. Economy without secrets. – M.: Delo, 1993

8. Nikitin S., Glazova E. “The state and the problem of monopoly” “ME and MO”, 1999, No. 7

9. A.E. Shastitko. “Antimonopoly regulation in Russia: Agenda and discussion design. Economic Issues, 2004, No. 3.

10. A. Gorodetsky, Y. Pavlenko. "Reforming natural monopolies." Economic Issues, 2000, No. 1.

11. V. Morgunov. "Profit rationing when regulating prices of natural monopolies." Economic Issues, 2001, No. 9.

Profitability is the degree of profitability, or profitability, when comparing the profit received by an enterprise with costs (cost) or the price of products. Kulikov L.M. “Economic theory”: Textbook.-M.: TK Welby, Prospekt Publishing House, 2004.-432 p.

Subsidy (from Lat. subsidium - help, support) - benefit, assistance (usually state and in in cash) region, company, to an individual. Right there.

For example, the Association of Users of Transport Services appealed to the SAC with a statement of violation of the Law “On Competition” by the Ministry of Railways, which obligated the owners of freight cars not belonging to the Ministry of Railways fleet to purchase new units for repairing cars at their own expense, despite the uniform rules of planned repair of rolling stock for all enterprises and organizations, regardless of industry and form of ownership. This decision of the Ministry of Railways, which created discriminatory conditions for enterprises, has been cancelled.

Molodyuk V. Current state of the market electrical energy in Russia and the problems of its development. -

Industrial policy in the Russian Federation, 2001, No. 1.

Magazine No. 3 2001 “Economic Issues.” V. Morgunov “Rationing of profits of natural monopolies”, p. 32

*Data has been rounded. **From the total volume of investments in fixed capital.

Source Goskomstat of Russia

Seminar at the Center for Strategic Research Foundation on the issue: "Antimonopoly regulation and business support"

Introduction

The action of market competition, the free market, inevitably gives rise to a monopoly, which changes the conditions of competition, and the mechanisms of functioning of the market system are under attack.

Monopolies, due to the high level of concentration of economic resources, create opportunities for accelerating technical progress. However, these opportunities are realized in cases where such acceleration contributes to the extraction of monopoly high profits. Joseph Schumpeter and other economists argued that large firms with significant power are desirable in economics because they accelerate technological change, since firms with monopoly power can spend their monopoly profits on research to protect or enhance their monopoly power. . By engaging in research, they provide benefits to both themselves and society as a whole. But there is no convincing evidence that monopolies play a particularly important role in accelerating technological progress, since monopolies can delay the development of technological progress if it threatens their profits.

Antimonopoly policy is, of course, very important for the state’s economy. Well-designed measures to regulate monopolies contribute to the development of competition, stabilization of the market and improvement of the economy as a whole.

Monopoly: concept and types

There are two types of antitrust policies: antitrust policies for natural monopolies and antitrust policies for artificial monopolies. In order to understand issues related to antitrust policy, it is necessary to general outline understand the essence of monopoly itself.

There are a large number of definitions of monopoly, because it is a multidimensional concept. Moreover, this concept is so important that in world economic theory there is even such a concept as the theory of monopoly. Within the framework of this theory, monopoly is viewed through the prism of three aspects:

From a market structure point of view

From a market behavior perspective

3. In terms of market outcomes

Considering each of these aspects separately, it should be clarified that based on the market structure, we can give the following definition: a monopoly is a form of market in which the entire volume of supply falls on only one entity.

Paying the greatest amount of attention to market results, the theory of monopoly notes that in a monopoly the results are associated with the following factors:

monopoly high prices

limited readiness of the monopoly for innovation.

But since the concept of monopoly is very important for the main subject of my work - antitrust policy, it is necessary, in my opinion, to describe this concept in more detail.

So, we can give the following signs of a monopoly:

A monopolistic market is represented by one seller and many buyers.

The products produced are unique (that is, there are no substitute products).

The entry of new firms into the market is virtually impossible due to barriers. There may be different reasons for the existence of such barriers, for example:

Large enterprise sizes and economies of scale.

A system of licenses for certain types of work, selectively issued by the state.

Monopoly ownership of the use of certain resources associated with the production of a rare good (for example, diamonds).

With a natural monopoly, the very conditions of production and the nature of the good matter.

Unfair competition, that is, influencing customers in ways that are unfair to a competitor due to a large budget and the scale of the enterprise as a whole.

The difficulty is in obtaining complete information about the entire market.

There are three types of monopoly: closed, natural and open.

Closed monopoly is a monopoly protected from competition by legal restrictions, patent protection, the institution of copyright, etc.

Natural monopoly arises in an industry in which long-run average costs reach a minimum only when one firm serves the entire market.

Open monopoly- This is a monopoly in which one company (at least for a certain period) is the only supplier of products, but does not have special legal protection from competition.

Economic consequences of market monopolization

At the same time, the activities of monopolies also have negative sides. Monopolies have the ability to:

Increase your profits by raising prices without reducing production costs;
“exploit consumers” by raising prices against their equilibrium level, reducing the range of products compared to markets where competitive firms operate;
slow down the implementation of scientific and technical progress (monopolies have the opportunity to receive high profits even without improving production);
weaken or even eliminate competition, along with its beneficial effect on production efficiency, product quality, and the level of production costs.

Such actions of monopolies lead to a less efficient distribution of society's limited resources compared to perfect competition, generating losses for society as a whole.

Rice. 11. 1. Consequences of market monopolization

Table 11.1

Key performance indicators of the company in conditions of perfect and imperfect
competition

*) The supply curve reflects the dynamics of production costs.

In conditions of imperfect competition, the consumer loses part of his consumer effect () - he is forced to buy less () and at a higher price (). Part of the lost consumer surplus is appropriated by the monopoly (), while the other part of the consumer effect ( - shaded) is simply lost (no one gets it) and represents a net loss to society.

Net loss of the company as a result of market monopolization - these are consumer losses as a result of a reduction in production below the equilibrium level.

According to some economists, the loss arising from monopolistic irrational distribution of resources in the United States reaches 2% of the country's gross national product.

Thus, monopolies, setting a price above the equilibrium one, set the production volume below the efficient one, which leads to irreversible losses for society. The activities of monopolies increase the uneven distribution of income, which can have negative socio-political consequences.

Since the activities of monopolies are antisocial in nature, protecting free competition and limiting the activities of monopolies is one of the most important functions of the state.

State against monopolies

Antimonopoly policy of the state is a set of economic and administrative measures aimed at promoting and protecting competition and limiting monopolistic manifestations. It includes both measures to prevent the emergence of new monopolies and measures directed against existing monopolies.

The legislation of most countries assumes that the market is monopolized if:

One seller accounts for 33%;
for the share of three - 50%;
the share of five is 66.6% of market turnover (total sales volume in a particular market).

In general, a market is considered to be competitive if there are at least 10 sellers on it.

To determine the degree of market monopolization, the market concentration indicator ( Harfindel-Hirschman index):

,
where is the share of the company, expressed as a percentage;
n- the total number of firms in the market;
i- company.

Based on IXX, the state regulates competition in markets. So, in the USA, if:

IXX is less than 1000, then the market is considered unconcentrated, and any mergers and acquisitions are allowed;
IXX is more than 1000, but less than 1800, then the market is considered moderately concentrated, and mergers are allowed, but special rules are introduced to guarantee new enterprises the opportunity to enter an already developed market;
IXX is more than 1800, then the industry is considered highly monopolized, and mergers and acquisitions are prohibited

State measures in the fight against monopolies

In the fight against monopolies, the state uses measures of an economic, legislative and administrative nature.

Economic measures supporting competition and fighting monopoly is a set of tools by which the possibilities of exercising the monopoly power of sellers are limited. Antimonopoly policy instruments include direct and indirect ones.

TO direct methods of regulating (restricting) activities monopolies include the establishment of:
“price ceiling” - the upper and lower levels of prices for products (no more than such and such, no less than such and such);
maximum rate of price growth;
marginal rate of return.

TO indirect methods of antimonopoly policy All types of government activities aimed at developing competition can be classified as:
encouraging the creation of substitute products;
support for new companies, medium and small businesses (simplification of the procedure for creating new companies, tax breaks, provision of subsidies, loans);
provision of government contracts to medium and small businesses;
opening of foreign trade borders (free international trade increases competition in the domestic market);
attracting foreign investment, establishing joint ventures, free trade zones;
financing measures to expand the production of scarce goods in order to eliminate the dominant position of individual economic entities;
government funding of R&D (research and development work).

Administrative measures, aimed at demonopolizing markets and preventing firms from accumulating monopoly power, are based on the relevant antimonopoly (antitrust) legislation.

All market economy countries have antimonopoly legislation, aimed at preventing monopolistic manifestations in markets, as well as unfair competition.

Typically, legislative measures involve:

prohibition of secret conspiracies aimed at maintaining monopoly prices and dividing markets;
prohibition of mergers of firms that lead to the establishment of supply control;
forced demonopolization (fragmentation of monopoly firms).

First antitrust law (Sherman Act) was adopted in the USA in 1890. It recognized monopolization of trade, seizure of control over a particular industry, and price collusion as illegal and criminally punishable.

Since then, the United States has adopted many laws limiting the power of monopolies, on the basis of which dozens of cases are heard in the courts every year on charges of certain companies of monopolizing markets.

For example, the lawsuit against AT&T (American Telegraph and Telephon), accused of monopolizing the telephone services market, became widely known. Based on a court decision, the company was divided into 10 independent companies. The creation of competition in the telephone services market resulted in a halving of prices for relevant services.

Another famous example is the case against IBM (1969), which was accused of capturing 75% of the computer market and setting prices so low that they prevented competitors from entering the market. This process was won by IBM, which was able to prove that consumers benefit from low prices.

It should be noted that the antimonopoly legislation of Western European countries is more liberal than the United States.

Although monopolies, represented, as a rule, by large enterprises, have certain advantages (lower average production costs, the ability to finance R&D, greater stability in unfavorable conditions, etc.), the negative consequences of monopolization exceed its positive aspects. Monopolization of markets leads to a reduction in consumer surplus that arises in conditions of competitive market equilibrium. Thus, the lack of competition and monopolization of markets leads to net losses for society - losses of consumers as a result of a reduction in production below equilibrium. Therefore, the fight against monopolization and support of competition is one of the most important functions of the state.

One of the important areas of government regulation of industry market structures and the behavior of a company in the economy is the government’s antimonopoly policy, that is, the adjustment of such activities of companies that are considered to be detrimental to competition in the market.

Among the goals of state antimonopoly policy are the following:

• · ensuring the efficiency of production and distribution of resources in the economy;
• · preventing or eliminating undesirable market structures and undesirable behavior of economic agents - that is, situations that are considered to violate public welfare;
• · assistance to some groups of economic agents at the expense of others (for example, assistance to small firms in their competition with large ones, regardless of their efficiency, or to firms in some industries compared to other areas of activity).

Although each goal is important from the perspective of the economy as a whole, individual countries place different emphasis on the goals in their antitrust laws, reflecting different countries' preferences in promoting competition. Still, most countries take the position of preventing certain activities of firms that are considered illegal.

Under traditional antitrust policy, the types of behavior considered illegal by firms include the following:

• · fixation sales prices, secret and explicit, so that the prices set by the company fall outside the sphere of influence of the market;
• · purchase restrictions: a prohibition for customers to buy any product in another place, from another seller, at a different price or in a different volume than established by the selling company;
• · sales restrictions: a prohibition on suppliers selling goods to another client, in another place, at a different price or in a different volume than provided for in the contract with the purchasing company;
• · related sales: sale of one product to a client, provided that he buys some other product (specified in advance in the contract) of this company;
• · false advertising: the emphasis in advertising messages on qualities of a product that in reality this product does not have, or emphasizing the shortcomings of a product of a competing company, which in fact it may not have;
• · unfair labeling of goods: registration appearance the product in a way that does not correspond to its purpose, or an indication of its internal characteristics that are not inherent in the product;
• Vertical or horizontal restrictions on competition:
• · pressure on suppliers (consumers) of products or on other firms producing a given product in order to strengthen the firm’s own influence in the market through the forced imposition of its rules of behavior on partners. In practice, the implementation of antimonopoly policy faces certain difficulties, among which the following can be distinguished:
• · There are often no unambiguous interpretations of the consequences of a company’s behavior. For example, a merger of two firms can lead, on the one hand, to an increase in the selling prices of goods ( negative consequence imperfect market structure), and on the other hand, such interaction between two firms can be expressed in the introduction of a new product or in improving the quality of an old product (a positive consequence of a monopoly). That is, when carrying out antimonopoly policy, a balance of consequences, both negative and positive, must be drawn up;
• · uncertainty of the subject of damage from an imperfect market structure. It is often not so obvious who should sue and be considered the injured party: the retailer-dealer of the monopolist's product, or the final consumer of the product, since the direct impact of restrictions on the part of the firm with market power may not be felt so much in relation to the intermediary link commodity chain, as much as in the position of an individual buying a product for consumption, since the merchant is often able to shift the burden of monopoly influence to his buyer. In turn, the fragmentation of end buyers leads to the fact that violations of a company’s conscientious behavior in the market are not always recorded and become the object of state regulation.

A number of methods are used to measure the effects of government regulation, for example:

• · comparison of the consequences and conditions of functioning of regulated and unregulated firms and markets;
• · use of variations in the intensity of regulated restrictions in the same market or in the same industry;
• · controlled experiments: conducting regulatory activities on a small scale to determine the impact of a measure on the behavior of firms;
• · modeling the behavior of firms and markets under different operating conditions (for example, using computers).

Let's consider different options for implementing competition policy in countries with developed market economies and Russian experience.

Antitrust (antimonopoly) policy- a set of economic, legislative and administrative measures aimed at limiting the conditions for the emergence and functioning of monopolies and protecting competitive market. The need for state intervention in this aspect of market relations is due to the fact that monopolies form artificial barriers to entry into the industry that impede competition, maintain monopoly high prices, limiting consumption, and restrain technical progress (large capital that needs to be updated; a monopoly position does not oblige them to improve production and product).

The first antitrust law (the Sherman Act) was passed in the United States in 1890. It outlawed any contract or secret agreement aimed at restricting trade between states or with foreign countries, as well as any attempt to monopolize trade. The 1974 amendment made violation of sections of this law a serious crime. Under this law, the government can prosecute individual firms and their managers, with penalties including: monetary fines, and imprisonment.

The second most important antitrust law (the Clayton Act) was also adopted in the United States in 1914. It prohibited all forms of discrimination in pricing policies, mergers of companies through the purchase of shares if this leads to a reduction in competition, combining positions on the boards of directors of different companies, and the sale of goods with forced assortment. The Celler Act, which was passed in 1950, tightened the practice of merging monopolies. Currently, horizontal mergers of firms with market shares of 10% and 5% are prohibited in the United States. Vertical mergers are allowed when a firm has 10% or more market share.

In Western Europe, laws are more lenient; they only prohibit the abuse of monopoly power and, accordingly, allow mergers of enterprises with higher market shares (up to 40% in France). In Russia, horizontal mergers are prohibited if the total share is more than 35%, and vertical mergers are prohibited if the share of one company is more than 35%.

Today, antimonopoly policy in all countries involves preventing the emergence of new monopolies, creating a competitive environment, and state regulation of the activities of monopolies.

Regulation is carried out through a price policy that involves curbing the growth of monopoly prices. It is very important when developing and implementing such a policy not to destroy the manufacturer, therefore prices should be set at the level of average costs in the industry, which allows enterprises to function normally. The disadvantage of this measure is that pricing tends to lag. In addition to it, tax regulators apply it, i.e. they establish a tax on excess profits.

The difficulties in implementing antimonopoly policy in Russia are caused by the fact that it was developed using examples from developed countries. But in all countries, such a policy is based on mature market relations and does not include tools suitable for the conditions of Russia - for the period of creation of market relations. The first version of the Federal Law “On Competition and Restriction of Monopolistic Activities...” was adopted in May 1991. It was based on foreign models of such regulation. Business greeted this law calmly, since it was seen as a way to implement a policy to support competition, and this policy was understood as creating advantages for some market agents at the expense of others. According to this law, registration of new companies was possible only with the consent of the antimonopoly authorities, thus creating new administrative barriers to competition.

In fact, antimonopoly policy in Russia was formed as a passive protective policy with a predominantly permissive-prohibitive function; its tasks were not only to combat existing monopolies, but also to prevent the emergence of new ones. The need for its implementation was determined by the fact that at that time there was no control over financial and industrial groups, the existence of which made it possible to carry out horizontal integration and create industry monopolies. There was no connection with other sections of economic policy. Antimonopoly regulation was mainly concerned with price policy and used the establishment of an upper price limit, a maximum profitability limit and maximum price change factors. This stimulated an increase in production costs and reduced interest in the development of production. The positive aspects of these measures were the understanding of the very need for antimonopoly policy, the formation of the necessary bodies, the development and adoption of laws, but in general such policies did not fulfill their direct functions.

The second stage of antimonopoly regulation took place in 1994-1995. and was marked by the adoption of the resolution “On the state program for demonopolization of the economy and the development of competition in the markets of the Russian Federation, main directions and priority measures” and the Federal Law “On Natural Monopolies”. During this period, attention shifts from commodity to financial markets, insurance, banks, natural monopoly industries, where the interests of general industrial and sectoral departments intersect. Since 1995, a quantitative approach to anti-competitive actions has begun to prevail: firms with a market share of 35%, only 65% ​​and higher are excluded from the list of monopolies. In the meantime, you need to prove that it is a monopoly. During the same period, antimonopoly regulation began to become an independent activity.

The third stage began in August 1998, when the Ministry of Antimonopoly Policy (MAP) was created. The process of distinguishing between antimonopoly and competition policies is beginning, but work is being done more actively to control natural monopolies. According to documents, MAP focuses its activities on balancing the interests of the state, consumers and natural monopolies. But what is the criterion for this balance? What kind of balance is this? There are no documents or developments that define this.

At the same time, a shift away from predominantly price regulation begins and the general state of affairs in the market is monitored. At the same time, demonopolization is considered as the main means of antimonopoly policy, but this is a one-time measure and the entire content of antimonopoly policy cannot be reduced to it.

In 2004, the Federal Antimonopoly Service was created. Its disadvantage is its dependence on politics. The head is appointed by the president, the deputy by the government. Hence the dependence of the effectiveness of antimonopoly policy on the political course of the government. The main task of this service is to develop competition. Competition policy is aimed at eliminating unjustified advantages of individual economic entities. But even now this work is carried out after the fact: measures are taken only after complaints are received, the regulatory framework is imperfect, and there is insufficient methodological support.

The further development of antimonopoly policy should be aimed at preventing the emergence of monopolies and strengthening monopoly power not only in purely monopolistic markets, but also in oligopolistic markets and in markets of monopolistic competition.

Questions for self-control

How are imperfectly competitive markets different?

What is a pure monopoly and why does it persist?

How are prices and production volumes regulated in a monopoly?

What are the features of pricing under monopoly conditions?

What is product differentiation?

What are the consequences of monopoly?

What is monopolistic competition? What are its symptoms?

Are enterprises operating under conditions of monopolistic competition effective?

What is oligopoly and what are the forms of its existence?

What is the purpose of antitrust regulation?

Antimonopoly policy- this is a certain direction government activities to the formation and regulation of optimal competition in the market system.

This policy is aimed at maintaining the development of goods on the market, a healthy level of competition, is engaged in limiting and suppressing monopoly movements and unhealthy levels of competition between market participants, and is also engaged in the protection consumer rights and freedom in choosing goods and services.

To put it simply in simple words, antimonopoly policy is the work of the state apparatus to monitor, analyze, improve, control and regulate the activities of enterprises and firms that produce certain products, so that they do not violate the rules of general competition and comply with established norms and obligations.

Antimonopoly policy includes specific state legislative provisions, the structure of tax obligations, rules for own property, support for small businesses, etc. It helps to minimize the activities of monopoly organizations and ultimately completely eradicate them for the further development of effective competition between producers of goods and services.

This policy belongs to the legal part of regulating the antimonopoly structure of relationships at the market level, which are regulated by the state.

Legislative bodies here play the role of grouped regulatory documents, which implement all possible solutions to maintain and operate good competition, and are engaged in developing their effectiveness and compliance with legal standards.

Market relations in the Russian Federation today are at a rapidly developing level. The state apparatus daily undergoes a huge number of complex and conflict situations, misunderstandings and barriers that negatively affect all activities of the state's antimonopoly policy. In the country, such issues are dealt with by the Ministry of Antimonopoly Policy - this is a constantly self-improving system of antimonopoly control.

Based on the fact that the monopoly system is very often actively engaged in seizing power in its market segment, the state apparatus must promptly adopt and tighten procedures to suppress such manipulations.

IN Lately The antimonopoly policy of the Russian Federation has undergone many changes. A few decades ago, in practice, the intervention of certain bodies in the work of companies was used, which could purposefully cause them great economic harm, but now these one-time “interferences” have turned into systematic work of the state apparatus.

Methods of fighting monopoly

Although today there are a large number of methods for influencing monopoly activities from the legislation of the Russian Federation, it is necessary to characterize some of the most positively influencing methods of struggle. These methods are:

• high level of taxes, allowing to reduce the profitability of monopoly organizations;
• maintaining the inflation rate and creating own regulation price policy for the production of goods and services, which is implemented by a process of strict price control;
• monopoly organizations are given the status of “state property”;
• control and supervision of production is carried out at the state level. This activity provides efficiency in tracking the cost of goods and services, as well as monitoring organizations that have entered or entered a certain area of ​​production;
• Antitrust policy deals with effective anti-stress policies.

History of the development of antimonopoly policy

The current laws of the Russian Federation regarding monopoly organizations and competition in general represent a modern vision in economic sphere country, as well as in its legal respect.

The question of organizing levers for control and supervision of the work of corporations and enterprises was first raised at the beginning of the twentieth century. At that time, all activities referred exclusively to government bills, which were carried out by government agencies. The First played a negative role in this matter World War, which pushed the Russian economic sphere a step back.

Since the beginning of the Soviet Union, a set of measures to counter the monopoly has ceased to make sense. By eradicating private entrepreneurial activity and the implementation of the command-economic policy, the state apparatus was able to acquire enormous power, which no country had had until that moment. The Soviet Union, in fact, independently transitioned to the status of a monopolist, covering almost all market segments: economics, idealistic orientation, political activity, religion, education, etc.

Since the beginning of the formation of economic reforms in Russia, which were aimed at creating effective relationships in the market and for the state apparatus to reject totalitarianism as an ideology of management, monopoly began to occupy an important role in the life of the country. There was a need to create a specific section in Russian bills.

Antimonopoly policy in the Russian Federation began to operate in 1990, when several documents were signed aimed at the process of monitoring and regulating the activities of entrepreneurs. In 1995, the “Law on the Market and Restrictions on Monopoly Activities” was adopted.

Since acceptance this law underwent various changes several times, but also in these days it is the basis for the entire existing structure in the market. Legislation deals with specific actions that prevent monopoly work, and also deals with the control of groups that may form in the course of the activities of the state apparatus.

Antimonopoly policy in the Russian Federation

Antimonopoly policy is carried out not only by actions on monopoly organizations with the help of legislative acts. On the territory of the Russian Federation, as in many other countries around the world, government authorities can use a large number of solutions to terminate the work of such organizations.

For countries characterized by a market economy (like the Russian Federation), the following methods are used:

• active activity of market subsections that have a high level of competition and are able to withstand the fight against the monopoly movement;
• a developed complex for eradicating monopoly work by organizing the suppression of its activities with the help of legislative documents through active struggle;
• serious control over the organization’s pricing policy, as well as supervision over its payback and profitability.

Although such complexes and measures have a wide and effective coverage on the territory of various states, they are not always able to cope with their task perfectly 100%. For each type of market economy it is necessary to find its own personal way regulation.

The country's antimonopoly policy, although it has a scheme for radical restructuring, has never had the nature of a structure of denial. This policy is not aimed at changing the current economic system. The main goal of antimonopoly policy is to maintain the balance of competition and monopoly organizations at the appropriate level for Russia.

In the Russian Federation, monopoly work is carried out with great difficulty and the constant pursuit of negative consequences in the economic sphere of the state. We are talking not only about incomplete production activities, but also about an increase in the cost of goods and services, and reduced profitability of organizations. The client of an organization that is in a monopoly environment must endure inflated prices for products. Such products have no competitors, and the low quality of the product or its imperfection will not serve as a reason for refusal to purchase.

It is worth noting the slow development of the technical component, inconsistency in the level of service, etc. – these are precisely the factors that indicate that the monopolist manufacturer neglects the needs and interests of its customers. Despite the large complex of negative elements, the most important thing is the complete capture of market structures by monopolistic organizations for self-regulation.

Monopoly organizations concentrate absolute power in their hands. Other market participants do not have access to limit the actions of these organizations or influence them in any way. Only thanks to the antimonopoly policy of the Russian Federation, which began to operate in the last decade of the twentieth century, was it possible to make changes to existing system monopoly and was able to resolve these issues.

To combat such companies, government agencies of the Russian Federation go through many difficulties. The main factor is the size of the monopoly organization - the larger it is, the more difficult it is to control it. The lowest parameters with an average level of long-term liabilities can be achieved only by organizing increased production indicators.

Producing in small quantities will not bring profit. It turns out that, for example, it will not be possible to organize healthy competition for the AvtoVAZ enterprise, even with the help of small companies producing domestic cars, since these organizations will not be able to meet the level of competitiveness, and especially taking into account the demands of the world community.