Improving Compliance With Antitrust Measures Through Commercial Policies
https://doi.org/10.18288/1994-5124-2024-2-6-35
Abstract
Commercial policies for major market participants were introduced in Russia about a decade ago in order to improve compliance with antitrust provisions and as a partial substitute for them. Experts were initially rather sceptical about this move because it was a departure from prevailing international practices and also imposed additional regulatory burdens on companies. This article examines whether commercial policies have been an effective way to improve antitrust compliance by Russia’s pharmaceutical companies, reduce erroneous accusations, and drive down the costs of anti trust enforcement for both the antitrust authorities and market players. Analysis of the commercial policies of several large pharmaceutical companies indicates that their rules are meant to address the abuse of market dominance in the sector which has been alleged by the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Russian Federation (FAS). Inasmuch as a refusal to supply counts as an infringement of Russia’s legislation on competition and also in view of particular aspects of competition in the Russian pharmaceutical markets, such commercial policies have great potential, first, to diminish erroneous accusations and, second, to reduce the costs of enforcing the legislation on competition. The authors conclude that introducing commercial policies has been beneficial for both consumers (as represented by the FAS) and the pharmaceutical companies.
About the Authors
Svetlana B. AvdashevaRussian Federation
Svetlana B. Avdasheva,Dr. Sci. (Econ.), Professor, Director of the Applied Economics Department; Deputy Director of the Institute for Industrial and Market Studies,
11, Pokrovskiy b-r, Moscow, 109028.
Olesya S. Khomik
Russian Federation
Olesya S. Khomik, Cand. Sci. (Econ.), Lead Еxpert at the Institute for Industrial and Market Studies,
11, Pokrovskiy b-r, Moscow, 109028.
Gyuzel F. Yusupova
Russian Federation
Gyuzel F. Yusupova, Cand. Sci. (Econ.), Senior Research Fellow at the Institute for Industrial and Market Studies,
11, Pokrovskiy b-r, Moscow, 109028.
References
1. Avdasheva S., Dzagurova N. Vertikal’nye ogranichivayushchie kontrakty i ikh interpretatsiya v antimonopol’nom zakonodatel’stve [Vertical Restrictions and Their Interpretation in Antitrust Legislation and Enforcement]. Voprosy ekonomiki, 2010, no. 5, pp. 110112. DOI: 10.32609/0042873620105110122. (In Russ.)
2. Avdasheva S., Kurdin A. Zadachi torgovykh politik chastnykh kompaniy kak instrumenta regulirovaniya i razvitiya konkurentsii: mirovoy opyt i popytka prognoza [Objectives of Private Companies’ Trade Policies as an Instrument of Regulation and Competition: International Experience and an Attempt to Forecast]. Ekonomicheskaya politika [Economic Policy], 2013, no. 5, pp. 106126. DOI: 10.18288/199451242016606. (In Russ.)
3. Agamirova M. E., Dzagurova N. B. Pravomernost’ vertikal’nykh ogranichivayushchikh soglasheniy s pozitsii “vzveshennogo podkhoda” i kharakter spetsificheskikh investitsiy [The Legality of Vertical Restraints in Terms of a “Balanced Approach” and the Nature of the Specific Investments]. Ekonomicheskaya politika [Economic Policy], 2016, no. 6, pp. 122 137. DOI: 10.18288/199451242016606. (In Russ.)
4. Akimova I. Kommercheskie politiki farmatsevticheskikh kompaniy: Antimonopol’nye riski i sposoby ikh minimizatsii [Commercial Policies of Pharmaceutical Companies: Antitrust Risks and Ways to Minimize Them]. BGP Litigation, 21 April 2023. https://bgplaw.com/alerts/kommercheskie-politiki-farmatsevticheskikh-kompaniy-antimonopolnyeriski-i-sposoby-ikh-minimizatsii. (In Russ.)
5. Bekker G. Prestuplenie i nakazanie: ekonomicheskiy podkhod [Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach]. In: Bekker G. Chelovecheskoe povedenie: ekonomicheskiy podkhod [Human Behavior: An Economic Approach]. Moscow, NIU HSE, 2003, pp. 282330. (In Russ.)
6. Knyazeva I. V., Dozmarov K. V. Antimonopol’nyy komplaens profilaktika kompaniyami riskov narusheniya konkurentnogo zakonodatel’stva [Antitrust Compliance Programme Reducing Companies’ Risk of Vioilating the Competition Law]. Vserossiyskiy ekonomicheskiy zhurnal EKO [ECO Journal], 2020, no. 4(550), pp. 110129. DOI: 10.30680/ECO0131765220204110129. (In Russ.)
7. Radchenko T., Shastitko A. Reglamentatsiya torgovoy politiki chastnoy kompanii: teoriya, praktika i vyvody dlya antitrasta [Regulation of Trade Policies of Private Companies: Theory, Practice and Antitrust Conclusions]. Ekonomicheskaya politika [Economic Policy], 2013, no. 5, pp. 81105. (In Russ.)
8. Smirnov A., Ryabkova E. Dela “Bakster”, “Teva” i “Novo Nordisk2”: o sootnoshe nii antimonopol’nogo i antikorruptsionnogo zakonodatel’stva [The Bakster, Teva and Novo Nordisk 2 Cases: The Correlation Between Antitrust and Antibribery Regulation]. Legal Insight, 2015, no. 1(37), pp. 3843. (In Russ.)
9. Stavniychuk A. Yu., Pavlova N. S. Effekty antitrasta: uroki dlya dokazatel’noy politiki [Antitrust’s Effects: Lessons for EvidenceBased Policy]. Voprosy ekonomiki, 2023, no. 5, pp. 6890. DOI: 10.32609/00428736202356890. (In Russ.)
10. Tretyak O. A., Klimanov D. E. Ispol’zovanie setevogo podkhoda k analizu biznesmodeli: primer rossiyskogo farmatsevticheskogo rynka [Application of a NetworkBased Approach to Business Model Analysis: The Example of Russian Pharmaceutical Market]. Rossiyskiy zhurnal menedzhmenta [Russian Management Journal], 2016, no. 14(2), pp. 77100. DOI: 10.21638/11701/spbu18.2016.204. (In Russ.)
11. Tsyganov A. Torgovye praktiki khozyaystvuyushchikh sub’’ektov napravlenie razvitiya konkurentnoy politiki [Commercial Practices of Economic Agents Trends in Competition Policy]. Ekonomicheskaya politika [Economic Policy], 2013, no. 5, pp. 7380. (In Russ.)
12. Shastitko A. E. Kartel’: organizatsiya, stimuly, politika protivodeystviya [Cartels: Organization, Stimuli, Protective Measures]. Rossiyskiy zhurnal menedzhmenta [Russian Management Journal], 2013, no. 11(4), pp. 031056. (In Russ.)
13. Shastitko A. E. Oshibki I i II roda v ekonomicheskikh obmenakh s uchastiem tret’ey storonygaranta [Type I and II Errors in Economic Exchanges Including a ThirdParty Guarantor]. Zhurnal Novoy ekonomicheskoy assotsiatsii [Journal of the New Economic Association], 2011, vol. 10, pp. 125148. (In Russ.)
14. Shastitko A., Avdasheva S. Advokatirovanie konkurentsii kak chast’ konkurentnoy politiki [Competition Advocacy as a Component of Competition Policy]. Voprosy ekonomiki, 2005, no. 12, pp. 109121. (In Russ.)
15. Shastitko A. E., Plaksin S. M. Effekty shtrafnykh sanktsiy: ot teorii k praktike [The Effects of Penalties: From Theory to Practice]. Voprosy gosudarstvennogo i munitsipal’nogo upravleniya [Public Administration Issues], 2013, vol. 3, pp. 110131. (In Russ.)
16. Shastitko A., Fedulova A., Yakovleva E. Regulirovanie vertikal’nykh ogranicheniy v Rossii [Regulation of Vertical Restraints in Russia]. Ekonomicheskaya politika [Economic Policy], 2010, no. 5, pp. 4161. (In Russ.)
17. Avdasheva S., Golovanova S., Katsoulacos Y. The Impact of Performance Measurement on the Selection of Enforcement Targets by Competition Authorities: The Russian Experience in an International Context. Public Performance & Management Review, 2019, no. 42(2), pp. 329356. DOI: 10.1080/15309576.2018.1441036.
18. Avdasheva S., Tsytsulina D., Golovanova S., Sidorova E. Discovering the Miracle of Large Numbers of Antitrust Investigations in Russia: The Role of Competition Authority Incentives. Higher School of Economics, Basic Research Program Working Papers no. 26, 2015. https://wp.hse.ru/data/2015/04/02/1096590297/26PA2015.pdf
19. Buccirossi P. Vertical Restraints on ECommerce and Selective Distribution. Journal of Competition Law & Economics, 2015, no. 11(3), pp. 747773.
20. Dethmers F., Blondeel J. EU Enforcement Policy on Abuse of Dominance: Some Statistics and Facts. European Competition Law Review, 2017, no. 38(4), pp. 147164.
21. Fox E. M. We Protect Competition, You Protect Competitors. World Competition, 2003, no. 26(2), pp. 149165.
22. Kanavos P., Schurer W., Vogler S. The Pharmaceutical Distribution Chain in the European Union: Structure and Impact on Pharmaceutical Prices. Brussels, European Commission, 2011. https://eprints.lse.ac.uk/51051/1/Kanavos_pharmaceutical_distribution_chain_2007.pdf.
23. Mendoza J. Leading Pharmaceutical Goods Wholesalers in Spain in 2020. Statista, 13 March 2024. https://www.adexloan.com/?_=%2Fstatistics%2F749541%2Fleading-basicpharmaceutical-products-manufacturers-in-spain%2F%23KJWqMdlUlBnvLqMGRBz0jpjhec9jFFI%3D.
24. Parcu P. L., Monti G., Botta M. From the Legalistic to the EffectBased Approach in EU Competition Policy. In: Economic Analysis in EU Competition Policy. Edward Elgar Publishing, 2021, pp. 113.
25. Ribeiro E. P., Mattos C. The Brazilian Experience With Excessive Pricing Cases: Hello, Goodbye. In: Excessive Pricing and Competition Law Enforcement. Springer, 2018, pp. 173187. DOI: 10.1007/9783319928319_7.
26. Sood N., Shih T., Van Nuys K., Goldman D. The Flow of Money Through the Pharmaceutical Distribution System. Los Angeles, CA, USC Shaeffer, 2017.
27.
Review
For citations:
Avdasheva S.B., Khomik O.S., Yusupova G.F. Improving Compliance With Antitrust Measures Through Commercial Policies. Economic Policy. 2024;19(2):6-35. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.18288/1994-5124-2024-2-6-35