Essay on Major Federal Anti-trusth Laws in the United States

As shown in Document A, reformers sought to break up large companies that controlled their area of competition, such as the Standard Oil monopoly on oil fields. However, the way at which they were picked was to organize them into good or bad trusts. The way this was done was at the control of the government, thus creating no set standards as to what company trusts to break up to create competition and which ones to keep. Despite the indecision, this was somewhat successful. As the Clayton Antitrust Act states (Document E), “... it shall be unlawful for any person engaged in commerce, in the course of such commerce, either directly or indirectly to discriminate in price between different purchasers of commodities which commodities are sold for use, consumption, or resale in the United States…”, meaning that women, and other minorities could buy the same items for the same price of others at any store in

Monopolies and oligopolies often use anti-competitive practices, which can have a negative impact on the economy. This is why company mergers are often examined closely by government regulators to avoid reducing competition in an industry.

When Woodrow Wilson was inaugurated in 1913, he stated in his address that, “We shall deal with our economic system as it is and as it may be modified, not as it might be if we had a clean sheet of paper to write upon” (First Inaugural Address, online). He did just that when he passed the Clayton Antitrust Act in October 1914. The Sherman Antitrust Act was passed in 1890, but it was very vague in the way it described monopolies (Clayton Antitrust Act, online). Big business took advantage of the loopholes, which diminished competition (Clayton Antitrust Act, online). Although Roosevelt and Taft successfully busted about 150 trusts, big businesses continued to grow and our entire economic system remained in the hands of a few men (Taft Biography, online; T. Roosevelt – Section 8, online; Clayton Antitrust, online). Wilson requested Congress to modify the Sherman Antitrust Act, and the Clayton Antitrust Act was born (Clayton Antitrust, online). It is “An Act To supplement existing laws against unlawful restraints and monopolies, and for other purposes” (HR 15657, online). The Sherman Act simply declared monopolies illegal, while the Clayton Act declared activities linked with monopolies to be illegal (Clayton Antitrust Act, online). Such activities include mergers and acquisitions that are intended “substantially to lessen competition, or to tend to create a monopoly” (HR 15657, online). The Federal Trade Commission Act, passed about a month before the Clayton Act, banned

United States antitrust law is a collection of federal and state government laws, which regulates the conduct and organization of business corporations, generally to promote fair competition for the benefit of consumers. The four major pieces of legislation known as the Antitrust Laws include: The Sherman Act, The Clayton Antitrust Act, The Federal Trade Commission, and the Celler-Kefauver Act.

A) There were 4 particular Antitrust Laws that were enacted with the primary purpose of protecting consumers, striving to achieve fair competition in the market place, and to achieve and allocate efficiency. The 4 Antitrust Laws that are major pieces of legislation are;

During the Progressive Era, Regulatory Agencies fail to provide and do their work, legislation ere made with the purpose for the common good of the citizen that suffer from the big corporation abuse, most of the corporation state strict rule but never got to accomplish them or the personal was too much expensive. The Supreme Court during the United State v Knight Company state diminished the effectiveness of the Sherman Anti-Trust act by ruling that manufacturing was not an interstate commerce (Document 5). The Federal Trade Commission, an independent agency of the United State government, established in by the Federal Trade Commission Act. Its principal mission was the promotion of consumer protection and the elimination/prevention of anti-competitive

The Antitrust Act permitted the good monopolies, which helped the growth of the economy, a perfect example was the U.S Steel company, that produced a high quality steel and sold it for a greatly reduced price, although it suppressed competition. This Act not only protected the U.S. economy, but protected the small companies, proportioning opportunity for competition. So the Antitrust Act was one of the most important reforms in the Progressive Era, because helped

Last February, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission (Dental Examiners). The case concerned the Board’s decision to stop teeth whitening services by non-dentists in the state. The Federal Trade Commission alleged that the Board had violated antitrust laws by attempting to limit competition by its teeth whitening decision. State entities such as the Board generally were thought to have immunity from antitrust laws, but the Supreme Court’s decision reversed this long-held belief and found that state boards could be held liability if certain conditions were met. The major condition was that the board be made up of a majority of active market

Through the application of the “Rule of Reason”, a methodology used by courts to interpret US antitrust laws and analyze relevant

Antitrust law in the United States is a collection of federal and state government laws regulating the conduct and organization of business corporations with the intent to promote fair competition in an open-market economy for the benefit of the public. Congress passed the first antitrust statute, the Sherman Antitrust Act, in 1890 in response to the public outrage toward big business. In 1914, Congress passed two additional antitrust laws: the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Clayton Act. (The Antitrust Laws. Web.)

Furthermore, in Standard Oil Co., the Supreme Court stated that “The term "monopoly,"… as used in the Sherman Act was intended to cover such monopolies or attempts to monopolize as were known to exist in this country; those which were defined as illegal at common law by the States, when applied to intrastate commerce.” The Supreme Court went on to further state that “the principles of the common law applied to interstate as well as to intrastate commerce.”

According to Heminway (2013). The commercial clause in the constitution allows the regulation of interstate business transaction the federal government. The law and courts establish standards that are acceptable in the business environment and the society. For example the guidelines regarding a contract between buyer and seller enshrined in the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC). The law also helps in resolving disputes between two business entities and between people and business entities. For example the case of Cipollone vs. Liggett Group, Inc. The legal system has much influence in the business decisions (Heminway, 2013).

It is very difficult for the government to come in and state that antitrust violations have occurred absolutely in a company.

The purpose of antitrust laws is to both promote and protect competition. They aren’t designed to go after big companies simply because they are bigger or more successful than others in their industry. They aren’t anti-market or anti-business. They are intended to be just the opposite, in fact. They are meant to promote successful market economics through the assurance of healthy competition while keeping abuses of the system in check that could overrun the market.

Competition in economics is rivalry in supplying or acquiring an economic service or good. Sellers compete with other sellers, and buyers with other buyers. In its perfect form, there is competition among many small buyers and sellers, none of whom is too large to affect the market as a whole; in practice, competition is often reduced by a great variety of limitations, including monopolies. The monopoly, a limit on competition, is an example of market failure. Competition among merchants in foreign trade was common in ancient times, and it has been a characteristic of mercantile and industrial expansion since the Middle Ages. By the 19th century, classical economic theorists had come to regard