One of the important areas of state regulation of sectoral market structures and the behavior of firms in the economy is the antimonopoly policy of the government, that is, the adjustment of such activities of firms, which is considered to be detrimental to competition in the market.

Among the goals of the state antimonopoly policy are the following:

• Ensuring the efficiency of production and distribution of resources in the economy;
• · prevention or elimination of undesirable market structures and undesirable behavior of economic agents - that is, such situations that are considered as violating public welfare;
• · assistance to one group 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 firms in some industries compared to other areas of activity).

While each objective is important to the economy as a whole, individual countries place different emphasis on objectives in their antitrust laws, reflecting countries' preferences for promoting competition. Yet most countries take a position of preventing certain activities of firms that are considered illegal.

According to traditional antitrust policy, the following types of behavior are considered illegal by firms:

• fixing sales prices, covert and overt, so that the prices set by the firm fall outside the sphere of market influence;
• Purchase restrictions: prohibition for customers to buy any product elsewhere, from another seller, at a different price or in a different volume than established by the seller;
• sale restrictions: a prohibition for suppliers to sell goods to another client, in another place, at a different price or in a different volume than it is stipulated by the contract with the purchasing company;
• · connected sales: the sale of one product to the client, provided that he buys some other (specified in advance in the contract) product of this company;
• Unfair advertising: the emphasis in advertising messages on such qualities of the product that the product does not really have, or emphasizing the shortcomings of the product of a competing company, which in fact it may not have;
• unscrupulous labeling of goods: clearance appearance goods in a way that does not meet 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 that produce this product, in order to strengthen the firm's own influence on the market through the forced imposition of its own rules of conduct on partners. In practice, the conduct of antimonopoly policy faces certain difficulties, among which the following can be distinguished;
• Often there are no unambiguous interpretations of the consequences of the firm's behavior. For example, the merger of two firms can lead, on the one hand, to an increase in the selling prices of a product (a negative consequence of an 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 monopoly). ). That is, when conducting antimonopoly policy, a balance of consequences, both negative and positive, must be struck;
• · Uncertainty of the subject of damage from an imperfect market structure. It is often not so obvious who should sue and consider themselves the disadvantaged party: the retailer-dealer of the product manufactured by the monopolist, or the final consumer of the product, since the direct impact of restrictions on the part of the firm with market power may be manifested not so much in relation to the intermediate link of the commodity chain, as much as the position of the individual who buys the goods for consumption, since the merchant is often able to shift the burden of monopoly influence on his buyer. In turn, the fragmentation of end buyers leads to the fact that violations of the firm'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;
• · the use of variations in the degree of intensity of regulated restrictions in the same market or in the same industry;
• • controlled experiments: carrying out regulatory measures on a small scale to determine the impact of any measure on the behavior of firms;
• · Modeling the behavior of firms and markets with different operating conditions (for example, using computers).

Consider different variants implementation of the competition policy of countries with developed market economy and Russian experience.

Introduction

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

Monopolies, thanks 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 have argued that large firms with significant power are desirable in economics because they accelerate technological change, as firms with monopoly power can spend their monopoly profits on research to protect or reinforce their monopoly power. . By engaging in research, they provide benefits both to themselves and to 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 technical progress if it threatens their profits.

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

Monopoly: concept and types

There are two types of antitrust policy: antitrust policy for natural monopolies and antitrust policy for artificial monopolies. In order to understand the issues related to antimonopoly policy, it is necessary to understand in general terms the essence of the 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 considered through the prism of three aspects:

In terms of market structure

In terms of market behavior

3. In terms of market results

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

Paying the most attention to market outcomes, monopoly theory notes that in a monopoly, outcomes are related to the following factors:

monopoly high prices

monopoly's limited willingness to innovate.

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 monopoly market is represented by one seller and many buyers.

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

Entry of new firms into the market is virtually impossible due to barriers. There can be various reasons for the existence of such barriers, for example:

Large scale enterprises and economies of scale.

The system of licenses for the performance of 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).

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

Unfair competition, that is, the impact on buyers in ways dishonest in relation to a competitor due to a large budget and the scale of the enterprise as a whole.

Difficulty 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, 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 is a monopoly in which one firm (at least for a certain period of time) is the only supplier of products, but has no special legal protection from competition.

Economic consequences of market monopolization

When evaluating the role of monopolies in the country's economy, there are arguments both "for" and "against" monopolies. Arguments for" ( positive aspects of monopoly activity) are related to the fact that a large association of enterprises usually acts as a monopolist. As such, it has the ability to:

apply the latest technologies, take advantage of mass production and, on this basis, produce products at lower costs, which obviously leads to saving resources; allocate more funds to finance research and development of new products and technologies, which contributes to the acceleration of scientific and technological progress; resist market fluctuations: during periods of crisis, large firms, and even more so their associations, are more stable, they are less at risk of ruin (and increasing unemployment) than small and medium-sized enterprises.

Thus, the existence of monopoly associations has a certain positive impact on the economy.

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

Increase your profits by raising prices without reducing production costs;
"exploit consumers" by inflating prices against their equilibrium level, reducing the range of products compared to markets where competitive firms operate;
hinder the introduction of the achievements 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

The main indicators of the company's activity in the 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 monopolization of the market - this is the loss of the consumer as a result of a reduction in production below the equilibrium.

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

Thus, monopolies, by setting a price higher than the equilibrium one, set the volume of production below the efficient one, which leads to irretrievable losses of society. The activity of monopolies increases the uneven distribution of income, which can have negative socio-political consequences.

Since the activities of monopolies are anti-social in nature, the protection of free competition and the restriction of 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 encouraging and protecting competition and limiting monopoly manifestations. It includes both measures that prevent the emergence of new monopolies and measures directed against existing monopolies.

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

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

In general, a market is said to be competitive if it has at least 10 sellers.

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

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

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

XXX less than 1000, then the market is considered non-concentrated, and any mergers and acquisitions are allowed;
XXX is greater 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;
XXX is greater than 1800, then the industry is considered highly monopolized and mergers and acquisitions are prohibited

State measures in the fight against monopolies

The state in the fight against monopolies uses economic, legislative and administrative measures.

Economic measures support of competition and the fight against monopoly is a set of tools by which the possibilities of exercising the monopoly power of sellers are limited. Among the instruments of antimonopoly policy, direct and indirect ones are distinguished.

To direct methods of regulation (restriction) of activities monopolies include the establishment of:
"ceiling prices" - the upper and lower levels of prices for products (no more than such and such, not less than such and such);
marginal price growth rate;
marginal rate of profit.

To indirect methods of antimonopoly policy can be attributed to all types of state activities aimed at developing competition:
encouraging the creation of substitute products;
support for new firms, medium and small businesses (simplification of the procedure for creating new firms, tax incentives, provision of subsidies, loans);
provision of state orders to medium and small businesses;
opening of foreign trade borders (free international trade increases competition in the domestic market);
attraction of foreign investments, establishment of joint ventures, free trade zones;
financing of measures to expand the production of scarce goods in order to eliminate the dominant position of individual economic entities;
public funding of R&D (research and development work).

Administrative measures aimed at the demonopolization of markets and the prevention of the accumulation of monopoly power by firms, are based on the relevant antimonopoly (antitrust) legislation.

All market economies have antitrust law aimed at preventing monopoly manifestations in the markets, as well as unfair competition.

Legislative measures usually include:

the prohibition of secret collusion aimed at maintaining monopoly prices, the division of markets;
the prohibition of mergers of firms that lead to the establishment of control over the supply;
forced demonopolization (crushing of monopoly firms).

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

Since then, the United States has passed many laws that limit the power of monopolies, on the basis of which dozens of cases are heard in courts each year accusing certain companies of monopolizing markets.

For example, the lawsuit against AT&T (American Telegraph and Telephon), which was accused of monopolizing the telephone service market, was widely known. Based on a court decision, the company was split into 10 independent firms. The result of the creation of competition in the market of telephone services was a halving of prices for the corresponding services.

Another well-known 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 antitrust laws of Western European countries are more liberal than those of 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 an unfavorable market environment, etc.), the negative consequences of monopolization exceed its positive aspects. The monopolization of markets leads to a reduction in the consumer surplus that arises in a competitive equilibrium of the market. Thus, the absence of competition, the monopolization of markets leads to net losses for society - losses for consumers as a result of a reduction in production below the equilibrium. Therefore, the fight against monopolization, the support of competition is one of the most important functions of the state.

... Antimonopoly politics states" Content 1. Antimonopoly politics states 2. Management of state property Literature 1. Antimonopoly politics states Antimonopoly... , activation activities antitrust authorities for...

Antimonopoly politics states (4)

Abstract >> Economics

Oriented economy without an active role states. Behind state the classic functions are always preserved ... changes and additions to the Law of the RSFSR "On Competition and antimonopoly activities on commodity markets" establishes a list of...

Antimonopoly Russian politics (1)

Diploma work >> Economics

Thirdly, the lack of development of legal aspects antimonopoly activities states and its bodies, fourthly, ... the development of economic and legal aspects antimonopoly activities states and his organs. Need...

The emergence of the first monopolies in Russia occurs in the late 19th century. These include the Union of Rail Manufacturers and other associations. It is interesting to note that these monopolies were created by the state itself in such industries as: technology, transport, metallurgy, oil, etc. And gradually other monopolies were captured important industries industry. They were created in the form of cartels and syndicates, where economic and financial independence was preserved. In 1908, in the then Russian Empire, there was an attempt to form antitrust laws based on the Sherman Act, which was adopted in the United States. But due to a coincidence of certain circumstances, it was not accepted; organizations of Russian entrepreneurs contributed to this. Monopolies exist in all countries of the world, but the peculiarity of Russian monopolies is that they appeared on the basis of the state monopoly of the administrative-command economy. After the collapse of the USSR, Russian competition law was introduced under large monopolies and at the beginning of the formation of market relations. That is why it was necessary for Russia not only to limit monopolization and abuse of a dominant position, but also to create conditions for free competition.

The formation of antitrust policy modern Russia begins in 1991, when on March 22 the law “On competition and restriction of monopolistic activity in commodity markets” came into force. This law outlined the main tasks of the state competition policy: assistance in the formation of market relations through the development of competition and entrepreneurship, control, regulation, restriction of monopolistic activity and imperfect competition, state control over compliance with antimonopoly legislation.

An executive body that exercises the functions of adopting regulatory legal acts (see Figure 1) to control and supervise compliance with legislation in the field of competition in commodity markets, protection of competition in the financial services market, activities of subjects of natural monopolies, and advertising.

The main functions of the FAS are:

Picture. 1. Functions of the antimonopoly body

The main laws and regulations, the control of which is entrusted to the FAS, are systematized in the following Figure 2:

Picture. 2. Basic laws and regulations

In its activities, the FAS is guided by the Constitution of the Russian Federation, Federal laws, orders and decrees of the President and the Government of the Russian Federation. FAS also carries out its activities through its territorial bodies that operate in all regions of the country. Their activities are aimed at preserving the single economic space of Russia and are centrally subordinated to the FAS. All economic entities: commercial and non-commercial organizations, individuals. persons, as well as individual entrepreneurs, must, at the request of the FAS, provide all Required documents, information and other information that is necessary for the FAS to carry out its legal activities. Information constituting a commercial secret received by the FAS in the course of its activities is not subject to disclosure, with the exception of cases established by the Federal Law. For the disclosure of this information, FAS employees bear administrative and criminal liability, and the damage caused is subject to compensation from the treasury of the Russian Federation. The absence of competition gives rise to the emergence of monopolies, which lead to completely opposite processes. The set of measures and actions of the state, which are aimed at limiting monopoly activities and ensuring free competition, is called the antimonopoly policy of the state. Antimonopoly policy is the main activity of the state in the formation of competitive market structures. It is aimed at promoting the development of commodity markets and competition, at preventing, restricting and suppressing monopolistic activities and unfair competition, and at protecting consumer rights. Antimonopoly policy is a special set of economic, administrative and legislative measures carried out

state and aimed at ensuring conditions for market

competition and prevent excessive market monopolization that threatens

normal functioning market mechanism.

The main directions of antimonopoly policy are:

Ensuring and developing competition;

Control over economic monopolies;

Control over the process of concentration of capital;

Protection of consumer interests;

Protection and support of small and medium business.

The main objectives of the antimonopoly policy are shown in Figure 3, they are:

Figure 3. Economic goals of antimonopoly policy

The main objectives of the State Antimonopoly Policy:

Providing favorable conditions and incentives for the development of competition and entrepreneurship in the national economy.

Removal of all barriers to the intensification of competition on a legal basis, which makes it possible to exclude monopoly actions of market entities, central authorities power and management, the dictates of economic entities.

Determination of the legal regime for regulating liability for monopoly actions and violations of the rules of fair competition.

Protecting the interests of small and medium-sized businesses from the arbitrariness of big business.

Creation of conditions for the development of the national economy.

The state antimonopoly policy in general covers a range of tasks that are aimed at developing the economy, developing the competitiveness of goods and services, and ensuring effective employment of the population. It also supports the participation of antimonopoly authorities in choosing the economic policy of the state, methods and directions that should have a significant impact on the competitive structure of the market and the financial and economic activities of market entities. Antimonopoly policy is in force in almost many countries of the world. Despite the fact that the nature and content of the antimonopoly policy of different countries have their own characteristics, the common foundations for all countries are: the protection and promotion of competition, control of the activities of firms occupying a position in the market, price control, protection of the interests of consumers of goods and services, protection of interests and assistance to the development of small and medium businesses. The lack of antimonopoly policy in some countries is explained by various factors. For example: such countries cannot afford such a program due to high costs and efforts. Antitrust policy is most often absent in smaller economies. It can be assumed that such small economies, unlike large ones, are not able to counteract the emergence of large local economies. These are mainly countries in Africa and the Middle East.

Speaking about the evolution of antimonopoly policy, one can notice that the assessment of the usefulness of both competition and monopoly has changed. There are 2 stages: the time of the domination of a particularly cruel attitude towards monopolistic phenomena, and the time associated with the tendency to comprehend and consider the relationship between monopoly and competition from the point of view of increasing the efficiency of the economy. That is, the ability of corporations operating there to ensure the timely renewal of their products, their high competitiveness in the world market, high quality, and price elasticity are taken into account. If these requirements are unattainable, then the market is recognized as monopolized, and the structures operating on it are subject to demonopolization. In connection with the issue under consideration, the problem of limiting competition or state support for monopolistic structures is of interest. First, the state often stimulates the development of certain types of activities that limit competition. Secondly, it provides direct support to monopolistic structures if the monopoly is seen as economically viable. To implement these areas, the state adopts various legislative acts regulating prices in a particular industry, intervenes in retail trade in order to fix uniform retail prices for certain goods, and uses world experience to solve the set tasks. Demonopolization is a permanent function and the main activity of the state in a market economy. Government agencies use various methods and methods to combat monopoly. The main techniques aimed at demonopolization are: control of mergers of firms that operate in the same industry.

A merger is a situation in the market when one market entity acquires shares or shares of another. As a result, the second enterprise becomes an integral part of the first. Horizontal merger - collusion of competing companies on uniform fixed prices, on the division of the market. A vertical merger represents the amalgamation of stage-by-stage related productions. The merger of former suppliers and consumers makes it impossible for other firms to sell their goods to the buyer firm. A severe penalty due to participation in a horizontal or vertical merger is the dissolution of the company. A conglomerate merger is a combination of businesses from different industries. Such a merger is usually allowed. For example: if a company in the steel industry or an oil company acquires a dairy company, their fortunes in the respective industries do not change much as a result of the merger. Most often, large companies occupying a large market share close to state-controlled concentration level. In Russia, the Ministry of Antimonopoly Policy and Entrepreneurship Support gives permission for a merger after analyzing possible changes in the market. They check the territorial and commodity boundaries of the market, change the concentration before and after the merger, change prices. To justify a merger, firms must provide calculations that show price cuts or fixing. But there is no guarantee that prices will rise after a while.

Protection of competition in competitive bidding. Competitive bidding eliminates favoritism, corruption, and dishonest deals. Competitive bidding in the public distribution of contracts and transactions for supplies or works is an important way to protect the interests of society. Falsification of applications leads to a direct violation of federal and local authorities, bodies of constituent entities or local self-government are prohibited from restricting the creation of new business entities, establishing bans on activities, the creation of goods, except in certain cases. Russian legislation. It is forbidden to establish bans on the movement of goods between regions Russian Federation or otherwise restrict the rights of business entities. Providing benefits to business entities that have advantages over other entities in the same industry requires approval from the federal antimonopoly authorities.

Not allowed to participate in entrepreneurial activity officials, public authorities and public administration.

Demonopolization of the Russian economy has its own principles:

1. Analysis of markets, selection of competitive and monopoly ones among them. To determine the degree of monopolization of the market, you need to find out the share of the company's products in the total volume. If the indicator is above 60%, this market is monopolized; if it is below 20%, it is not monopolized.

2. A versatile approach to monopoly markets. Suggests that antitrust policy should not be directed against all monopolies.

3. Identification of a natural monopoly industry, which, in principle, is not subject to demonopolization.

4. Definition of monopolies against which the state uses tough measures. The state controls the processes of mergers of companies and not every one of them is recognized as legal and permissible. Antitrust policy is primarily directed against such monopolies.

5. Combination of antitrust policy, legal regulations(antimonopoly law) and the organizational mechanism that ensures their implementation. This form in developed countries has been operating for a long time, but in Russia it is still in the formative stage.

6. Simultaneous implementation of demonopolization and price liberalization, because one price liberalization leads to the consolidation of the positions of monopolies, which can freely set their own prices.

7. Improvement and strengthening of market structures that resist monopolies.

The goal of antimonopoly policy is to ensure that only the zone of natural monopoly operates in the economy. However, under the conditions of a market economy, many monopoly industries are characterized by the features of a natural monopoly. By functional purpose, natural monopolies can be divided into technological oligopolies, scientific and technical and state monopolies. The specificity of technology in some industries naturally leads to a technological oligopoly. On the basis of acquired patents and licenses, a natural scientific and technical monopoly is formed.

As mentioned above, a natural monopoly is formed in the market when one firm can produce a product at low cost than several smaller firms. With an increase in the volume of output of a natural monopoly, the average cost of production decreases.

A firm that has achieved a position of natural monopoly in an industry can charge prices above costs and limit the quantity of goods beyond what is optimal for society. Thus, there is a need for state regulation of natural monopolies. To this end, in 1995 Russia adopted a law on the regulation of natural monopolies.

Methods of regulation of subjects of natural monopolies:

Price regulation, carried out by determining prices or their limit level;

Determination of consumers subject to compulsory service and establishment of a minimum level of their provision in case of impossibility to satisfy in full the needs for goods produced by a natural monopoly entity.

Violations for which natural monopolies are punished with fines are:

Setting prices above the level set by the regulator of natural monopolies. Fine up to 15 thousand. minimum wage;

Failure to comply with the decision issued by the regulatory body of natural monopolies. Fine up to 10 thousand minimum wages;

Providing false information to the regulatory authorities of natural monopolies. Fine 1000 minimum wage;

- untimely provision of documents and other information necessary for its activities. Fine up to 500 minimum wage

Of great importance is the pricing system in the natural monopoly market, which would ensure the establishment of an optimal price level, including a fair profit, when the price coincides with the average total costs. Pricing regulation can simultaneously lead to a reduction in prices and an increase in production volume, and lead to a decrease in the economic profits of natural monopolies. Industries that are aimed at the defense of the country, serving the state as a monopoly consumer, are in a difficult situation. Such enterprises do not have independence in terms of determining the volume and structure of production, the properties and characteristics of products, prices, and the choice of suppliers. The requirements for them are very variable and depend on the military-political situation and the strategy of the state. In order to compensate for losses associated with isolation from the open market, enterprises need to be provided with material, informational and other resources, carry out long-term planning of the volume of government orders, etc.

In addition to price regulation, the state has the ability to limit the profitability of natural monopolies through fiscal, customs, and credit policies; regulate property relations on the basis of a controlling stake, nationalization, changes in the legal form of activity; introduction of competition in the natural monopoly market, if it is economically justified. For example: in the natural gas industry, gas transportation is a monopoly activity. Production and sale of natural gas is a market with fairly high competition. In railway transport, the monopoly activity is the transportation itself, and the laying of tracks, the operation of the road remain quite competitive. Therefore, the task of the state is to stimulate new companies in the development of new market sectors; lowering barriers to entry because the efficiency gains from a single producer do not compensate for society's losses from the abuse of monopoly power. Monopolies are a huge problem for any country's economy. Russia's monopolies differ in many ways from other countries because they are inherited from the socialist era of monopoly. Consequently, the implementation of antimonopoly policy in our country requires an individual approach and double efforts. In the early 1990s, monopolization, along with other government problems, stood in the way of Russia's economic development. It was clear that without the adoption of appropriate measures against monopoly, the transition to a market economy is not possible, where the presence of competition is one of the main aspects. This problem was not only purely economic in nature, it gradually became a political and social threat. In creating favorable conditions for competition and stabilizing the devastated economy, the antimonopoly policy of the state played a decisive role. In modern conditions market economy, the role and importance of antitrust policy in terms of economic development of the state is very large. It should also be noted that the well-being and life of ordinary citizens of the country depend on the effectiveness and correctness of this policy, since the consequences primarily affect them. Currently, antimonopoly policy is actively developing both in Russia and around the world. This fact determines the importance of state regulation of market entities. Recently, huge efforts have been directed towards improving the regulatory framework for antimonopoly regulation. But it must be admitted that, regardless of the presence of the legal field and the state legal body, the Russian antimonopoly policy needs serious adjustment. In a broad sense, the state antimonopoly policy considers almost the entire range of decisions aimed at economic development, increasing competitiveness in the market for products and services of national producers, ensuring effective employment. Natural monopolies occupy a special place in the Russian economy. Because we have large areas of territories, different climatic conditions, diversity natural resources, Population. Recently, as we all have already noticed, the Russian and regional press are getting more and more facts about the struggle between monopolists and consumers. The main industries are electricity, gas supply and the oil refining industry. Accordingly, the antimonopoly policy should be improved both in relation to artificial monopolies and natural ones.

Antitrust regulation is a system of legislative and regulatory legal acts aimed at developing fair competition and overcoming the negative consequences of the monopoly power of an enterprise in the market for goods, services and factors of their production.

The main methods antitrust regulation are:

• limiting the monopolization of the market;
• permanent state monitoring;
• prohibition of the establishment of monopolistic prices;
• maintaining and maintaining competition in the market.

Antimonopoly legislation is a legislatively fixed rules for the functioning of business participants and state regulatory bodies in the market of goods and services. The main objectives of the state antimonopoly legislation are:

• providing favorable conditions and incentives for the development of competition in the national economy;
• removal of all barriers to the development of competition on a legal basis and prevention of the dominant position of individual market participants;
• the exclusion of monopolistic actions of the central authorities and the dictates of individual participants in the economic turnover;
• determination of the legal regime for regulating the liability of market participants for violation of the rules of fair and fair competition.

State fight against monopoly

production entails significant public loss:

• compared to , the monopoly usually sets higher prices with limited volume;
• the monopoly is able to extract superprofits, while appropriating a significant part of the consumer surplus;
• monopoly prevents the efficient allocation of resources in the sense that monopolistic firms do not necessarily produce at minimum average cost (min LRAC) as in perfect competition;
• monopoly prevents market competition by fixing prices, erecting artificial barriers to entry, entering into contracts under harsh conditions, driving competitors out of business through predatory practices.

Since the activities of monopolies are anti-social in nature, the protection of free competition and the restriction of the activities of monopolies are among the most important functions of the state. The state in the fight against monopolies uses economic and administrative measures.

The main economic measures to maintain competition and combat monopoly are:

• encouraging the creation of new products and substitute products;
• support for new firms and enterprises of medium and small businesses;
• attraction of foreign investments;
• establishment of joint ventures and creation of free trade zones;
• financing of measures to expand the production of scarce goods in order to eliminate the dominant position of individual economic entities.

Competition is an effective mechanism for improving the quality and quantity of goods and services with a commensurate decrease in its cost.

State antimonopoly policy

Government competition policy generally aims to:

• intensification of scientific and technological progress, i.e., increasing efficiency and reducing the time for the development and implementation of new scientific and technological developments in production, which make it possible to increase the range, quality and reduce the price of goods provided on the market;
• maintaining competition in the regulatory field;
• creation of conditions for effective and efficient competition.

The market inevitably tends towards monopolization, since producers need to establish control over the market in order to function effectively.

Unfair competition in the national economy of Russia manifests itself in the form of:

• bribery;
• blackmail;
• providing deliberately false information to the consumer;
• concealment of information about economic activity from state inspection structures;
• deliberate concealment of defects for the consumer;
• industrial espionage;
• counterfeit products of competitors.

The state antimonopoly policy is aimed at creating conditions for fair competition and preventing market monopolization. It performs the most important functions in the development of the national economy, since creates conditions for increasing the competitiveness of domestic producers and the economy as a whole.

The problematic of the practical implementation of antimonopoly policy is due to the fact that it mainly uses economic mechanisms that are not sufficiently developed in Russia. Accordingly, the effectiveness of antimonopoly policy is determined primarily by the development of the national market and the objectivity of the state economic policy.

Measures to maintain competition in Russia

The main administrative measures to maintain competition are reflected in federal law dated July 26, 2006 No. 135-FZ “On Protection of Competition” (previously, the Law of the RSFSR dated March 22, 1991 No. 948-1 “On Competition and Restriction of Monopolistic Activities in Commodity Markets”) was in force.

This law defines organizational and legal framework protection of competition, including prevention and suppression of:

• monopolistic activity and unfair competition;
• prevention, restriction, elimination of competition by federal executive authorities, state authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, local governments, other bodies or organizations exercising the functions of these bodies, as well as state extra-budgetary funds, central bank Russian Federation.

Antitrust policy is a set of government measures to improve antimonopoly legislation, the taxation system, denationalization, denationalization and privatization of property, encourage the creation and development of small businesses.

Regulation of the activities of natural monopolies can be carried out on the basis of the use of various forms and methods of state regulation. In countries with a mixed economy, four main forms of state regulation can be distinguished (Table 1).

Table 1. Forms and methods of state regulation of the economy

Since 2004, there has been a fundamental change in the state antimonopoly policy, when, simultaneously with the general reform of the state apparatus, the Ministry of the Russian Federation for Antimonopoly Policy and Entrepreneurship Support was reorganized into Federal Antimonopoly Service. The main activity of the new structure was determined to create conditions for the development of competition and the development of a unified state policy to support competition. Despite this, in general, the state antimonopoly policy has retained its inactive character - there is simply a fixation of cases of violation of competition.

There is a transition of the problem of competition from a purely economic category to a political one, which indicates the need to maintain it at the proper level throughout society. The activity of monopolists, which is certainly necessary in some industries, should be more and more legally regulated primarily in the interests of the consumer.

In modern conditions, the most important task of the state in the implementation of antimonopoly policy is to create equal conditions for all business entities, and the goal of antimonopoly regulation is to develop competition, increase production and consumption of goods and services, improve the quality and standard of living of the population.

Directions of the state antimonopoly policy

The social costs of monopoly power force the state to regulate the activity of monopolies.

Antitrust policy is a system of measures aimed at strengthening and protecting competition by limiting the monopoly power of firms.

Among the main directions of the antimonopoly policy of the state are:

• direct price regulation;
• natural regulation.

Let's consider these areas in more detail.

Direct price regulation

The establishment by the state of the maximum allowable prices for the monopolist's products leads to a modification of the market demand curve.

Rice. 1. Setting the maximum allowable prices

On fig. one D and MR are the demand and marginal revenue curves of an unregulated monopoly, Rm- the price set by the state.

If the monopolist complies with the introduced price cap, its demand curve is modified and takes the form broken curve PmAD, consisting of two segments: horizontal PMA and waning AD. In accordance with this, the marginal revenue curve also changes.

A-priory, marginal revenue represents the increase in total income with a change in output per unit, i.e.

MR=(TR)`=(P*Q)`=P*(dQ/dQ) + Q*(dP/dQ),

MR= P+Q(dP/dQ).

If the monopolist's output is less than Q`, then the price set by the state is valid Pm, the demand curve is a horizontal line and is perfectly elastic (dP/dQ=0). Hence, MR=P.

If the production volume exceeds Q`, then additional quantity products can only be sold at lower than Pm, prices. The demand curve is decreasing dP/dQ<0 , and hence the marginal revenue curve MR lies on the segment bf. With a production volume equal to Q`, the marginal revenue curve has a gap AB.

Let us consider how such a situation affects the behavior of a monopolist (Fig. 2).

Rice. 2. Shift of the equilibrium point in the conditions of state regulation of prices

Assume that the optimal price of an unregulated monopoly is set at P* and the optimal volume is at Q*. If the maximum allowable price (P`) is higher than the optimal one, then this will not change the firm’s decision regarding the optimum point, but if P`

If the government wants to incentivize the expansion of the monopoly firm's production even more (to Q'', for example), it must set the maximum allowable price even lower (in this case, to P'). The minimum allowable price corresponds to min SATC, since at a lower level it will not be economically feasible to continue production and the firm will leave the industry.

Taxation

Another form of state antimonopoly regulation is taxation. Without going into a detailed description of all existing taxes on monopolies, we will consider the impact on the behavior of a monopoly firm of two types of taxes:

• commodity, the rate of which is set per unit of output, and the total amount is determined by the volume of output, and
• per capita, levied regardless of the volume of output.

1. Item tax

A commodity tax is levied on the sale of cigarettes, wine and spirits, gasoline. This tax is part of the variable costs for the monopolist, i.e. profit is calculated according to the formula

n=TR-(TC+tQ),

and the profit maximization condition takes the form

(p)`=0,

dTR/dQ=dTC/dQ+d(tQ)/dQ,

MR=MC+t,

where t- the rate of the itemized tax.

Graphically, the impact of the commodity tax on the shift of the optimum point of the monopolist is shown in Fig. 3

Rice. 3. Establishment of a commodity tax on a monopoly

Let be MC1 is the firm's marginal cost curve, Q1 and P1- optimal output volumes and prices before the introduction of taxation.

The introduction of a tax increases the additional costs of the firm for the release of each additional unit of output, i.e. MC2=MC1+t. The optimal release point is reduced to Q2, the price rises to R2. As a consequence of this, the total profit of the firm decreases (the monopolist operates on the elastic segment of the demand curve, therefore, an increase in price causes a drop in the value of the total income of the firm, which, in the face of an increase in total costs, leads to a decrease in profit).

Many economists believe that this tax cannot be seen as a suitable means of controlling monopolies, since part of the tax burden is passed on to the consumer.

2. Group of lump-sum taxes

Since this group of taxes is levied regardless of the volume of sales, unlike commodity taxes, they are part of the monopolist's fixed costs (for example, the cost of a patent or license for the exclusive right to engage in a certain type of activity) and do not affect the marginal cost.

In this case, the profit of the monopolist will be

n=TR-TC-g,

where g is the lump-sum tax rate for a period of time (=const).

The profit maximization condition is written as

(P)`=0,

(TR)`=(TC)`,

Thus, the introduction of lump-sum taxes does not change the optimal volume and price, but the amount of profit received by the monopolist is reduced. This tax cannot be passed on (even partially) to the buyer through higher prices and lower output, as with a commodity tax.

3. Income tax

The effect of , prices and output is similar to the effect of lump-sum taxes. After paying the income tax, the monopolist's optimum point remains the same as before paying the tax. This is because the tax is based on some specific, fixed percentage of profit and does not change the volume at which MC=MR. This can be proved in the following way.

Denote by t the profit rate (in %). Then the maximization condition net income (i.e. profit after tax) can be written as:

max(pN)=TR-TC-t(TR-TC)=(100-t)(TR-TC),

(nN)`=(100-t)(MR-MC)=0.

If the tax rate is less than 100%, i.e. t< 100, то (100 — t) >0 and, therefore, the condition will be satisfied only if the marginal cost is equal to the marginal income, MC=MR. This means that when taxing the monopolist's profit, the optimal volume and optimal price remain the same. The entire burden of taxation falls on the seller. This favorably distinguishes this type of tax from commodity taxes and is considered an effective means of controlling the activities of monopolies.

Introduction

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

Monopolies, thanks 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 monopolistically high profits. The problems of monopolization of economic life, competition in commodity markets today attract close attention not only of specialists, but also of the general population. This is evidenced by various articles and statements: “Strategic success is achieved only in an open economy, and not behind a protectionist fence. One rule for all is better special regimes and individual exceptions. Monopoly corrupts, absolute monopoly corrupts absolutely. Without competition, only prices rise. Property rights are sacred. Private property is more efficient than state property. The state is not an efficient entrepreneur and should not be in business.”

Since the beginning of the 90s of the 20th century, these problems have become acute for Russia: without taking firm and consistent measures against monopoly, one cannot hope for the success of economic reform and the transition to a market economy. Trying to compensate for the imperfections of the market, the state, resorting to different ways and methods, selects the most appropriate 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 the markets and identify cases of their monopolization (in Russia, such activities are carried out by the State Antimonopoly Committee);

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

To begin with, we will define the very concept of monopoly, some of its characteristic features and the negative impact on the economy of the country, in order to understand the significance of antitrust regulation.

Chapter 1. General characteristics of the monopolized market

1.1. Definition of monopoly.

Monopoly (from the Greek monos- one, poleo- I sell) in the narrow sense - this is the market domination of one seller. However, in a broad sense, it means any dominant position of one or a group of persons in any field of activity. A market is monopolized when a product that has no close substitutes is offered to many buyers by one seller because other sellers are denied access to the market. Market closure can be defined as a legislative ban on certain types of economic activity(patented technologies for manufacturing products, the state monopoly on alcoholic beverages or gambling), and the need to make large one-time investments in fixed assets that 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 firm in an industry that produces a given product or service. Therefore, the concepts of "firm" and "industry" are identical;

There are no closely related products - substitutes. The product of this firm is unique, and the buyer does not have acceptable alternatives;

Monopolized access to any economic resources;

The monopoly firm controls the quantity supplied in the market and controls the price;

It is impossible for another company to enter the industry. Entrance to the industry is blocked.

There is no competition.

1.2. Negative Traits of a Monopolized Market

Like everything in the world, monopoly in the economy has its pros and cons. "All monopoly and all profit-seeking is evil," Ford says knowingly (68-17). Let us define some negative aspects of monopolistic domination:

Being the only seller of a unique product, monopolies can raise its price indefinitely.

Example. Consumer prices for petrol in March 2005 on average in Russia increased by 0.3% compared to February 2005. and amounted to 13.92 rubles. per litre. 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% - up to 15.33 rubles. per litre. It was announced today federal Service state statistics(Rosstat).

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

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

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

It is not profitable for monopolies to create products that replace their goods, so their activity slows down the pace of scientific and technical 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, can impose their discriminated conditions on society: low wages for their employees, poor quality of goods, forced “add-ons” to their products (like a program for accessing the Internet , fastened by Microsoft to the Windows operating system) and so on.

1.3. Feature of the position of monopoly

The peculiarity of the position of a monopoly is that the industry demand curve is the demand curve for its products. Therefore, for a monopoly, the price is not an exogenous parameter, but a decreasing function of its output. Having decided on the volume of output, the monopolist, given a given demand, simultaneously determines the price at which he can sell his output. 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 have to consist in maximizing profits. Being a sole 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 product at the same time at different prices.

The main goal of any monopolist is to maximize profits. To show at what price and what volume of output the marginal revenue of the monopolist will be as close as possible to the marginal cost and the resulting profit will be the largest, let's turn to a numerical example. 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. one.

We assumed that 1 thousand units. a monopolist can sell its products at a price of 500 rubles. In the future, with the expansion of sales by 1 thousand units. he is forced to reduce its price by 2 rubles each time, so the marginal revenue is reduced by 4 rubles. with each increase in sales. The firm will maximize profit by producing 14,000 units. products. It is at this level 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, and thereby reduce profits.

In a competitive market, when the firm's price and marginal revenue are the same, 15,000 units would be produced. products, and the price of production would be lower than in a monopoly.

Output, thousand units	Costs					Profit, thousand rubles
	Gross thousand rubles	Limit, rub.		Gross, thousand rubles	Limit, rub.
		425	474		448
		455	472		444

Tab. 1. Dynamics of costs and income of the firm in a monopoly.

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

Since in our example production is possible only in whole units of output, 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 buy because of the high price set by the manufacturer.

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

The development of large production monopolies significantly changed the perfectly competitive market. It has practically ceased to exist in its classical version. Producers find themselves in unequal conditions, the nature of competition is changing. A fierce struggle is unfolding between large commodity producers using a variety of methods of competition.

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

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

One of the functions of the state in a market economy is to preserve competition as economic basis market mechanism. Therefore, in almost all developed countries, where monopolies have a fairly strong position, the state creates antimonopoly legislation and pursues an antimonopoly policy. The 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 an artificial deficit, etc. Under these conditions, the state is to some extent forced to control the activities of business entities in order to prevent the monopolization of the economy countries. Antimonopoly policy is understood as a system of state measures of a legal, economic, financial, tax, psychological nature that prevents manifestations of anticompetitive behavior and promotes efficient functioning market economy. Antimonopoly policy is the main activity of the state in the formation of competitive market structures.

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

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

Prohibition of secret agreements between firms;

Behavior, if necessary, unbundling monopolies;

Security and protection competitive environment: prevention of monopoly mergers, liberalization of markets and facilitating access to foreign goods and capital, support for small businesses, venture capital firms, etc.

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

For any legislation, the definition of the very concept of monopoly is of key importance. Despite the fact that we have defined the concept of monopoly above, let us again denote a somewhat different formulation. Monopoly here is understood as the conquest or preservation by a firm or a group of firms of a dominant position in any market, through the practice of restricting or weakening competition. At the same time, it is important to keep in mind that the dominant position of the firm is not necessarily identical with the concept of monopoly and is pursued in accordance with the law. Thus, if a firm has gained a dominant position as a result of reducing production costs and prices for its products, conducting active and effective innovation activities, and issuing fundamentally new products, i.e. due to the improvement of its own activities and financial policies, it is regarded as a monopoly and is not prosecuted by law. The law pursues not the natural economic growth of the enterprise, but the use of non-economic methods aimed at ousting a competitor.

2.2. Antitrust Law

Antitrust law is legislation against the accumulation of socially dangerous monopoly power by firms.

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

1. The Sherman Act (1890), which prohibits the secret monopolization of trade, sole control in a particular industry, price fixing. Fines, damages, imprisonment, and even the dissolution of the guilty firm were envisaged as punishments. The main feature of the Sherman Act is its focus on combating existing monopolies. Its shortcomings were the vagueness of the basic definitions, the absence of a permanent body monitoring the implementation of the law, and the absence of preventive antitrust measures.

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

3. The Robinson-Patman Act (1936) prohibits restrictive business practices in the field of trade, "price scissors", price discrimination, etc.

The general scheme of the price corridor:

________|______________________|_____

С/с-be Starting

products 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 does not form completely spontaneously.

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

shifted from a narrow to a broad interpretation of monopolistic behavior. The Wheeler-Lee Act (1938) was intended to protect 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 1970s, antitrust laws were further developed. 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 of firms on mutual sales and purchases;

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

In the 1980s, the strict regulation of the activities of American companies came into conflict with economic situation. Restriction of firms' agility threatened to weaken their positions, both on the world and non-domestic markets. In the more liberal antimonopoly policy of the 1980s, more attention was paid to industry specifics, 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 the state's economic policy. It was created in parallel in all countries of Western Europe after the Second World War and received its final design in the 70s. Broadly speaking, there are two main areas:

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

2. Monitoring (observation) of individual anti-competitive practices of firms, in which the predominant position of the firm in this market is used.

In all countries of Western Europe, the dominance of an individual firm or group of them is regarded as an anti-competitive factor and is the object of close attention of the state. In France, a merger is 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 it occupies 1/3 of the market for goods and services. In England, if the share of one company or group of firms controls ¼ of the market, it is recognized as a monopoly.

2.3. Antimonopoly legislation in Russia.

The first law concerning the antimonopoly regulation of the economy appeared in Russia in 1991 - the law “On Competition and Restriction of Monopoly Activities in Commodity Markets” dated March 22, 1991.

From 1991 to 1999, a large number of objectively necessary laws were introduced, which formed the organizational and legal basis for regulating monopolies. For example, the laws "On the privatization of state and municipal enterprises in the Russian Federation" of July 3, 1991, "On the supply of products for federal state needs" of December 13, 1994, "On financial and industrial groups" of 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 the implementation of foreign trade" dated April 14, 1998 and others, as well as regulatory legal acts of the President of the Russian Federation and the government.

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

As a result of this need, in 1999 the Russian government created the Ministry for Antimonopoly Policy and Entrepreneurship Support (MAP). It was created on the basis of the State Committee for Antimonopoly Policy, which 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 (GKRP) and, possibly , the Federal Energy Commission (FEC) will be included.

But despite all the measures taken, the level of development of competition in our country is clearly insufficient. In Russia, in the transitional economy, the task of combating monopoly is quite acute. The manifestation of monopoly in countries with economies in transition has a number of features. This is primarily due to the fact that the centralized state deliberately formed an administrative monopoly in almost all spheres of society. In a planned economy, monopoly was imposed "from above", in contrast to a 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. The result was a highly monopolized economy. So, by the beginning of the 90s in the USSR, 1,800 items of products were produced by only one enterprise or association, more than 1,100 enterprises were absolute monopolists. In the production of many important types of products, 2-3 enterprises dominated.

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

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

Regulation of the activities of monopoly enterprises, namely, it ensures the prevention, restriction and suppression of monopolistic activities and unfair competition. Unfair competition is understood as actions aimed at acquiring advantages that are contrary to the law, business practices, the requirements of integrity, reasonableness and fairness and which caused (may cause) losses to competitors or damage to their business reputation. We are talking about the dissemination of false, inaccurate or distorted information that can cause loss or damage, misleading consumers about 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 owner's consent

Under prevention of monopolistic activity means a set of measures taken by the antimonopoly authority to create economic, organizational and legal conditions in which the emergence of monopoly 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 expansion of their geographical boundaries).

Restriction of monopolistic activity - the process of formation and implementation of 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 body as maintaining a register of economic entities with a share of more than 35 percent on the market of a certain product, monitoring economic concentration, and conducting audits of compliance with antimonopoly laws.

- Suppression of monopolistic activity - the actual law enforcement activities of the antimonopoly body to identify facts of violation of prohibitions and other restrictions established by the antimonopoly legislation, the initiation and consideration of cases and the adoption of decisions on them that are binding on violators, control over the execution of decisions and instructions.

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

Direct methods of antimonopoly regulation:

The prohibition of agreements between producers or consumers in order to limit access to the market of competitors, to establish a monopoly price.

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

Compulsory disaggregation of all forms of associations of enterprises that occupy a monopoly position in the market.

For example, the American experience shows the beneficial nature of such disaggregations. So, after the division of the monopoly giant AT & T [“American Telephone and Telegraph Company” - “American Telephone and Telegraph Company” (Ai-Ti-and-Ti)] in the 1980s, the newly formed companies from it immediately carried out previously inhibited innovations and doubled (!) Reduced prices.

If we take Russia, then in it the antimonopoly policy of the 1990s was mainly directed not against the abuse of monopolists (electricity, gas, transport and other companies) in inflating prices, but only to force the latter to share in full the superprofits received by the state .

Prevention of new monopoly formations or control of increased 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 coherent policy in the market. According to the Law "On Competition and Restriction of Monopolistic Activities in Commodity 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 of them (subsequent control).

Pre-controlled, firstly, the creation, merging and joining commercial organizations, associations, unions and associations, if their assets exceed 100 thousand minimum wages; secondly, liquidation and separation (separation) 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 commodity market exceeds 35% (except for cases when the enterprise is liquidated by a 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 monopoly enterprises, limiting their growth (setting 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, impose on the counterparty the terms of the contract that are unfavorable for him or not related to the subject of the contract, include in the contract discriminatory conditions that put the counterparty in an unequal position compared to other enterprises, to prevent other enterprises from entering the market (or leaving it), to induce the counterparty to refuse to conclude 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 economic entity (manufacturer) that dominates the market of a given product in order to compensate for unreasonable costs caused by underutilization of production capacities and (or) to gain additional profit by reducing the quality of the product.

Monopoly low price: the price of the purchased goods, set by the dominant buyer on the market of 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 of a product at a loss-making level in order to drive competitors out of the market.

The ban on the establishment of monopoly prices is the most stable, although there are many problems here as well. In particular, "Temporary guidelines on Revealing 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 set taking into account the fact that production capacities can be exhausted. But with a general decline in production It is not realistic for Russia. external factors identify monopolistically high or monopolistically low prices.

Now in Russia monopoly high prices are more often practiced, and in countries with developed competition - monopoly low, sometimes even dumping. Russian monopoly manifests its anti-competitive behavior mainly in relations with consumers or suppliers, and not with competitors. But as competition develops, the likelihood of monopolistically low prices increases: powerful diversified companies, thanks to cross-subsidization due to the profitability of some sectors, can underestimate the prices of products of others and thereby block competitors. In this part, it is especially necessary to control the financial and industrial groups.

Formation of the marginal level of profitability (profitability);

Comprehensive state support for small and new firms (tax incentives, subsidies from the budget, soft loans, government orders, etc.)

Admission of foreign capital and assistance to foreign companies, joint ventures.

Antimonopoly policy also uses prohibitions on anticompetitive actions of authorities and administration. The development of market relations presupposes the elimination of direct interference of state 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, 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, unreasonably provide benefits, restrict the creation of enterprises, impose bans on their activities, sale or purchase of goods, indicate the priority of some contracts, arbitrarily set the size of the registration fee, prevent the entry into the market of goods and services of "out-of-town" enterprises and so on.

The registry is widely used as a tool for antitrust control. According to the results of the analysis of the state of the commodity market and the share of enterprises on it (more or less than 35%), they are included or excluded from the state register. Does this MAP, when it comes to Russian market in general, or its territorial offices in the case of regional markets. The register is compiled in order to have an information base on the largest market entities and control their compliance with antimonopoly laws.

The register necessarily includes 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 singled out as a special category, which become the only producers of products not because the market is closed, but because of the long-term growth of economies of scale. A natural monopoly exists when economies of scale are so great that one firm can supply the entire market at a lower unit cost than a number of competing firms. Such conditions are typical for public utilities. In these cases, economies of scale in the production and distribution of the product are so great that large-scale activities are necessary to obtain low unit costs and low prices. This is clearly seen from the graph. As the volume of production increases significantly, the long-term

Picture 1

average cost figure 1 (long run average cost). If the market were divided among many producers, then economies of scale would not be achieved, unit costs would be high, and high prices would be required to cover these costs. Two alternatives are presented as possible means of securing socially acceptable behavior on the part of a natural monopoly. One is public property and the other is state regulation. If competition is not possible, then regulated monopolies should 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 departments. Figure 2 shows the demand and cost parameters of a natural monopoly. Because of the high fixed costs, the demand curve intersects the average cost curve at a point where average cost falls 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 on 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 a single producer.

Figure 2

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, range of goods and services produced by them. In relation to natural monopolies, the state is also forced to carry out direct or indirect regulation. Modern antimonopoly policy, first of all, is aimed at using the advantages of a natural monopoly under the control of society and the state and at preventing or limiting an artificial monopoly. To this end, measures are being taken against excessive concentration of economic power, artificial deficits, and price abuses. At the same time, free and fair competition in the economy is stimulated.

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

The concept of determining the level of profit embedded in regulated prices bears a clear imprint of the transitional state of the Russian economy, its market institutions, private property and competition. The method of profit rationing in regulated chains significantly affects investment activity natural monopolies and their effectiveness capital investments. According to the market approach to price regulation, investors will invest in the implementation of 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. receiving dividends, then investments must be received from profits, in which case the increase in tariffs will be the largest, since an increase in profits directed to investments leads to an increase in taxes on profits. Needless to say, the 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 their reflection in the cost of production.

Let us consider the analysis of sources of financing in fixed capital for medium and large enterprises of natural monopoly industries in Russia in 1999-2000. based on the table below.

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

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 capital investment financing, since

more than other branches of natural monopolies 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 profits in the sources of capital investment financing was only 0.6%, which is significantly less than in the electric power industry, railroad and pipeline transport (15-17%). On the other hand, the share of "borrowed funds from other organizations" is two orders of magnitude higher (30.6%) than in the electric power industry (0.4%) and in railway transport (0.1%). On the whole, in 1999, the electric power industry, railway transport, the gas industry, and pipeline transport relied primarily on non-market forms of raising funds for capital investment in fixed assets.

In 2000, at first glance, the situation in the analyzed industries changed markedly compared to 1999. On average, in five industries, the share of own funds in the sources of capital investment financing fell to 38%, while the share of borrowed 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 not changed.

The volume of attracted funds increased due to a sharp increase in other sources. In 2000, other attracted funds amounted (on average for five industries) to 41.7% of all sources of financing investments in fixed assets (against 7.1% in 1999). Particularly large are the volumes of other sources in the gas industry and in railway transport. In the last branch, huge funds are centralized in the fund of the ministry, and then directed to specific enterprises for the acquisition and creation of fixed assets. Businesses show these sources in statistical reporting as "others". Something similar seems to be happening in the system of JSC "Gazprom", which has 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 can see, the structure of sources of financing investments in fixed assets that changed in 2000 testifies mainly to the development of processes of centralization and redistribution of funds within the systems of interdependent organizations. However, in the power industry financial policy enterprises is becoming more and more market-oriented, judging by the structure of sources of capital investment financing.

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 capital investment financing is 3-4%, and according to a more realistic estimate - 1-2%. In rail transport, their share is even smaller. In the electric power industry and the communications industry, the share of market sources is 10% and 15%, respectively, or, most likely, 8% and 13%.

The structure of sources of financing for investments by 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 for the payment of 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 products of natural monopolies indirectly hinders the formation of a capital market in Russia. Such an impact cannot be overlooked, since the investments of natural monopolies make up a significant part (about 30%) of all investments in the Russian economy.

2.7. Reforming natural monopolies in Russia.

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

As the experience of our largely pseudo-market economy shows, the disaggregation of such giants as the Ministry of Railways, OAO Gazprom, RAO UES of Russia is fraught not with a 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 disaggregation of organizational and managerial structures and separation of mines into independent legal entities.

A number of features of the activities of natural monopolies can lead to an increase in total costs in the national economy. First, because the monopolist does not have sufficient incentives to minimize its internal costs, its interest in large-scale reorganization or innovation is much less than that of firms selling their products in competitive markets. Second, there are opportunities to "inflate" those overheads that allow the managers of such large companies to increase their personal well-being.

An objective obstacle to the development of competition in the infrastructure sector is high barriers to entry for new firms. The "value" of such barriers is determined by the amount of investment required to create an infrastructure network. The inconsistency of the organizational and economic conditions in which the subjects of 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 - "private unregulated monopoly, private monopoly regulated by the state, direct economic activity of the state" 1 .

The approach to reforming natural monopolies, which provides for the separation of 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:

Separation of the railway network from operations by creating a company that owns all the railway tracks and stations, but does not operate them;

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

A company that owns all railroad tracks and stations, but does not operate them;

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.

The modern approach to the regulation of natural monopolies should be based on the position that natural monopolies are an integral part of what J. Galbraith called the "planning system". In today's highly developed economy, it includes the largest corporations. The laws of their behavior differ from the laws of functioning of the traditional market system, which plays a subordinate role in the modern economy. The market itself is not able to manage or control the "planning system". These functions can only be performed by the state and society as a whole. In the case of natural monopolies, such control should concern costs, prices, and distribution of profits.

The economic activity of monopolies, including natural ones, should be considered in the context of the globalization of the world economy and the tightening of international competition for transnational corporations. It is transnational corporations that are the main subjects of the global economy, accumulating most of the income generated in it. The creation and successful development of these companies require huge efforts, time, a favorable climate, and support, including at the government level. The national economy without such companies is doomed to a passive role in global economic relations. To date, the only transnational company in the full sense of the word, which has undeniable weight on the European continent, operates in our country - this is OAO Gazprom.

Reforms of natural monopolies should not be reduced to their primitive fragmentation, but, in fact, to destruction and degradation. Such a policy generates archaic market relations, which in the advanced industrial countries are actively pushed to the "roadside" of economic life. The Russian economy is still "afloat" thanks to the functioning of natural monopolies. It is clear that they have "outgrown" the primitive attitudes (and times) of a "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. Forecast estimates of the development of natural monopolies must take into account a number of circumstances. First, the need to form interrelated strategies for the internal development of the relevant industries (national strategies) and global strategies focused on their active role as subjects of competitive relations in the global economy. Secondly, the need to link the developed strategies with the periodization of the development of the Russian economy until 2015, which includes 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 condition, the place occupied in the macroeconomic system.

Conclusion

Antimonopoly regulation is the most important component of the economic policy of the state in all countries with a developed market economy. Antimonopoly regulation is a purposeful state activity carried out on the basis and within the limits allowed by the current legislation to establish and implement the 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 the monopolization of the economy is the excessive power of monopoly firms. Bargaining power is the ability to influence the price of a commodity. The objective of antitrust policy is to prevent firms from gaining unlimited market power, expanding the scope for competition and converting it into non-price power.

Summarizing the above, it can be argued that antitrust law 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.

The 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 monopolies.

This is another problem of modern Russia that needs to be solved.

Perhaps these problems and the difficulties associated with their solution arise due to the fact that Russia has 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, the monopolies in our country are not the result of natural development, but deliberately created formations. Moreover, I am sure that the antimonopoly policy will fruitfully develop both in relation to closed and open monopolies, and in relation to natural monopolies, which is perhaps the most important thing for the Russian economy at the moment.

How will antimonopoly policy develop in the near future?

This question can be partially answered by citing the statement of the head of the sector of the bureau economic analysis A. E. Shastitko. He noted that: “… expanding domestic market is a means of ensuring national and economic security countries, however, the formation of a tough competitive environment involves adjusting 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 the antimonopoly policy in Russia will receive additional adjustments and clarifications in the near future.

Reasonable, clear and confident reform of antitrust policy can help the Russian economy improve and improve. At the same time, Russia should not so much rely on foreign experience as seek its 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, then the life of the Russian population in general will certainly get better.

List of used literature

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

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

3. Nureev R.M. Microeconomics course: A textbook for universities. - 2nd ed. – M.: Norma, 2004.

4. Economic theory: Proc. For stud. higher textbook institutions / Ed. V.D. Kamaev. - 9th ed., revised. and additional – M.: Humanit. ed. center VLADOS, 2003.

5. Galperin V.M., Grebennikov P.I., Leusskii A.I., Tarasevich L.S. Macroeconomics. S.-Pb. Ed. School of Economics, 1997

6. Pindike 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. Questions of Economics, 2004, No. 3.

10. A. Gorodetsky, Yu. Pavlenko. "Reforming Natural Monopolies". Questions of Economics, 2000, No. 1.

11. V. Morgunov. "Rationing of profits in the regulation of prices of natural monopolies". Questions of Economics, 2001, No. 9.

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

Subsidy (from Latin subsidium - help, support) - allowance, assistance (often state and in monetary form) region, company, individual. There.

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

Molodyuk V. The existing state of the electric energy market in Russia and the problems of its development. -

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

Journal No. 3 2001 "Economic Issues". V. Morgunov "Rationing the profits of natural monopolies", p. 32

*Data rounded. **From total investment in fixed capital.

Source Goskomstat of Russia

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