4328 research outputs found
Sort by
Medical Marijuana Use in Federally Subsidized Housing: The Argument for Overcoming Federal Preemption
Get PDFThe Merger Incipiency Doctrine and the Importance of Redundant Competitors
Get PDFThe enforcers and the courts have not implemented the merger incipiency doctrine in the vigorous manner Congress intended. We believe one important reason for this failure is that, until now, the logic underlying this doctrine has never been explained. The purpose of this article is to demonstrate that markets’ need for “protective redundancy” explains the incipiency policy. We are writing this article in the hope that this will cause the enforcers and courts to implement significantly more stringent merger enforcement.To vastly oversimplify, the current enforcement approach assumes that if N significant competitors are necessary for competition, N-1 competitors could well be anticompetitive, but blocking an N 1 merger would not confer any gains. Because many enforcers and judges erroneously assume that mergers among major competitors usually result in significant gains to efficiency and innovation, they believe that blocking mergers to the N 1 level would impose significant costs on the economy. Why should enforcement preserve apparent “redundancy”? First, the relationship between concentration and competition, and between concentration and innovation, is uncertain. Underestimating the minimum necessary number of firms needed for competition and for innovation is likely to result in harm to consumer welfare. Second, one or more of the N firms frequently can wither or implode as a result of normal competition, or from an unexpected shock to the market, often surprisingly quickly. This leaves only N-1 or N-2 remaining significant competitors. Finally, when enforcers challenge a merger that would have resulted in N competitors, they often allow the merger subject to complex remedies. But if the remedy fails, as they often do, the market will have too few competitors by the enforcers’ own estimate. Taken together these scenarios often leave markets with too few firms. The attenuation of the incipiency doctrine has allowed many mergers that have resulted in higher prices and lower levels of innovation. This has been shown by recent empirical work evaluating the consequences of major mergers. Moreover, other empirical work shows that significant mergers rarely produce significant efficiency gains and often result in losses to innovation.A revitalized incipiency doctrine would retain the “protective redundancy” that would preserve competition, while sacrificing little or nothing in terms of efficiency or innovation. The enforcers and the courts should implement this policy much more aggressively
Proposing a Single, Simpler Test for Cash Equivalency
Get PDFUnder the cash method of accounting, generally taxpayers include income items that are received in the form of cash, checks, and property, in the year in which they are received. Under the cash equivalency doctrine, a promise to pay an amount in the future, even though it is a property right, generally will be included upon receipt only if the promise to pay constitutes a cash equivalent.
Whether an obligation is a cash equivalent is generally determined based on common law standards developed by the courts with some assistance from the Service. As a consequence, the current approach to cash equivalency suffers from the lack of a uniform standard. There is also uncertainty in applying the particular tests, given the fact-intensive, imprecise inquiry that is required. In addition, the current standards for cash equivalency may also present liquidity difficulties for taxpayers.
To address these problems, this article proposes a single test for determining whether an obligation calling for future payments is a cash equivalent. The proposed test would generally define a cash equivalent as an obligation that is readily tradable in an established securities market. By avoiding the aforementioned problems, the proposed test would promote the simplicity and liquidity policies that underlie the cash method of accounting. The proposed test would also create consistency with the results under the installment method of reporting when a taxpayer receives a deferred-payment obligation on the sale of property. To prevent possible abuses, the article also considers the adoption of certain measures that apply in connection with the installment method
Pursuing Inclusive Higher Education in Egypt and Beyond through the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
Get PDFInclusive higher education is elusive for students with disabilities, especially in developing countries. The adoption and rapid ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) provides, if applied as its drafters intended, a “whole of institution” framework for its realization (CRPD Committee, 2016). Myriad legal, attitudinal, physical, and communication-based barriers limit or exclude participation. The individual impact of such discrimination is clear and carries lifelong consequences. Equally endemic are the broad societal and pedagogical effects of this exclusion. To illustrate: preventing persons with disabilities from Teacher Education courses impacts inclusive education in primary and secondary education; barring people with disabilities from academic programs in the sciences stifles innovation in assistive technology, health, and rehabilitation; and limiting access to studying the humanities hampers the emergence of disability studies as a rightful discipline. This article presents a framework for inclusive higher education in developing countries as contemplated by the CRPD. In doing so, we draw on field work conducting the first assessment of the accessibility of Egyptian public higher education to students with disabilities. We outline lessons that can be learned and pitfalls to be avoided both in Egypt and indeed for other countries in the Global South
