Introduction…………………………………………………………………………...3

1. Concept, basic principles of the antimonopoly policy of the Russian Federation……………5

1.1. The concept of competition and monopolistic activity……………..5

1.2. Types of monopolistic activities…………………………………..6

1.3. Goals and methods of antimonopoly regulation in Russia…………….8

2. Antimonopoly legislation in Russia……………………………...16

2.1. Stages of development of antimonopoly legislation …………………16

2.2. Legal and regulatory framework for antimonopoly activities…………..18

2.3. The main provisions of the antimonopoly law…………..27

3. Activities of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Russian Federation………………31

4. Impact of antitrust law on unity Russian market and economic development……………………………………………….…37

5.Development trends regulatory framework antimonopoly law in solving problems……………………………………….…40

6. State control over monopolistic activities in countries with developed market economies………………………………..…...43

Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………50

List of literature used…..………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

INTRODUCTION

Without the adoption of firm and consistent measures against monopoly, one cannot hope for the success of economic reform and the transition to a market economy. In Russia, the process of creating state control to prevent unfair competition actually began from scratch, since the command-administrative system that was present in the management of the economy until recently, in its essence, excluded the presence of free competition in economic activity.

From the Soviet economy, the Russian economy inherited high level concentration of production in many sectors of the economy. In Russia, natural monopolies also have great market power, operating in the basic sectors of the economy - the electric power industry and transport. Thus, RAO UES of Russia controls 98% of electricity consumers, RAO GAZPROM controls 94% of the domestic gas market, and the Ministry of Railways controls 77% of cargo turnover. Antimonopoly regulation, combined with support for domestic entrepreneurship and the organization of consumer protection, are one of the essential conditions for the successful socio-economic development of Russia.

Of great importance is the creation and improvement of the legislative framework regarding the regulation of monopolistic processes and competition, the understanding by the Russian population of the need for economic reforms in this area.

For antitrust policy the state creates antimonopoly services, the main task of which is to control monopolistic tendencies in the country.

In order for the implementation of antitrust policy to win the trust and support of the public, so that people know that they can turn to the antitrust authorities with their problems, it is necessary to convince people that free competition is good for everyone.

In this course work, we will consider the issue of the application of antitrust laws and the impact of antitrust regulation on the unity of the Russian market and economic development.

The purpose of this work is to study and generalize the foreign experience of antimonopoly regulation, analyze the basic principles of antimonopoly regulation in Russia on the basis of the current economic situation and current regulations, study the antimonopoly legislation of the Russian Federation, consider the area of ​​problems of antimonopoly legislation and possible ways their decisions; identifying sources of antimonopoly regulation problems; the main trends in changes in the antimonopoly legislation by analyzing the current regulations, taking into account the peculiarities of the Russian economy.

Study of antimonopoly policy at the federal level;

To get acquainted with the history of the formation of antimonopoly legislation in Russia;

Familiarize yourself with the regulatory legal acts of antimonopoly activities;

Consider the types of violations of antimonopoly law on the example of enterprises;

Familiarize yourself with the activities of antimonopoly authorities at the federal and regional levels;

To get acquainted with the implementation of state control over monopolistic activities in countries with developed market economies.

The subject of the study is the antimonopoly legislation of the Russian Federation

1. Concept, basic principles of the antimonopoly policy of the Russian Federation

1.1. The concept of competition and monopolistic activity

Monopoly (from the Greek. Monopolium - one sell or the only seller) means the exclusive right to carry out any activity (production, trade, craft) owned by one person, group of people, organization or state, allowing you to impose your own interests and receive monopoly profits.

Monopoly also finds its place in a market economy. Its existence can be judged by signs of monopolistic behavior: by the destruction of market mechanisms (inhibition of scientific and technological progress, retention of high prices, decrease in quality and reduction in output, etc.).

A monopoly can be the state, regions, central economic departments, ministries, of course, state and private enterprises, as well as individual entrepreneurs. Usually, monopoly is associated with large and largest enterprises or corporations.

The essential features of a monopoly are the possession by the subject of property and monopoly power, the ability to dictate their terms, to influence the market equilibrium in a way that is beneficial for themselves, to manipulate prices and production volumes.

Competition is a necessary prerequisite for a market economy. It means the competitiveness of market participants, when their independent actions effectively limit the ability of each of them to unilaterally (monopolistically) influence General terms circulation of goods in the relevant commodity market. The opposite of competition is monopolistic activity, which is the actions of market participants that contradict antitrust laws and are aimed at preventing, restricting or eliminating competition.

Competition is permitted by law, and monopolistic activity is prohibited. Monopoly in the state economy is based on universal state ownership and the absence of a civilized market, i.e. total nationalization of the economy.

The negative consequences of the monopolism of state property (state monopoly) are;

1) at the level of society - the lack of economic freedom, the degeneration of the economic system;

2) at the industry level - the emergence of narrow departmental interests;

3) at the enterprise level - inflexibility, inefficiency of production;

4) at the level of an individual employee - alienation from property, management and from the results of one's own labor.

State monopoly inflicts enormous harm on the economy and the national economy as a whole.

The main ways to overcome monopoly are: the formation of a normally functioning market economy and a competitive environment in the commodity markets, the development of small business, as well as the denationalization of property and the privatization of enterprises. In short, this includes all measures to demonopolize the economy.

Antimonopoly legislation is aimed at maintaining competition and limiting monopolistic activity.

1.2. Types of monopolistic activities

The normal development of entrepreneurship is hindered by the monopolistic activity of entrepreneurs (economic entities) as a type of offense. According to Article 4 of the Law on Competition, monopolistic activities are actions (inaction) of economic entities that are contrary to antimonopoly legislation and are aimed at preventing, restricting or eliminating competition.

The main types of monopolistic activities are:

1. Abuse by an economic entity of a dominant position in the market (Article 5 of the Law on Competition). The dominant position of an economic entity means its dominance on commodity market similar goods, if its share of the goods is 65% or more (Article 4 of the Law on Competition as amended in 1998). The position of an economic entity whose share in the market of a certain product does not exceed 35% cannot be recognized as dominant.

The abuse of a dominant position on the market by economic entities is expressed in the fact that the antimonopoly legislation prohibits them from taking such actions as: withdrawing goods from circulation to create a shortage in the market; imposing unfavorable terms of the contract on the counterparty; inclusion in the contract of discriminatory conditions that put the counterparty in an unequal position compared to other business entities; consent to conclude a contract only if such goods are included in which the counterparty is not interested (Article 5 of the Law on Competition);

2. Concerted actions of economic entities that restrict competition (Article 6 of the Law on Competition). Agreements (concerted actions) reached in any form in whole or in part (concerted actions) of competing economic entities with an aggregate market share of a certain product of more than 35% are prohibited and invalidated in accordance with the established procedure, if such agreements have or may result in restriction of competition. Such agreements are aimed at:

establishment (maintenance) of prices (tariffs), discounts, allowances (shares), margins;

increase, decrease or maintenance of prices at auctions and auctions;

division of the market on a territorial basis, the volume of sales or purchases, in terms of sellers or buyers.

3. Acts and actions of authorities and administration aimed at restricting competition (Article 7 of the Law on Competition);

4. Agreements (coordinated actions of authorities and administrations that restrict competition (Article 8 of the Law on Competition);

5. Participation of officials of public authorities and government controlled in business activities. According to Art. 9 of the Law, these officials are prohibited from engaging in independent entrepreneurial activities; own an enterprise; to vote independently or through a representative by means of their shares, contributions, shares of shares when accepted by the general meeting of a business partnership and company; hold positions in the management bodies of an economic entity. These officials have the right to engage in scientific and teaching activities.

1.3. Goals and methods of antimonopoly regulation in Russia

The demonopolization of the economy is the overcoming of monopolistic activity and the promotion of the formation of market relations based on the development of competition and entrepreneurship.

Antimonopoly regulation is a set of economic, administrative and legislative measures implemented by the state and aimed at ensuring conditions for market competition and prevent excessive market monopolization that threatens the normal functioning of the market mechanism. Antimonopoly regulation includes regulation of the level of concentration and monopolization of production, strategies and tactics of enterprises, foreign economic activity, price and tax regulation.

The antimonopoly policy of the state is always based on antimonopoly legislation.

Antimonopoly legislation is a complex and extensive network of laws, court decisions and legal norms, a set of legal acts in countries with a market economy aimed at maintaining a competitive environment, combating monopolism and unfair competition. All these measures are aimed at maintaining a competitive environment, combating monopolism and unfair competition, to regulate the actions of firms and corporations in the market of goods and services, in the capital market, cutting off those that are recognized as unscrupulous, of poor quality in relation to the rights of producers and consumers, and simply harmful to society.

The complex of state measures that make up the antimonopoly policy is based on a general conceptual idea, according to which the highest welfare of citizens is achieved when they have the opportunity to freely exchange the goods and services they produce in a competitive market. The competitive market thus acts as a universal regulator of social production and its proportions. At the same time, the question of what to produce and in what quantity is objectively decided by the consumer himself, presenting a demand on the market for certain types of goods and services.

The development and adoption of antimonopoly legislation is one of the most important means of state regulation of the economy. In the modern period, the main feature of this legislation is that it is aimed at protecting the so-called oligopoly of the market mechanism.

There are two main forms of fighting monopolies:

1) prevention of the creation of monopolies;

2) limiting the use of monopoly power.

The experience of developed countries shows that the antitrust policy turned out to be ineffective and influenced only the forms of capital centralization, but it did not stop the process of monopolization itself. Opposition to the monopolization of the economy is expressed in the form of prohibitions on conducting industrial and commercial activities, in the downsizing of firms, their reorganization, division, up to liquidation. Despite the differences in the antitrust laws of different countries, they have common features and goals. These include: encouraging competition; control over firms that occupy a dominant position in the market, and over the process of mergers and acquisitions of companies; protection of consumer interests; promoting the development of small and medium-sized businesses.

Actions of entities aimed at the territorial division of markets, the boycott of competitors, the attachment of the buyer to certain sources of supply, the establishment of agreed prices and discounts, the harmonization of production quotas in order to manipulate the exchange and the nature of the offer, as well as the appointment of single directors of competing firms, are recognized as illegal.

In the countries of Eastern Europe, the problem of antimonopoly regulation has arisen relatively recently. It should be noted that the monopolies here were created artificially, by concentrating production, which led to the formation of gigantic enterprises and associations. In the post-Soviet countries, antimonopoly policy was originally aimed at overcoming "command-administrative monopoly", i.e. to change the type of economic systems.

Summarizing the above, we note that free competition led to the concentration of production, which led not to the emergence, but to the dominance of market monopolies. Their most common types are pure, or absolute, natural and artificial, production and organizational monopolies. The classic organizational forms of monopolies are cartels, syndicates, trusts, concerns, which still exist in a modernized form.

During the implementation of antimonopoly measures, the following main goals are pursued:

1. Ensuring the unity of the economic space on the territory
Russian Federation

2. Ensuring "transparency" of processes related to the creation, merger and accession of commercial organizations, the acquisition of large blocks of shares, fixed production assets and intangible assets, as well as rights that make it possible to determine the conditions for the activities of enterprises that occupy a dominant position in the market.
3. Reducing barriers to entry into commodity markets
4. Creation of effective legal mechanisms that ensure compliance with the ban on entrepreneurial activities by representatives of the authorities, including through the use of state and municipal unitary enterprises as tools for combining economic and power powers by the authorities.
5. Activation of work on the prevention and suppression of unfair competition in the commodity markets.

The achievement of the set goals is realized through the use of methods that have developed in world practice, the main of which are the following: the use of restrictive measures, control over the increase in economic concentration, a ban on unfair competition, prohibitions on actions of authorities and management that may adversely affect competition, use state register.

restrictive measures. They are applied by the antimonopoly body to business entities that violate antimonopoly laws.
These are prohibitions on monopolistic activity and unfair competition, on the actions of authorities and administrations that may adversely affect the development of competition.

Prohibitions on monopolistic activities are divided into prohibitions against agreements that restrict competition and prohibitions against enterprises abusing their dominant position. Such abuses are the most typical (more than 60%) violation of the antimonopoly law.

Quite often there are such violations as the imposition of unfavorable terms of the contract on the counterparty, non-compliance with the pricing procedure, concerted actions of enterprises aimed at limiting competition. The monitoring of more than 200 prices showed that more than a third of the enterprises that occupy a dominant position in the market overestimate the prices of goods and services.

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, prevent other enterprises from entering the market (or leaving it), 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.

The ban on the establishment of monopoly prices is the most stable, although there are many problems here as well. In particular, the Interim Guidelines for the Identification of Monopoly Prices, dated April 21, 1994, suggest using the concept of profit capping and the concept of market comparison at the same time. 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 in Russia, this is unrealistic. It is also unrealistic to find out the actual cost, profit and profitability of an enterprise under the dominance of barter and "black cash". Therefore, the concept of comparing markets is preferable, in which the antimonopoly agency does not need to check the production indicators of a monopoly enterprise, it is enough to identify monopoly high or monopoly low prices based on external factors.

Now in Russia monopoly high prices are practiced more often, and in countries with developed competition - monopoly low, sometimes even dumping.
Russian monopolism manifests its anti-competitive behavior mainly in relations with consumers or suppliers, and not with competitors. But as competition develops, the likelihood of monopoly use increases. low prices: powerful diversified companies through 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.

Register as a tool of antimonopoly 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.
This is done by the MAP, if we are talking about the Russian market as a whole, or by 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), Novosibirsk Metallurgical Plant (sheet tool cold-rolled steel), Magnitogorsk Metallurgical Plant (high quality strips), "Ufaneftekhim" (ethylene-propylene rubbers), "Volga Khimvolokno" (polyurethane textile threads), etc.

The number of enterprises included in the register depends on the boundaries of the commodity market in which their share is determined. The more detailed the product range is considered, the more enterprises can be included in the register. The antimonopoly authorities identify enterprises that have a significant share only in the production of the most important for the economy, structure-forming and socially significant products.
But the inclusion of an enterprise in the register does not yet mean that it is a monopolist and restrictive measures should be applied to it - say, in terms of prices, because the very presence of large enterprises does not mean that they are abusing their dominant position. Moreover, their monopolistic activity is impossible if effective demand or resources for the development of production are limited in the market. The monopoly behavior of an enterprise and measures to prevent abuse of a dominant position are strictly regulated by Articles 5-8 of the Competition Law, and the broad use of the term "monopolist" is not allowed.

All commodity markets can, with reservations, be divided into three types: with developed competition - markets for the main types of food, grain, vegetable oil, as well as markets for transport, construction and machine-building complexes; oligopolistic with a small number of producers - markets for individual durable goods (cars, computers, household appliances). They are especially difficult to demonopolize, because in the absence of formal dominance of any of the producers, favorable opportunities are created for monopolistic collusion, which is quite difficult to prove legally; monopolized, including markets of natural monopolies.

The structure of commodity markets, the nature and level of monopolization of the economy are changing as a result of privatization, price liberalization, the opening of the domestic market to international competition, bankruptcy and reorganization of unprofitable enterprises, and the regulation of natural monopolies.

In Russia, natural monopolies include, first of all, RAO UES
Russia", "Gazprom" and the Ministry of Railways. Their fate is hotly debated. The measures outlined by the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation "On the main provisions of the structural reform in the spheres of natural monopolies" of April 28, 1997 No. 426 are perceived ambiguously.

Although the structural reform in this area is aimed at increasing the economic efficiency of natural monopolies, the rational use of their production potential, and the formation of competitive (market) relations, opponents of demonopolization believe that the implementation of the planned plans will require costs that will exceed the future effect. Nevertheless, the reform of natural monopolies is one of the main tasks of the restructuring of the Russian economy.

The application of antimonopoly regulation methods cannot be carried out without an appropriate legislative framework.

2. Antimonopoly law in Russia

2.1. Stages of development of antimonopoly legislation

The current Russian legislation dedicated to the protection of competition has gone through several stages in its development. The transition of the Russian state to market relations required adequate legal measures, therefore the first stage development of domestic antimonopoly legislation is considered to be the moment of adoption of the Law of the RSFSR "On Competition and Restriction of Monopolistic Activities in Commodity Markets".

In July 1991, almost simultaneously with the adoption of the said Law, the State Committee of the Russian Federation for Antimonopoly Policy and Support for New Economic Structures was created, later - the State Antimonopoly Committee, in 2003 - the Ministry for Antimonopoly Policy and Entrepreneurship Support, transformed into the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Russian Federation (FAS Russia). The competence of these antimonopoly bodies was directly determined by the Law of the RSFSR "On Competition and Restriction of Monopoly Activities in Commodity Markets".

The Constitution of the Russian Federation, adopted by popular vote in the same year, guaranteed the unity of the economic space, the free movement of goods, services and financial resources, and the support of competition. Thus, in the normative legal act of the highest legal force, the legal principles in the regulation of competition were fixed, the legal foundation was laid for the formation of a civilized market. In addition, the fairly quickly accumulated experience of considering cases involving violations of the antimonopoly law showed that the current Law on Competition of 1991 was not fully adapted to the economic processes in Russia, and already in 1993 the need for its significant updating and supplementing became obvious. From that moment began second phase development of the antimonopoly legislation of the Russian Federation - the stage of formation of the constitutional foundations of antimonopoly legislation.

Third stage in the development of domestic antimonopoly legislation began in 1994 in connection with the adoption of the new Civil Code of the Russian Federation. So, Part 2, Clause 1, Art. 10 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation does not allow the use of civil rights to restrict competition, as well as the abuse of a dominant position in the market. Changes in the constitutional and civil legislation necessitated further amendments to the Competition Law of 1991.

Fourth stage - the creation of new directions of the Law of the RSFSR "On competition and restriction of monopolistic activity in commodity markets", namely price and advertising. Price regulation of the activities of economic entities that dominate the market, which is currently implemented mainly as part of the regulation of the activities of natural monopoly entities on the basis of Federal Law No. 147-FZ of August 17, 1995 "On Natural Monopolies", as well as special laws "On State Regulation of Tariffs for Electricity and Heat Energy"). In order to protect against unfair competition in the field of advertising, to prevent and suppress inappropriate advertising, in 1995 was adopted the federal law"About advertising". Currently, the Federal Law of March 13, 2006 N 38-FZ "On Advertising" is in force.

The fifth stage in the development of antimonopoly legislation is the formation of legislation on the protection of competition in the market financial services(banking, insurance and other financially related legal entities and individuals).

Substantial amendments to the 1991 Law on Competition were made in 2002 and largely removed small and medium-sized businesses from the tutelage of officials.

At this stage, the development of antimonopoly legislation is crowned by the Federal Law No. 135-FZ of July 26, 2006 "On Protection of Competition" 1
Antimonopoly legislation in Russia.

2.2. Regulatory framework for antimonopoly activities

The Law "On Competition and Restriction of Monopolistic Activity in Commodity Markets" was the basis for the formation of antimonopoly legislation in the Russian Federation, preparation and adoption of relevant regulatory documents.

Such documents include the Rules for Considering Cases on Violations of Antimonopoly Legislation (approved by order of the SCAP of Russia dated May 12, 1994 No. 53), the Law on Supplementing the Criminal Code of the RSFSR and the Code of the RSFSR on Administrative Offenses.

A separate block is made up of acts on the State Register of monopoly enterprises and on special regulation of their activities. The legal foundations of antimonopoly are contained in the Laws on Enterprises and Entrepreneurial Activity, on the Arbitration Court, the Arbitration Process, in the regulatory documents governing the privatization process.

To determine a monopoly enterprise, it is important to establish not only its market share (the concepts "enterprise occupying a dominant position in the market" and "enterprise occupying a monopoly position in the market" are used in the legislation as synonyms), but also to identify the presence of signs that allow characterizing the behavior entrepreneur as a monopoly.

The SCAP of Russia, in accordance with the right granted by the Law to establish the maximum share value, the achievement of which makes it possible to consider the position of an enterprise as dominant, determined two conditions that make it possible to characterize the position of an economic entity as dominant: its market share and the ability to restrict competition.

The inclusion of an enterprise in the State Register of Associations and Monopoly Enterprises means that the enterprise is recognized as a monopolist. The compilation and approval of the State Register is entrusted to the SCAP of Russia.

When compiling the register, only one of the signs was used - market share, while the concept of "dominant position" requires the establishment in each specific case of the presence of certain signs that characterize the position of the enterprise as dominant.

The procedure for the formation of the State Register, types of Registers, the procedure for exclusion from the Register are determined by orders of the Civil Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation No. 60 of October 10, 1991 and No. 45 of February 20, 1992. They provide for the procedure for notifying monopolist enterprises of inclusion in the Register, the mandatory publication of the Register in mass media ("Economic newspaper", "Financial newspaper", "Legislation and Economics" magazine).

The SCAP of Russia left the formation of regional registries to its territorial departments. Inclusion in the Register depends on the geographical market in which the enterprise has a dominant position, and does not depend on the form of ownership. The register contains three sections - consumer goods, services and products for industrial purposes.

Inclusion and exclusion from the Register of enterprises recognized as monopolists, constant control over prices and production is carried out by the SCAP of Russia, the Price Committee.

The dominant position of an economic entity causes other legal consequences: attribution of property to federal property, restrictions and features of privatization, etc. In this regard, a joint regulatory act was adopted "On the procedure for interaction between the State Property Committee of Russia, property management committees and state antimonopoly authorities of Russia in the process of privatization state enterprises and the creation of holding companies" (Letter of the State Property Committee of Russia and the State Committee for Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation dated 30.04. - 05.05.93 No. ACh4-19 / 3009 -LB / 1869).

The procedure for exclusion of associations and enterprises from the Register of Monopolists assumes that they were included in the Register lawfully. In practice, it turns out that the Register includes enterprises whose market share is below 35%, or there is no second sign of the dominant position of the enterprise - the ability to limit competition. Therefore, many enterprises dispute the correctness of inclusion in the Register. The legislation provides that in this case the enterprise has the right to apply to the arbitration court.

The inclusion of an enterprise in the State Register causes the application of special regulation of activities to them: the restoration of existing economic ties, the introduction of forced distribution of products, state regulation of prices and a number of other strict measures, up to the reorganization of enterprises that abuse their monopoly position. The procedure for applying these measures was initially determined by the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of February 20, 1992 "On measures to stabilize the work of the industry of the Russian Federation in 1992." It was further detailed in the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of February 27, 1992 No. 132, which entrusted the organization of measures for special regulation of the economic activities of monopoly enterprises to the Government Commission for the Operational Regulation of Resource Supply. This Commission has been given a number of powers: making proposals to the SCAP for inclusion in the Register and for exclusion from it, regulation of product supplies. The Commission has the right to send orders to suppliers and buyers on the mandatory supply of products to the state reserve, send them documents for the supply of products. Orders and documents are the basis for concluding contracts, and in case of refusal of the supplier or his evasion from concluding a contract, to apply to the arbitration court with an application for coercion to conclude a contract.

1 Order No. 53 of the SCAP of Russia dated May 12, 1994 approved the rules for considering cases of violations of antimonopoly legislation, developed in accordance with paragraph Z. 27 of the Law of the RSFSR "On Competition and Restriction of Monopolistic Activities in Commodity Markets" and regulating the procedure and terms for considering cases of violations of antimonopoly legislation and making decisions on them.

For monopoly enterprises included in the Register, the declaration of prices for products and goods is provided, as well as state regulation of prices, carried out by the Committee on Pricing under the Ministry of Economy of Russia, established in the Regulation approved on December 29, 1991 by the Ministry of Economy and Finance of the Russian Federation.

A number of regulations provide for measures related to the demonopolization of economic structures: the separation of associations, concerns, other associations of enterprises that occupy a dominant position in commodity markets and violate antimonopoly laws, as well as the creation of independent enterprises with the right legal entity by separating structural units and other subdivisions from operating enterprises

Measures to demonopolize the economy are closely linked with the privatization of state and municipal enterprises and create the necessary conditions for its implementation. This is the purpose of the Decrees of the President of Russia dated November 25 and 29, 1991 on the commercialization of trade, Catering and household services.

The Instruction "On the Procedure for Controlling the Acquisition of Shares, Participatory Interests in Partnerships and Ordinary Registered Shares of Joint-Stock Companies and the Procedure for Recognizing Persons Controlling Each Other's Property", approved by Order No. acquisition by an investor of 35 percent or more of shares, shares and stakes in the authorized capital of the issuer or shares that provide more than 50 percent of the votes of shareholders when placed among the founders joint-stock company, with an increase in the size of the initial authorized capital by issuing shares or increasing shares, participation shares, when shares are traded between investors.

Persons controlling each other's property are recognized as: persons owning more than 25% of shares, shares or participation interests, a person owning shares that provide more than 50% of the votes of shareholders of another legal entity, or the presence of at least 1/4 of the same legal entities in elected management bodies of various legal entities.

Control over the acquisition by an investor of 35 or more percent of shares, stakes and participation interests is carried out by the SCAP of the Russian Federation or its territorial departments (depending on the size of the authorized capital of the business entity).

Consent to the acquisition of the declared volumes of shares, shares or participation interests is given if their acquisition does not lead the issuer and investor controlling each other's property, in aggregate, to a dominant position in the market of a certain product (in accordance with the requirements set forth in Article 17 of the Law RSFSR "On Competition and Restriction of Monopolistic Activity in Commodity Markets").

The aggregate share of the issuer and the investor in the market of a particular product is calculated as the sum of their individual shares, as well as the shares of other legal entities that control each other's property, and (or) over the property of one of which the investor exercises direct control. The determination of the share of the issuer and the investor in the commodity markets is carried out in accordance with the procedure determined by the SCAP of Russia when determining the boundaries of commodity markets.

The absence of the consent of the SCAP of Russia or its territorial department for the acquisition of 35 or more percent of shares, stakes or participation shares is the basis for declaring the transaction invalid.

During the privatization of state-owned enterprises and the creation of holding structures, the SCAP of Russia and its territorial bodies exercise control over the dominant position of the enterprise in the local or federal market for goods, works and services, as well as when creating an independent enterprise (enterprises) by separating a separate division from the existing enterprise ( subdivisions), which occupies a dominant position in the market (the share of products exceeds 35% in the federal or local market of goods, works, services). The basis for this is Letter No. ACh-19/3009-LB/1869 of the State Property Committee and the State Committee for Administrative Offenses of Russia dated 30.04.-05.93 "On the procedure for interaction between the State Property Committee of Russia, property management committees and state antimonopoly authorities of Russia in the process of privatization of state-owned enterprises and the creation of holding structures" .

Control is exercised by the approval and issuance by the antimonopoly authorities of a conclusion on privatization, which is sent to the State Property Committee of Russia or its territorial Committee. In conclusion, proposals may be made on the use of the method of privatization, reorganization of the enterprise, the inclusion of certain conditions in the plan for the privatization of the enterprise, in the charter of the joint-stock company being created, or in additional conditions for the sale of enterprises at a commercial or investment tender.

When a holding company is created on the basis of a large business structure, subdivisions (subdivisions) are separated from the relevant enterprise as legally independent (subsidiary) enterprises. The SCAP controls the reflection in the constituent documents of the presence of controlling stakes in subsidiaries in the authorized capital of the holding company, as well as the compliance of the holding company's documents with the requirements of the temporary regulation on holding companies and the Law "On Competition and Restriction of Monopoly Activities in Commodity Markets".

This Law quite clearly delimits the powers of the Antimonopoly Committee and its territorial departments and judicial bodies (executive and judicial authorities). Thus, the SCAP is not entitled to make decisions on the termination and amendment of contracts (agreements), on their recognition, as well as illegal acts of authorities or management, as invalid, to recover losses and fines. This is the prerogative of the judiciary (arbitration and general courts).

In the event of non-compliance with the order or non-payment of a fine, the Antimonopoly Committee or territorial bodies must apply for the recognition of an agreement or act as invalid and with other requirements to an arbitration or general court. To implement the Law of the Russian Federation "On Protection of Consumer Rights", the SCAP of Russia is entrusted with the functions of control over violations of the law (Order of the SCAP of the Russian Federation dated August 24, 1992 No. 185). In particular, the Committee should exercise control and suppress the monopolistic activities of economic entities and unfair competition in the market of consumer goods, works and services by sending orders to manufacturers (sellers, performers) to terminate and bring claims against manufacturers and sellers in general and arbitration courts, as well as performers of works and services in case of violation of consumer rights.

To implement these tasks, subdivisions for the protection of consumer rights and commissions for the consideration of cases of violations are created within the territorial departments. The Directive of the SCAP of Russia on the termination of violations of consumer rights specifies the deadline and specific actions that the contractor (manufacturer, seller) must take to eliminate violations of consumer rights. In case of evasion or untimely execution of the order, the Civil Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation initiates a case on the imposition of a fine. The regulation on the procedure for imposing fines on economic entities for evading or untimely execution of the instructions of the SCAP of Russia (territorial administrations) on the termination of violations of consumer rights was approved by order of the SCAP of April 23, 1993 No. 51.

Order of the State Committee of the Russian Federation for Antimonopoly Policy and Support of New Economic Structures of July 14, 1994 No. 83 approved the "Regulations on the procedure for considering cases of violations of the principles of fair competition and consumer rights to reliable information." When advertising the services of banks, financial, insurance and investment enterprises, organizations, individual entrepreneurs, joint-stock companies, as well as other legal entities that attract funds from citizens or implement their financial programs in accordance with this order, it is prescribed:

Indicate the date and registration number of the issue of the advertised valuable papers, the place of their registration and the place where you can get acquainted with the terms of the issue;

Do not allow the announcement of guarantees, promises or proposals about the future efficiency (profitability) of their activities;

Do not promise to carry out work, provide services, provide goods, if they are not actually carried out (are not produced) on the day of advertising;

In the presence of the listed violations, the relevant commission issues a decision that is subject to mandatory consideration by the advertiser and the body that carried out the licensing.

The advertiser, whose advertisement is recognized as unfair, is obliged to remove his advertisement from distribution within three days from the date of the expiration of the period for consideration of the decision and inform the SCAP of Russia (territorial administration) and the body that licensed the advertiser about this. Otherwise, the license issued to the advertiser will be suspended.

When considering cases, the SCAP of Russia and its territorial departments are guided by the Law of the RSFSR of March 22, 1991 "On Competition and Restriction of Monopolistic Activities in Commodity Markets", Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of June 10, 1994 No. 1183, Regulations on the SCAP of Russia, approved by Decree of the President of the Russian Federation dated August 24, 1992 No. 915, regulations on the territorial departments of the SCAP of Russia, Rules for Considering Cases of Violations of Antimonopoly Legislation, approved by Order of the SCAP of Russia dated May 12, 1994 No. 53.

The basis for the consideration of the case is the identification of facts of unfair advertising; Advertisers fail to comply with the following obligations:

Indicate the actual amount of dividends paid on ordinary registered shares during the last financial year;

Indicate real interest paid on various types of deposits during the last financial year, broken down by months (quarters), if payments were made monthly (quarterly).

2.3. The main provisions of the antimonopoly law

The core of the Russian antimonopoly legislation is the Law of the RSFSR “On Competition and Restriction of Monopolistic Activities in Commodity Markets” dated March 22, 1991 (hereinafter referred to as the Law). Monopolistic activity, according to Art. 4 of the Law, are actions (inaction) of economic entities or federal executive bodies, executive bodies of constituent entities of the Russian Federation and local governments aimed at preventing, restricting or eliminating competition that are contrary to antimonopoly legislation.
Section II of the Law is devoted to forms of monopolistic activity. It consists of five articles that provide for the regulation of the abuse of a dominant position in the market, vertical and horizontal (cartel) monopolistic agreements, the activities of executive authorities and local governments that restrict competition, as well as the inadmissibility of participation in entrepreneurial activities of officials of public authorities and public administration.

In paragraph 1 of Art. 5 of the Law establishes a general prohibition of abuse by an economic entity (group of persons) of a dominant position in the market. This prohibition applies to actions that have or may result in the restriction of competition and (or) infringement of the interests of other economic entities or individuals. The dominant position is recognized as the position of an economic entity, whose share in the market of a certain product (i.e., having no substitute or interchangeable goods) is 65% or more, unless the economic entity proves that, despite exceeding the specified value, its position the market is not dominant.

Exemplary forms of manifestation of abuse of a dominant position, specified in Art. 5 of the Law on Competition, the following:

Withdrawal of goods from circulation, the purpose or result of which is the creation or maintenance of a shortage in the market or an increase in prices;
- imposing on the counterparty the terms of the contract that are not beneficial for him or not related to the subject of the contract (unreasonable demands for the transfer of financial resources, other property, property rights, labor force of the counterparty, etc.);

Inclusion in the contract of discriminatory conditions that put the counterparty in an unequal position compared to other business entities;

Consent to conclude a contract only if provisions are made in it regarding goods in which the counterparty (consumer) is not interested;
- creation of barriers to market access (exit from the market) to other economic entities;

Violations of the pricing procedure established by regulatory enactments;
- setting monopoly high (low) prices;
- reduction or termination of production of goods for which there is a demand or orders from consumers in the presence of a break-even possibility of their production;
- unreasonable refusal to conclude an agreement with individual buyers (customers) if it is possible to manufacture or supply the relevant goods.

According to Art. 6 of the Law, anti-competitive agreements (concerted actions) are the most dangerous and common form of monopolistic activity in a market economy.
Paragraph 1 of this article concerns the so-called horizontal (cartel) agreements, i.e. agreements between business entities of the same level. Thus, fully or partially agreements (concerted actions) reached in any form by competing economic entities (potential competitors) with a total market share of a certain product of more than 35% are prohibited and invalidated in accordance with the established procedure, if such agreements may result in restriction of competition. .

Paragraph 2 of Art. 6 of the Law is devoted to vertical anti-competitive collusion. Thus, agreements (concerted actions) reached in any form by non-competing economic entities, one of which occupies a dominant position, and the other is its supplier or buyer (customer), are prohibited if such agreements (concerted actions) have or may result in restriction of competition. .
Articles 7 and 8 of the Law are directed against monopolistic activities in the field of economic management during the period of transition from the command-administrative system to market relations. It should be noted that these provisions are not inherent in the legislation of industrialized countries; they are more characteristic of countries with economies in transition.
According to paragraph 1 of Art. 7 of the Law, federal executive authorities, executive authorities of constituent entities of the Russian Federation and local governments are prohibited from adopting acts and (or) taking actions that limit the independence of economic entities, create discriminatory or, on the contrary, favorable conditions for the activities of individual economic entities, if such acts or actions have or may result in restriction of competition and (or) infringement of the interests of economic entities or citizens.
When merging, creating, joining commercial organizations, various manifestations of anti-competitive consequences are possible. Articles 17 and 18 of the Law regulate the control of the following types of economic concentration: 1) creation, merger and accession of associations of commercial organizations, as well as commercial organizations themselves; 2) the acquisition of certain blocks of shares (deposits, shares) in the authorized (share) capital of economic entities; 3) liquidation and division (separation) of state and municipal unitary enterprises (if this leads to the emergence of an economic entity whose share in the relevant commodity market exceeds 35%); 4) ownership or use by one business entity of fixed production assets and intangible assets of another business entity; 5) the acquisition by any person of the rights that allow determining the conditions for the conduct by an economic entity of its entrepreneurial activity; 6) interweaving directorates.

A necessary condition for applying to the antimonopoly authorities for obtaining consent to the creation, reorganization and liquidation of commercial organizations is a certain total value of the assets of the founders, reorganized and liquidated enterprises (more than 100,000 minimum wages).

3. Activities of the Federal Antimonopoly Service RF

The law establishes the following forms of unfair competition:

Distribution of false, inaccurate or distorted information capable of causing loss to another business entity or damaging its business reputation - misleading consumers about the nature, method and place of manufacture of consumer properties, product quality;

Incorrect comparison by an economic entity of the goods it produces or sells with the goods of other economic entities;

Sale of goods with illegal use of the results of intellectual activity and equivalent means of individualization of a legal entity, individualization of products, performance of works, services;

Obtaining, using, disclosing scientific, technical, industrial or trade information, including commercial secrets, without the consent of their owner (Article 10 of the Law on Competition).

The implementation of state policy to promote commodity markets and competition, prevent, restrict and suppress monopolistic activities and unfair competition is carried out by the federal antimonopoly body - the State Antimonopoly Committee of the Russian Federation (since 1998 - the Ministry for Antimonopoly Policy).

The federal antimonopoly body is part of the structure of the federal executive bodies, formed in the manner established
The Constitution of the Russian Federation and the Federal Constitutional Law
"On the Government of the Russian Federation".

The territorial bodies of the federal antimonopoly body are independent not only in organizational and structural terms, but also financially, since they are financed from the federal budget.

The law does not provide for any restrictions on the number, structure and location of the territorial bodies of the federal antimonopoly body, however, the practice of their formation in accordance with the administrative-territorial division has become traditional
Russian Federation.

The federal antimonopoly body creates its own territorial bodies. The powers of the antimonopoly authorities stem from their tasks and functions (Article 12 of the Law on Competition).

In order to promote the development of commodity markets, competition, support for entrepreneurship and demonopolization, the federal antimonopoly body has the right to send recommendations to the relevant executive authorities and management bodies:

1) on the provision of soft loans, as well as on the reduction of taxes or exemption from them for economic entities entering the market of a certain product for the first time;

2) on changing the scope of free, regulated and fixed prices;

3) on the creation and development of parallel structures in the spheres of production and circulation;

4) on financing measures to expand the output of goods in order to eliminate the dominant position of individual economic entities;

5) on attraction of foreign investments, creation of organizations with foreign investments and free economic zones;

6) on licensing of export-import operations and changes in customs tariffs.

The federal antimonopoly body is entrusted with state control over:

1) creation, merger and accession of commercial organizations (unions or associations);

2) mergers and acquisitions of commercial organizations, if the amount of their assets according to the last balance sheet exceeds 100,000 minimum wages;

3) liquidation and division (separation) of state and municipal unitary enterprises, the amount of assets of which exceeds 50 thousand minimum wages, if this leads to the emergence of an economic entity, whose market share will exceed 35% (clause 1, article 17 Law).

In addition to the above, the functions of state control are assigned to the federal antimonopoly authorities - this is control over compliance with the law in the implementation of individual business transactions by business entities (clause 1, article 18 of the Law). This control is expressed in the fact that, with the prior consent of the federal antimonopoly body, on the basis of a petition from a legal or natural person, the following are carried out:

1) acquisition by a person (group of persons) of shares with the right to vote in the authorized capital of a business company, in which such person (group of persons) acquires the right to dispose of more than 20% of the said shares (stakes). This requirement does not apply to the founders of a business company during its formation;

2) obtaining ownership or use by one economic entity (group of persons) of fixed production assets or intangible assets of another economic entity, if the book value of the property constituting the subject of the transaction exceeds 10% of the book value of fixed production assets and intangible assets of the economic entity alienating the property ;

3) the acquisition by a person (a group of persons) of the rights that allow determining the conditions for an economic entity to conduct its entrepreneurial activities (clause 2, article 18 of the Law).

Tasks and goals of antimonopoly bodies.

The main tasks and goals of the federal antimonopoly body, as well as the responsibility of its officials, are determined by the Law and other regulatory legal acts of the Russian Federation.

The main tasks of the federal antimonopoly body, directly specified in the Law, include:

Assistance in the formation of market relations based on the development of competition and entrepreneurship;

Prevention, restriction and suppression of monopolistic activity and unfair competition;

State control over compliance with antimonopoly legislation.

The Federal Antimonopoly Authority performs the following main functions, directly listed in the Law:

Sends proposals to the Government of the Russian Federation on the improvement of antimonopoly legislation and practice of its application, conclusions on draft laws and other regulations relating to the functioning of the market and the development of competition;

Gives recommendations to federal executive authorities, executive authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and local self-government on the implementation of measures aimed at promoting the development of commodity markets and competition;

Develops and implements measures to demonopolize production and circulation;

Controls compliance with antimonopoly requirements during the creation, reorganization and liquidation of business entities;

Controls the acquisition of shares (stakes) with the right to vote in the authorized capital of business entities, which may lead to a dominant position in the markets in the Russian Federation of business entities or to the restriction of competition.

In order to promote the development of commodity markets and competition, support entrepreneurship and demonopolization, the federal antimonopoly body may send recommendations to the relevant federal executive authorities, executive authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and local governments:

On the provision of preferential loans, as well as on the reduction of taxes or exemption from them for economic entities entering the market of a certain product for the first time;

On changing the scope of free, regulated and fixed prices;

On the creation and development of parallel structures in the spheres of production and circulation, including through centralized investments and loans;

On financing measures to expand the output of goods in order to eliminate the dominant position of individual economic entities;

On attracting foreign investment, creating organizations with foreign investment and free economic zones;

On licensing of export-import operations and changes in customs tariffs;

On amendments to the lists of types of activities subject to licensing and the procedure for their licensing.

The federal antimonopoly authority takes part in the implementation of federal demonopolization programs, programs for developing competition and supporting entrepreneurship.

4. Influence of antimonopoly legislation on the unity of the Russian market and economic development.

Antimonopoly legislation is one of the few types of legislation that divides the Russian market into separate commodity markets. In itself, such a division does not present a particular problem and does not contradict the correctly understood constitutional principle of the unity of the economic space. The fact is that any economic space cannot be united if unity is understood as homogeneity. Another understanding can give a view of space from the point of view of an acting person, for whom space is a space of choice and decision-making, and the desired unity of space then should mean a desire to increase its "length" - expanding the possibilities of choice and activity for business and citizens. The space is indeed heterogeneous and classifying it into separate markets cannot in itself present a problem. However, it is one thing to classify for the purpose of understanding the world, and another for the purpose of transforming it. As we have shown above, the classification of a person as an entrepreneur can prevent him from seeing non-entrepreneurial traits in his behavior and, moreover, lead to legislative restrictions on his actions as a consumer.

The division of the Russian economic space into separate markets in the antimonopoly legislation is not just a way of describing what is happening, but precisely an instrument of action. The concept of a commodity market is included in the definition of a dominant position, the presence of which makes it possible to apply to the company the norms of antimonopoly legislation that regulate the most important aspects of the activities of enterprises: increasing capitalization, reorganization, the structure of production and sales. Thus, getting into the Register, created in accordance with the Federal Law "On Competition and Restriction of Monopolistic Activities in Commodity Markets" and the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation "On the Register of Economic Entities with a Market Share of a Certain Product of More Than 35%", means the possibility of quite serious additional costs . The regional practice of maintaining such registers shows that in determining the geographical boundaries of the market, the boundaries of the subject of the federation and its regions are widely used. Therefore, even firms operating in such highly competitive sectors as the production of meat, bread and sausage products become "monopolists".

Considering antimonopoly regulation as a barrier to entry, we find that this barrier will be most significant for regions with a relatively small domestic market, either due to geographical size or due to the underdevelopment of the region. Thus, the main two consequences of antimonopoly regulation for regional development will be a general decrease in entrepreneurial activity and the flow of capital to regions with a more developed domestic market.

The legislative attempt to "normalize" profits offered by antitrust laws is the most serious blow to the competition process. Other norms developed on the basis of the model of perfect competition have a similar effect. There is only one choice: either competition continues, or schemes are imposed on it that copy the situation of the absence (end) of competition. But if we give any place in the life of the "normal profit" that can only come about as a result of "normal activities", we will see that competition and innovation disappear, and vigorously competitive people are replaced by faceless firm owners.

The influence of the antimonopoly legislation directly on the production of goods can be shown by means of a historical reconstruction of the situation in which the antimonopoly legislation arose.

The most famous antitrust law that has become a model for many others, the Sherman Act, was passed in the United States in 1890. The real reason for the passage of this act was the serious pressure of the farm lobby (and groups that joined them) that could not compete with the new, mechanized agricultural production, whose center was Chicago. Accordingly, it was not monopolistic restrictive practices that were the cause of concern for interest groups, but the high level of competition in the sectors accused of monopoly. It was in these sectors that prices fell more than in other sectors, and output growth was also quite high. This is evidenced by the table below, based on statistics from 1880-1890. for a number of industries accused of monopoly. The situation was no different in industries declared "natural monopolies."

5. Trends in the development of the regulatory framework of antimonopoly legislation in solving problems.

Today, antimonopoly legislation needs to be improved, mainly on the basis of a generalization of law enforcement practice. It is necessary to update the legal framework in such a way that it would make it possible to more reliably suppress the abuse of market power, infringement of the interests of economic entities, apply penalties to legal and individuals, including officials of federal and regional executive authorities and local governments, to better regulate the safety and quality of goods and services. We need a law “On the protection of competition in the financial services sector”.

Russian competition law was developed under strong monopolies and only emerging market relations. Therefore, it is important for our country not only to limit monopoly and abuse of dominance, to enforce competition rules, to punish violations, but also to create a competitive environment by showing political will.

As for the directions of antimonopoly policy in Russia for the coming years, in December 2001, at a meeting of the Government of the Russian Federation, the concept of a medium-term government program for 2002-2007 was approved. "Structural Adjustment and Economic Growth". It contains a special section on antitrust policy.

Antimonopoly policy in the medium term will be implemented in the following main areas:

1. Improving the legal framework, forms and methods of antimonopoly control and regulation in order to prevent and suppress the abuse of market power, collusion, agreements and concerted actions resulting in restriction of competition and (or) infringement of the interests of economic entities or citizens, unfair competition.

2. Demonopolization of the economy and creation of conditions for the development of competition in monopolized commodity markets with a high degree of concentration of supplies, removal of barriers to the development of competition and entry into the markets of other economic entities.

3. Opposition to the creation of new monopolistic structures as a result of the redistribution of property, the implementation of corporate investment policy and integration processes, including the formation of FIGs.

4. Extension of antimonopoly requirements to the markets of financial, including banking and insurance, services.

5. Coordination of goals, objectives and measures for demonopolization and development of competition in commodity markets, harmonization of antimonopoly legislation within the framework of the common economic space of the CIS, adaptation of competition policy for the purpose of Russia's entry into the world economic community.

The developers of the Russian antimonopoly legislation still have a lot of work to do, and it would be advisable to take into account the experience foreign countries without forgetting the specifics of the Russian market.

To demonopolize the economy and develop competition, experts suggest:

Establish antimonopoly control over tenders, tenders, and auctions, including when placing orders for the supply of products for state and municipal needs (in 1998 alone, financial turnover at such tenders and auctions reached 122 billion rubles);

Introduce tough measures against the actions of regional authorities that impede the freedom of movement of goods and capital throughout Russia;

Improve the legal regulation of the use of public funds to expand the competitive environment, reduce the concentration of production and reduce departmental monopoly;

Coordinate the antimonopoly legislation of the CIS countries, adapt their competition policy to international principles and rules.

6. State control over monopolistic activities in countries with developed market economies

In countries with developed market systems, the state assumed responsibility for the fate of the market and the creation of conditions for its effective functioning, standing up for market competition, finding effective means of antimonopoly prevention.

In all industrial developed countries legal regulation (usually within the framework of trade law) of the process of concentration of capital and competition is currently being carried out in order to mitigate the economic and social consequences of monopolistic practices.

The development and adoption of antimonopoly legislation is one of the most important means of such state regulation of the economy. In the modern period, the main feature of this legislation is that it is aimed at protecting the so-called oligopoly as a market mechanism.

In developed countries, antimonopoly regulation has become a regular function of the state since the late 19th century and is based on the established system of market relations, antitrust legislation (USA, Canada, Japan), or on legislation to combat restrictive economic practices (Scandinavian countries), or on the norms enshrined major international agreements. A number of countries have also enacted laws against unfair competition (including fraud) in manufacturing and trade. At the national level, there are antimonopoly bodies responsible for the development and implementation of antimonopoly policy. In the US, these are the Federal Trade Commission and the antitrust division of the Department of Justice. In Germany, there is the Federal Office for State Supervision of Cartels and the Monopoly Commission, in England - the Commission on Mergers and Monopolization and the Court of Justice for Free Trade, in France and Spain - the Competition Council, in Japan - the Committee on Fair Deals.

Historically, there have been two systems of antimonopoly regulation: American and Western European. The criterion for their differences is the attitude towards monopoly. The first - declares all monopolies illegal. The second - prohibits not the monopoly itself, but the abuse of monopoly power. Governments take into account the pros and cons of large companies in the implementation of antitrust policy, preventing the manifestation of anticompetitive behavior, but not deterring efficient large-scale production.

The first antitrust laws were passed in Canada (1889) and in the USA (1890). Today, American antitrust law is considered one of the most well developed and well-tested by time. In the United States, the main laws governing monopolistic activities and monopolized markets are the Sherman and Clayton Acts, the Federal Trade Commission Act, and the Celler-Kefauver Amendment.

The Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 forms the core of antitrust policy in US economic life. According to it, "every contract and any association in the form of a trust or in any other form, as well as a secret agreement aimed at restricting trade and commercial activities ..." This law also states that "every person monopolizing or trying to to monopolize ... any branch of the trading operation ... will be considered a delinquent." In Clayton's 1914 amendment to this law, the violation of its articles is qualified as a "serious crime", punishable not only by monetary fines, but also by imprisonment. In special cases, the court may decide to decentralize and split the firm into a number of smaller enterprises.

Under US law, a company may be recognized as a monopolist and legal action may be initiated against it if it controls more than 6% of the market and there are facts indicating the use of unfair methods of competition.

The US legislation is quite tough on mergers. Thus, horizontal mergers - mergers of two competitors, for example, the automobile manufacturers Ford and Chrysler - are recognized as illegal if the total market share of the resulting company exceeds 15% of the market.

Exceptions exist only if one of the companies is on the verge of bankruptcy.

Vertical mergers are mergers between firms specializing in different stages of the production process in the same industry. Such mergers are also not allowed if each firm owns 10 percent or more of the relevant market. It is believed that vertical mergers reduce the opportunities for competition between companies that sell raw materials. US antitrust law essentially allows conglomerate mergers between companies that are not technologically related. For example, telephone and insurance companies, since the monopolization of the market of one of the goods in this case does not occur.

In the US, there are fairly tough sanctions for violating antitrust laws. Companies that use illegal methods of competition and cause damage to contractors and consumers by their actions are obliged to compensate for the losses incurred in a threefold amount.

However, in reality, cases of toughening in relation to monopoly companies are not used so often. For example, in the history of American antitrust law, about 30 companies have been disbanded. The most high-profile cases were the dissolution in 1911 of the oil refining and tobacco trusts and the division in 1982 of the ATT company. Lawsuits against monopoly companies last for years, since such processes are complex, require huge costs and attract a lot of funds. Thus, the United States Machinery Corporation case lasted 7 years, and IBM - 13 years.

In European countries, antitrust laws were adopted much later than in the United States. Some countries introduced it after the Second World War.

In contrast to American antitrust laws, which generally aim to follow the letter of the law, for European countries, the principle of "common sense" is decisive in the antitrust policy of the state. The main goal of the antimonopoly policy of most European countries is to improve the quality of products through the broad development of competition. In England, the main bodies implementing antitrust policy are the Office of Trade Compliance and the Commission on Monopolies and Mergers. Their function is to exercise general supervision. Companies that control more than 25% of the market may fall into their field of vision. Since the main goal of antitrust policy in England is to stimulate competition, direct administrative methods (such as prohibition of merger processes) are used to a limited extent.

In the UK, two systems of control over monopolies have developed. In the first, based on fair trade and competition laws, the Fair Trade Office, the Monopoly Commission, and the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry play a key role. The second system of control provided for by the Restrictive Trade Practices Act is that the Court of Restrictive Practices plays a key role. In general, the legislation is more liberal than the American antitrust, as it follows the traditional British policy of free trade and minimization of direct state interference in the economic activities of entrepreneurs. The functions of the Office include: collecting and analyzing information on abuses of dominant position, referring cases of a monopoly situation in any industry to the Commission on Monopolies, exercising control over proposed mergers of enterprises, referring cases of cartel agreements to a restrictive practice court, initiating cases of about setting and maintaining resale prices. The main task of the Commission on Monopolies and Mergers is to investigate and draw up reports on the existence (or the possibility of occurrence) of a monopoly situation or the implementation of a merger of enterprises. In the event that the Commission on Monopolies comes to a conclusion about the violation of public interests, the Secretary of State has broad powers to apply various measures to influence the offender: making decisions on the termination of the contract, prohibitions in the supply of goods, binding transactions, discrimination, prohibition or restriction mergers, on the division of enterprises by selling any of their parts or in some other way.

In France, antimonopoly legislation has been in force since 1953. However, active actions against monopolies began to be carried out from the 70s. Prior to this, it was believed that a tough anti-monopoly policy could harm an insufficiently powerful domestic industry.

On the issue of control over merger processes, the antimonopoly law takes a tougher position in relation to horizontal mergers. If during a vertical merger, the maximum quota of a company in the market is set within the limits of up to 40%, then during a horizontal merger, amalgamation of companies is not allowed if the quota is exceeded by more than 25%.

The final decisions to limit monopolistic activity are made by French law through administrative procedures, and not through the courts. There are currently about 3,000 state price controllers in France. Their main task is to control the state price discipline. Control over monopolistic activity is entrusted to the Competition Council, the Ministry of Economy and courts of general jurisdiction.

The Competition Council is considered to be an independent administrative body, on whose decisions the Minister of Economy cannot veto. It performs advisory functions at the request of various institutions and organizations, and can also apply the following sanctions: order an enterprise or person to stop the alleged activity within a certain period; impose a fine on an enterprise or a person, the maximum amount of which is 5% of the trade turnover of the offending enterprise; require the violator to publish the Council's verdict in certain journals. If an enterprise that has become a victim of anti-competitive policy demands compensation for damage, it must apply to the court with this request.

In Germany, state regulation of market relations, which leads to mitigation of the negative consequences of excessive monopolization, is carried out by the so-called cartel authorities. These authorities include the Federal Cartel Office, the Federal Minister for Economic Affairs and the higher authorities of the Länder. They are joined by the Commission on Monopolies, created to provide opinions on the concentration of enterprises in Germany. As noted above, German antitrust law occupies an intermediate position between the two systems of antitrust law. A significant impetus in the development of antitrust law in Germany was the establishment of a free market economy there in the postwar period. In 1949, two bills were developed: on ensuring competition by increasing efficiency and on the department for monopolies. Work in this direction was continued and culminated in the adoption in 1957 of the Law Against Restrictions on Competition, which in everyday life received the abbreviated name Cartel Law, which does not accurately reflect its content, since it is designed to regulate competition restrictions not only in the form of cartels. The Law is currently in force in the 1989 version. Having entered into force on January 1, 1990, it is now dated as such. It should be noted that the German Cartel Law is based on two principles: the principle of prohibition and the principle of control and regulation of monopolistic activity. As in the US, it prohibits a certain category of agreements, such as cartel agreements and cartel rulings. However, these prohibitions are accompanied by numerous exceptions that largely neutralize the principle of the prohibition of monopoly practices. So, if the Sherman Law declares illegal the conclusion of any agreement restricting trade, then the German Cartel Law invalidates the execution of cartel agreements or regulations. In addition, unlike horizontal competitive restraints, vertical restraints are not formally prohibited. They are subject to administrative control in order to prevent anti-competitive practices.

Of the European countries, the latest antitrust legislation was adopted in Italy - in 1990. Italian antitrust legislation is considered one of the most liberal in Europe. Even the sales quotas of individual firms are not regulated.

In recent years, control over the activities of monopolies has been introduced at the all-European level. The EU has set up a Merger Control Commission. The Commission can control mergers if the global turnover of a multinational company in an EU country exceeds ECU 5.0 billion.

The antimonopoly legislation of Japan is considered quite liberal. It recognizes the dominant position of one company, which controls 50% of the market, two - 75%. There are incentives for R&D firms.

The resolution of disputes is usually carried out neither by judicial nor administrative means, but only through negotiations.

In the West, antimonopoly policy is a flexible system of permanent, mobile restructuring measures and sanctions that are prohibitive, restrictive or encouraging.

CONCLUSION

Summing up what has been said, it can be argued that antimonopoly legislation is the most important component of the 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 experience of Western countries in antimonopoly legislation is great and varied. The emergence of such legislation is due to historical reasons. Due to the peculiarities of the development of the economy of various countries, different systems of antimonopoly regulation have developed. Despite the difference in approaches to antimonopoly regulation in various Western countries. The US antimonopoly practice is considered to be especially developed in this regard, since its legal (legislative) aspect, like other areas of law in the US, is based on a case system.

The specifics of Russian monopolies also affected the peculiarities of legislative regulation of their activities. In the capitalist countries, monopolies appeared when market relations already existed, and the state, in order to prevent the strangulation of competition, began to introduce restrictive norms. Russian competition law was developed under strong monopolies and only emerging market relations. Therefore, Western experience in a certain, and quite significant part of it, is not applicable in Russian conditions.

Of course, the demonopolization of production based on state property is a long and complex process. In part, overcoming monopolism can be carried out by disaggregating enterprises, by mechanically dividing them into parts. The construction of new backup enterprises would require too much funds, which our country does not currently have at its disposal. It can be assumed that the overcoming of monopoly will be due to the diversification of production at existing enterprises, which are able to use free capacities (or expand existing ones) to produce scarce goods. In the process of the formation of market relations, the share of state property is gradually declining, but various forms of individual and collective property are developing: individual enterprises, partnerships with full and limited liability, joint-stock companies of open and closed types, cooperatives, associations, etc. Various forms of ownership operating in common system economic relations, cannot be isolated from each other. Overcoming their specificity, they inevitably intertwine. Based on this interweaving, mixed forms of ownership can arise. The objective basis of this interweaving is the mutual complement and use of those specific opportunities that are inherent in each of the specific forms of management. So, in Russian joint-stock companies, the property of individual citizens, collectives and the state is now merging. Creation and development of JSC is the main way of denationalization of property.

In Russia, at this stage, the problem of monopolization ceases to be purely economic, and becomes more and more political. However, it is common knowledge that the economy, first of all, should not have a political affiliation. And only then will the state be able to fully replace the decades-old monopolies with a free and self-organizing market.

At the regional level, there is currently a negative trend towards strengthening the administrative regulation of economic processes in the regions. According to the data of the MAP of Russia, a significant number of cases of violation of antimonopoly legislation have recently been initiated against local authorities. They were associated with the establishment of various kinds of administrative barriers.

These include barriers to entry into local, local commodity markets for non-resident business entities that are able to successfully compete with local producers, the introduction of higher local tax rates for non-resident enterprises, increased license fees, complicating the procedure for licensing types of activities, complicating the procedure for registering enterprises, creation of obstructions in abduction land plots, priority distribution of any kind of limited resources, etc.

It should be taken into account the fact that the state authorities and the largest economic entities operating in this product market. This allows the latter to lobby their interests and achieve decisions directed against potential competitors, including in matters of state aid and government orders.

Bibliography:

1. Constitution of the Russian Federation

2. Avdasheva S.B., Aronin V.A., Akhpolov I.K. and others. Ed. A. G. Tsyganova. Competition and antimonopoly regulation / Textbook for universities. Moscow: Logos, 1999. 368 pages.

3. Vrublevsky B.I. Practicum on the basics of entrepreneurship: tutorial for students of economics. specialist. universities / Vrublevsky Bronislav Ivanovich, V.B. Vrublevsky, I.V. Senko; Center for Science and Technology development services. - Gomel: Development, 2005

4. Kachalin V.V. International aspects of antimonopoly regulation / Vladimir Viktorovich; V. Kachalin // World economy and international relations. - 2006. - N 2. - S. 49-56

5. Kruglova N.Yu. Business Basics: Textbook for universities on special. 351000 "Anti-crisis management" / Kruglova Natalya Yurievna. - M.: RDL, 2005. - 558 p. - Bibliography: p. 558

6. Mironov V.V., Zimoglyad V.Ya., Yakovlev A.L. "Russian monopoly and privatization"// Economist.2006. No. 6. S. 2-3

7. Morozova T.G. Durdyev Yu.M. Tikhonov VF, State regulation of the economy: Proc. allowance for universities. Ed. Morozova T.G. – M.: UNITI-DANA, 2002.-255s

8. Nikiforov A.A. The concept of antimonopoly policy and reform // Vestn. Moscow university Ser.6., Economics. 1998. No. 1.S. 4-7

10. On state regulation of natural monopolies / Astapov K // Society and Economics 2003 - №4-5 p. 274-287

11. On the role of monopolism in the modern economy / V. A. Volkonsky, T. I. Koryagina // Banking. - 2005. - N 2. - S. 4-1411.

12. Raizberg B.A. Modern economic dictionary. – M.: INFRA-M 2002.-480s.
13. Rozanova N.M. Competitive process in the modern market economy. Moscow: MAKS Press 200110.

14. Samofalova E.V. State regulation of the national economy. Proc. allowance / Samofalova E.V. and others - M.: Knorus, 2005.-261p.

15. Sanko G.G. Monopoly and competitive policy in a transforming economy / Bel. economy magazine. - 1999. - No. 2. - p.100-111

16. Starodubrovskaya N.M. Fundamentals of antimonopoly policy. //"Questions of Economics". 2003. No. 16. pp. 5-9

17. Khashukaev S.F. Formation of a competitive environment in a transitional economy. Nizhny Novgorod: VVAGS Publishing House 2002

18. Khodov L.G. State regulation of the national economy. Proc. – M.: Economist, 2005.-959s.

19. Chuvilin E.E., Dmitrieva R.V. State regulation and price control in capitalist countries, // Finance and statistics, - Moscow, 2006. N 5. P. 10-18

20. Yudanov A.Yu. Competition. Theory and practice. - M.: Tandem.gnom-press, 1998. - 384 p.

21.http://www.socionet.ru/files/book_ekonomika_rus_gp0675/25.xml

Antitrust legislationAbstract >> Economic theory

Conclusions……………………………………………………………………… 19II. Antitrust legislation…………………………………...20 1. Antitrust bodies: system, goals and objectives……………...20 2. Antitrust legislation RF………………………….23Conclusion…………………………………………………………………..30 ...

Adoption of antimonopoly legislation in Russia

The antimonopoly legislation of the Russian Federation is aimed at preventing the creation of monopolies, as well as promoting the formation, development and maintenance of a competitive environment.

The formation of Russian antimonopoly legislation began not so long ago, at the end of the 20th century, however, some of its elements can already be seen in the pre-revolutionary period and in Soviet times. However, no previously existing legal systems and the regulations did not have a significant impact on him. Therefore, it is generally accepted that the creation of antitrust legislation began from scratch.

Note! The starting point in this area was the adoption of the Law of the RSFSR “On Competition and Restriction of Monopolistic Activities in Commodity Markets” dated March 22, 1991 No. property, creation and liquidation of such institutions, as well as the appointment of their heads.

In this act, the tasks of antimonopoly policy were more clearly defined:

1. Contribute to the formation of healthy market relations by promoting the development of competition.
2. Prevention, restriction, suppression of the formation of monopolistic activity.
3. State control over the implementation of these norms.

Important! This law is still in force, mainly in terms of defining concepts in this area.

Russian antimonopoly law

The antimonopoly legislation of Russia is based on the Constitution and the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. For example, Art. 10 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation contains provisions regulating the prohibition of the use of civil rights in order to restrict competition.

Note! The fundamental act is the law "On Protection of Competition" dated July 26, 2006 No. 135-FZ. It defines the fundamentals of competition protection, as well as methods for suppressing monopolistic activities and unfair competition.

Federal Law “On Natural Monopolies” No. 147-FZ dated August 17, 1995 regulates relations under conditions of natural monopolies, the formation and creation of which is sometimes justified due to the possibility of supplying the market with goods by only one enterprise.

In addition to these acts, the norms of the antimonopoly legislation of the Russian Federation contain:

1. Law of the Russian Federation "On Subsoil" dated February 21, 1992 No. 2395-1 in the form of a ban, restriction, discrimination on the use of subsoil.
2. The Law "On the supply of products for federal state needs" dated 12/13/1994 No. 60-FZ indicates the prevention of refusal to conclude a state contract with suppliers occupying a dominant position in the market.
3. Federal Law "On Communications" dated July 7, 2003 No. 126-FZ.
4. Other acts.

Important! Relations in this area can be regulated by decrees of the Government of the Russian Federation, as well as acts of the antimonopoly authority. As an example, we can cite the order of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Russian Federation “On approval of the procedure for analyzing and assessing the state of the competitive environment in the commodity market” dated April 25, 2006 No. 108.

Levels of antitrust law

The levels of antitrust law are divided into 3 types:

1. accepted at the federal level.
2. Accepted at the level of subjects of the Russian Federation, since at this level it is possible to regulate, form and apply prices in a certain sector of the economy, including in natural monopolies.
3. Accepted at the level of municipalities, since at this level it is allowed to influence the activities of a local monopoly, for example, heat and water supply enterprises.

Russian antimonopoly legislation includes a considerable list of normative acts that are being improved, supplemented and changed taking into account the development of economic relations. It is formed from documents adopted not only at the federal, but also at regional level, as well as by issuing acts by the antimonopoly body itself.

Antitrust Law

At the level of individual regions, antitrust laws appeared even earlier - in individual states of the United States. Organizations such as the Missouri Farmers Alliance became the initiators of their approval. They brought together producers who were worried about increased competition from larger, more efficient farms. The increase in the market share occupied by large farms was presented as a dangerous concentration leading to market monopolization. At the same time, market concentration was accompanied not by a reduction in production and an increase in prices, for which the “monopolists” were accused, but by exactly the opposite phenomena. So, wheat in 1889 cost 35% cheaper than ten years earlier, pork for - years. fell in price by 19%, beef tenderloin - by 39%, livestock in live weight fell by 28.8% over five years. The US livestock population increased by about 50% during the 1880s.

The situation was similar at the federal level. Senator John Sherman, who secured antitrust legislation in the US, accused trusts of restricting output to drive up prices. As his correspondence with representatives of small oil companies, in reality, Sherman defended precisely the interests of those entrepreneurs who suffered from falling prices, in particular, from the reduction in the cost of petroleum products caused by the use of tanks in the transportation of oil. In particular, he lobbied for a law that would ban railroads from offering discounts for shipping oil in tanks instead of barrels.

Among the industries considered monopolized by Congress were oil, sugar, rail, lead, zinc, jute, coal, and cottonseed oil. But in all the industries listed, for which the relevant data is available, production between and years. grew faster than US production as a whole. The US GNP for this period grew in real terms by 24%, and in nominal terms by 16%. As for output in the industries where trusts were formed, in nominal terms it increased by 62% during this time, and in real terms by 175%. Thus, the trusts ensured the growth of production and the reduction of prices.

Table. Growth in output in certain US industries in - yrs.

Nominal GDP	16 %		Real GDP	24 %
	62 %		Average for "monopolized" industries	175 %
cottonseed oil	151 %		Steel	258 %
Leather products	133 %		Zinc	156 %
Ropes and twine	166 %		Coal	153 %
Jute	57 %		steel rails	142 %
			Oil	79 %
			Sugar	75 %

Table. Rising prices in certain industries in the US in - gg.

(Source: Thomas DiLorenzo The Origins of Antitrust Rhetoric vs. Reality" Regulation, Volume 13, Number 3, Fall 1990)

Since the passage of the Sherman Act, antitrust laws have spread to most countries in the world. This process was not instantaneous: for example, in Italy the corresponding law was adopted 100 years after the Sherman Act - in 1990.

Table. Countries with no antitrust laws

Asia	Africa	Europe	North America	South America
Afghanistan	Angola	Andorra	Belize	Bolivia
Bangladesh	Botswana	Georgia	Bermuda	Paraguay
Bahrain	Gabon		Dominica	Suriname
Burma	Ghana		Dominican Republic	Ecuador
Brunei	Guinea		Cayman islands
Hong Kong	Congo		Curacao
Qatar	Lesotho		Cuba
Kuwait	Liberia
Macau	Libya
UAE	Mauritania
Palestine	Madagascar
	Mozambique
	Nigeria
	Swaziland
	Togo
	Uganda
	Central African Republic

Antimonopoly law in Russia

The basis of the Russian antimonopoly legislation is the Federal Law (Russia) "On Protection of Competition". The law contains restrictions on the freedom of entrepreneurial activity and freedom of contract for economic entities that occupy a dominant position. The presence of the latter is established on the basis of determining the company's share in total sales in the market or determining the aggregate market share held by several of the largest (in terms of sales volume) companies.

Such entities, with certain exceptions, are prohibited from:

1) establishment, maintenance of a monopoly high or monopolistically low price of goods;

2) the withdrawal of goods from circulation, if the result of such withdrawal was an increase in the price of the goods;

3) imposing on the counterparty the terms of the contract that are unfavorable for him or not related to the subject of the contract;

4) economically or technologically unjustified reduction or termination of the production of goods, if there is a demand for this product or orders for its supply are placed if there is a possibility of its profitable production;

5) economically or technologically unjustified refusal or evasion from concluding an agreement with individual buyers (customers) if it is possible to produce or supply the relevant goods;

6) economically, technologically and otherwise unjustified establishment of different prices (tariffs) for the same product, unless otherwise provided by federal law;

7) establishment financial institution unreasonably high or unreasonably low price of a financial service;

8) creation of discriminatory conditions;

9) creation of obstacles to access to the commodity market or exit from the commodity market to other economic entities;

10) violation of the pricing procedure established by regulatory legal acts.

Along with this, the federal law "On the Protection of Competition" introduces control over mergers of organizations, the sale and purchase of large blocks of shares in companies, as well as a ban on price negotiation between business entities, market division and some other practices.

Economic concentration control

Control over economic concentration consists in the control of antimonopoly authorities over the acquisition of assets by economically significant companies. Such control exists in one form or another in most countries with antitrust laws. In particular, of the 80 countries surveyed by the US Department of Justice with antitrust laws, about 60 control mergers. At the same time, the details of the control regime may differ depending on the country and type of transactions.

Control can be preliminary (companies submit information about transactions to the antimonopoly authorities before the completion of these transactions) or subsequent (after the transactions are completed). In addition, notification may be mandatory or voluntary. For example, in Australia, which does not have a mandatory notification procedure, a company may still choose to obtain immunity from possible prosecution and apply in advance for formal approval.

Table. Merger control procedures in different countries peace

	Mandatory advance notice	Mandatory post-notification	Voluntary notice
Austria	Netherlands	Argentina*	Australia
Azerbaijan	Poland	Greece*	Ivory Coast
Albania	Portugal	Denmark	Great Britain
Argentina	Russia	Indonesia	Venezuela
Belarus	Romania	Spain	New Zealand
Belgium	Slovakia	Macedonia*	Norway
Bulgaria	Slovenia	Russia*	Panama
Brazil	USA	Tunisia*	France
Hungary	Thailand	SOUTH AFRICA*	Chile
Germany	Taiwan	South Korea*
Greece	Tunisia	Japan*
EU	Türkiye
Israel	Uzbekistan
Ireland	Ukraine
Italy	Finland
Kazakhstan	Croatia
Canada	Czech
Kenya	Switzerland
Cyprus	Sweden
Colombia	Estonia
Latvia	South Africa
Lithuania	Yugoslavia
Macedonia	South Korea
Mexico	Japan
Moldova

• - depending on the nature of transactions

(Source: US Department of Justice, 2000) .

Criticism of antitrust law

According to the leaders of the FAS I. Artemyev and A. Sushkevich, “the antimonopoly policy of the state, like no other form of public interference of the authorities in private affairs, is under constant fire of criticism from representatives economics". Critics of the antimonopoly legislation are such well-known economists, lawyers and philosophers as M. Friedman, F. Hayek, A. Greenspan, A. Rand, R. Coase, R. Bork, R. Posner, M. Rothbard. The main objects of criticism are:

• economic consequences of antitrust regulation (it is argued that it always or often leads to a decrease in public welfare); and
• the underlying ethical and legal philosophy of antitrust regulation (it is said to violate property rights and freedom of contract and lead to inequality of citizens' rights).

Some of the critics of the antitrust law are in favor of its abolition, some are in favor of significant adjustments.

Notable antitrust critics

Ethical and legal criticism of antitrust laws

Wikimedia Foundation. 2010 .

Lecture 8. Antimonopoly regulation

2. Antimonopoly legislation, its goals and objectives.

Development and implementation antitrust policy is among the most important economic functions modern state.

The implementation of antimonopoly policy is based on the conclusion that society incurs economic and other losses from the displacement of market competition by a monopoly.

Competition- this is the competitiveness of economic entities, the independent actions of which effectively limit the ability of each of them to unilaterally influence the general conditions for the production of goods and their circulation in the relevant market. This is a competition in which the most effective participants win.

Competition is one of the most important elements of the market, since it is competition that forces the participants in economic relations to engage in the activities necessary for society, and is a mechanism for selection and regulation in a market economy. Competition refers to those properties of a market economy, without which market economy does not exist at all.

Antitrust policy is a set of government measures aimed at preventing, limiting and suppressing monopolistic activities, providing all economic entities level playing field competition and prevention of unfair competition.
State antimonopoly regulation of the economy includes two interconnected directions:

1) development and adoption of special antimonopoly legislation;

2) formation of a system of bodies that carry out antimonopoly regulation and control compliance with antimonopoly legislation.

In the main capitalist countries, antimonopoly laws were adopted after the Second World War: in France in 1945, in Japan in 1947, in England in 1948, in the FRG in 1957. National laws reflect the specific conditions of their countries and differ from US law. However, antitrust laws are uniform in their fundamentals. Firstly, it puts mergers of companies under state control, secondly, it prohibits agreements and conspiracies of entrepreneurs and, thirdly, it suppresses unfair competition.

In Russia, the need for antimonopoly regulation was realized by the state authorities only by 1990, when the predecessor of the current Federal Antimonopoly Service, the RSFSR State Committee for Antimonopoly Policy and Support for New Economic Structures, was created. And in 1991, the fundamental law in the field of antimonopoly regulation "On competition and restriction of monopolistic activity in commodity markets" was adopted.
Goals and methods of antimonopoly regulation in Russia.
Antimonopoly regulation operates in order to ensure the unity of the economic space, free movement of goods, freedom economic activity in the Russian Federation, protecting competition and creating conditions for the effective functioning of commodity markets.

The strategic tasks of conducting antimonopoly policy and developing competition in Russia at the present stage were formulated by the President of the Russian Federation V.V. Putin on 08.02.2008 in a speech at an expanded meeting of the State Council “On the development strategy of Russia until 2020.

The main goal of antimonopoly regulation in Russia is to control the economic concentration on commodity and financial markets, which is necessary to prevent their monopolization.
Based on this, it is possible to determine tasks of antimonopoly regulation:
- support for healthy competition;

Ensuring freedom of economic activity on the territory of the Russian Federation;

Suppression of monopolistic activity, as well as unfair competition in commodity markets;

Prevention of creating obstacles to access to the commodity market or exit from the commodity market to other economic entities;

Creation of conditions for the effective functioning of commodity markets.
The main instrument of the state antimonopoly policy is the state-legal mechanism - antimonopoly legislation and the system of legislative, executive and judicial authorities. With the help of antimonopoly laws, the state exercises legal and administrative regulation of the activities of monopolies, creating conditions for the reproduction of competition.

Antimonopoly legislation, its goals and objectives

The main federal law aimed solely at maintaining achieved level and further development of competition, is the federal law of July 26, 2006 No. 135-FZ “On Protection of Competition”.

The federal law "On Protection of Competition" determines the organizational and legal framework for protection of competition.

The aims of the law are to ensure the unity of the economic space, the free movement of goods, the freedom of economic activity in the Russian Federation, the protection of competition and the creation of conditions for the effective functioning of commodity markets.

The Law “On Protection of Competition” defines the effective organizational and legal framework for the protection of competition in commodity and financial markets in Russia. These include: a clear definition of the range of transactions and actions that are performed with the prior consent of the antimonopoly body; the definition of the dominant position of an economic entity in the commodity market is specified; a fundamentally new definition of prohibitions on various types of monopolistic activity is given; provides an exhaustive list of the powers of the antimonopoly body and the types of orders that it has the right to issue, etc.

The law develops antimonopoly legislation and specifies restrictions and prohibitions on monopolistic activities. law prohibited: abuse by an economic entity of a dominant position in the market; actions or agreements that restrict competition; unfair competition.

The law also defines general antimonopoly requirements for the procedure for conducting all types of tenders, competitions and auctions by authorities and extra-budgetary funds.

Strategic competition policy objectives require adherence to certain principles and methods in its implementation. Of the existing principles and methods can be distinguished:

Assessment of the impact on the competitive environment of measures to protect against unfavorable foreign competition;

Antimonopoly control over compliance with competition law;

Application of restrictive measures;

Counteracting unfair competition;

Economic concentration control;

Reducing barriers for firms to enter the market and create new companies;

Antimonopoly regulation in natural monopoly sectors;

Prohibitions on anti-competitive actions of authorities and administration;

Control in the field of placement of state orders;

Market Analysis;

Ensuring competition at the global level.

under restrictive measures understand prohibitions for monopolistic activity; unfair competition, which may lead to restriction of competition; direct intervention government agencies power in the activities of enterprises, etc.

Authorities are prohibited from granting privileges and benefits to individual companies. Competitive requirements are established for tenders and auctions in the course of public procurement.

Law "On Protection of Competition" prohibits concerted action between business entities which may lead to: setting monopoly high or monopolistically low prices; withdrawing a product from circulation in order to create or maintain a shortage; inclusion in the contract of discriminatory conditions that put the counterparty in an unequal position compared to other enterprises; inducing the counterparty to refuse to conclude contracts with individual buyers (customers).

Unfair competition- these are any actions of economic entities (a group of persons) aimed at obtaining advantages in the implementation of entrepreneurial activities that are contrary to the legislation of the Russian Federation, business practices, the requirements of integrity, reasonableness and fairness and have caused or may cause losses to other economic entities - competitors - or have caused or may harm their business reputation.

Unfair competition is not allowed , including:

Distribution of false, inaccurate or distorted information that may cause losses to an economic entity or damage its business reputation;

Misleading in relation to the nature, method and place of production, consumer properties, quality and quantity of goods or in relation to its producers;

Incorrect comparison by an economic entity of goods produced or sold by it with goods produced or sold by other economic entities;

Sale, exchange or other introduction into circulation of goods, if the results of intellectual activity and equivalent means of individualization of a legal entity, means of individualization of products, works, services were illegally used;

Illegal receipt, use, disclosure of information constituting a commercial, official or other secret protected by law.
The law provides for control over economic concentration.Economic concentration - transactions, other actions, the implementation of which has an impact on the state of competition. State concentration control is designed to prevent deterioration of the competitive environment and eliminate the possibility of a situation of abuse of dominant position. Therefore, the largest transactions on mergers and acquisitions are carried out in a permissive manner after agreement with the antimonopoly authority. The same procedure is provided for mergers and acquisitions involving foreign firms.

The law provides for lowering barriers for firms to enter the market and create new companies . The possibility of the emergence of new sellers is a deterrent to the manifestations of monopoly on the part of firms already operating in the market. The formation of new firms is also an important element in improving competitiveness.

Established antimonopoly regulation in natural monopoly industries. The economic meaning of a natural monopoly lies in the existence of such an effect in the industry, in which only one firm can operate on the market. This is typical for industries that require large-scale investment in distribution networks, such as electricity, gas and water, telecommunications, railways and so on.

However, even for such industries, mechanisms are provided to achieve competitive results:

1) withdrawal of excess profits by the regulatory body;

2) conducting inspections with the imposition of large fines in case of revealing an overestimation by firms of their costs;

3) setting tariffs as the average or lowest cost for a group of similar firms;

4) holding auctions for firms to obtain the right to produce products or provide services within a specified period.

Prohibitions on anti-competitive actions of authorities and administrations have been established. 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.

The order and control in the field of placement of state orders (purchases) has been established. If such purchases turn into guaranteed ones for sellers, then the quality decreases, prices rise, and the competitive development of the economy stops. In order to prevent this from happening, strict procedures for placement and monitoring of compliance with these procedures have been developed.

To prevent and suppress monopolistic activities, the State Register of the Russian Federation is maintained . Inclusion of an economic entity in the register, exclusion of an economic entity from the register, introduction of amendments to the register is carried out on the basis of the order of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of Russia, if the economic entity has a share of more than thirty-five percent in the relevant commodity market of the Russian Federation as a whole. The register necessarily includes enterprises that are the only producers in Russia of certain types of products.

Control questions

1. What is the content and methods of antimonopoly regulation?

2. Name the tasks of antimonopoly regulation.

3. Formulate the goals and objectives of the antimonopoly legislation.

4. List the legislative measures to combat monopolistic activity in the economy.

Powerful enterprises with monopoly power in the market are a very dangerous factor that can cause irreparable harm to the economy not only of the state, but of the whole world. For this reason, a set of laws was created that establishes the rules for doing business and is aimed at resolving issues related to the fight against unfair competition and other manifestations of monopoly business.

One of the founders of antitrust law is considered to be John Sherman, who in 1890 introduced business rules aimed at overcoming monopolization. Thanks to the law, the elimination of competitors and actions that were aimed at restricting the freedom of trade were recognized as illegal. The Sherman Act is still part of the United States Code. It was and is the foundation for creating and combating the manifestations of monopoly. But the act was far from ideal. The first changes and improvements were adopted in 1914. The Clayton Act is dated this year, as well as the code of laws of the Federal Trade Commission. The adoption of antitrust laws swept through Europe already in the post-war period. England was first, followed by France and Italy. In turn, Eastern Europe did not stand aside. Since 1980, the antimonopoly set of rules has been adopted in a number of countries, one of which was Russia.

In Russia, the monopoly began to manifest itself exclusively thanks to the leadership of the state. The authorities were guided by the direct development of the state's economy and the welfare of the country as a whole, and it was for this reason that monopolies and trusts were artificially created. But over time, the creation of individual monopolies in the sectors of the economy played a cruel joke on the state, as they began to oppress not only many enterprises, but also the very top, thereby trying to dictate their terms. For this reason, it was decided to create an antimonopoly law and implement it in Russia in order to deprive the monopoly of independence and enormous power.

In the post-war period, the USSR organized its own trust, which was called the "command economy". And it was simply impossible to compete with Gosplan, Goskomtsen and Gossnab.

Currently, the Federal Antimonopoly Service operates in Russia, which originated in 2004. Its creation was influenced by the experience of the RSFSR State Committee on Antimonopoly Policy and Support for the Development of New Economic Structures, which began working fourteen years before the creation of the Federal Antimonopoly Service. The task of the committee was to eliminate the infringement of trade participants. Such bodies reported directly to the Prime Minister. If we characterize the Federal Antimonopoly Service, then specifically its functions were the fight against the conduct of monopoly business, namely:

1. Consideration of issues related to conducting unfair competition.

2. Warning, detection and prevention of the conduct of clear signs of a monopoly business.

3. Control over compliance with all legal rules for doing business.

Russian enterprises that have more than 35% of sales in the domestic market are entered in a special register created by the antimonopoly service. With the help of it, it is easier for the authorities to influence the prevention of maintaining a monopoly. The service also develops proposals that help improve antitrust laws and contribute to the development of the competitiveness of developing enterprises. In 1995, the bodies of the RSFSR adopted an act, which later became the basic law against the fight against monopoly. It was called "On Competition and Restriction of Monopolistic Activity in Commodity Markets". Of course, this normative act has been refined and updated more than once, and some paragraphs of the law have been removed.

Since its promulgation, the law has consisted of 7 sections. Over time, some items have been removed or replaced. Each section has been highlighted.

For example, the first section was devoted exclusively to general concepts and the interpretation of individual terms.

The second spoke about which companies were considered to be those that operate with signs of a monopoly.

The third and fourth sections combine the concepts of unfair competition and what tasks the antimonopoly legislation sets for itself.

Of the last three, the sixth section can be distinguished, in which the legislator indicated responsibility for conducting illegal actions. Over time, parts of this normative act became their own rules.

The antimonopoly legislation is based on the articles of the Constitution and the Civil Code. Also, the Law of the Russian Federation “On Competition” is a fundamental normative act. The principles of the antimonopoly legislation are primarily reflected in the eighth article of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, thanks to which the main economic principle is fixed at the legislative level - this is the freedom of market relations, that is, competition. Article 34 also states that the Constitution prohibits activities that are aimed at monopolizing the conduct of business. In turn, Article 74 of the Constitution establishes that the territory of the Russian Federation is a single economic space. This factor is a prerequisite for maintaining fair competition.

Concerning Civil Code, then it contains important norms that directly dictate the rules prohibiting certain actions related to the restriction of competition. One of the articles says that it is forbidden to use civil rights for the selfish purposes of restricting competition. A significant moment was the fact of approval of the Law “On Protection of Competition”. This law was also based on the concepts of antimonopoly, the norms of which established methods for the protection and suppression of trusts, monopolies and unfair competition. But if other rules for doing business are established by international standards, then they have priority and cancel the norms of the legislation of the Russian Federation.

The legislation of the Russian Federation establishes the levels of implementation of antimonopoly laws. According to the rules, 2 levels of legislation are established: federal, as well as at the level of the subject of the Russian Federation. The subjects of the Russian Federation have the opportunity to form and regulate the price economy in certain areas of business.

Unfortunately, the legislation, whose task is to prevent the monopolization of business in Russia, is far from perfect. Of course, steps are being taken to improve legislation, thanks to which they allow promoting goods on world markets and help prevent the emergence of trusts. But antitrust laws have many pitfalls that entail great consequences not only for one particular enterprise, but for the entire economy of the state as a whole.