Question

How would an ideal (non-real world) anti-trust law differ in its
treatment of implicit and explicit collusion? By treatment, you
can include the illegality, the punishments or any evidential thresholds
in your ideal law. [Only the law is ideal, it should face the
type of firm behaviors we see in the US economy.] Justify your
answer. Explain the differences in how these types of collusion
present themselves to either regulators who must decide which
cases to investigate and the courts. Are there any issues with
handling implicit collusion more aggressively than the current law
does?

Answer 1