격변의 시대: 미국 반독점법의 대변환 가능성에 관한 고찰

The core pillars of U.S. antitrust law is currently being challenged from multiple sides. There are multiple bills in Congress amending the antitrust statutes and overturning decades of well-established case law. The heads of antitrust agencies under the Biden administration have also been vocal about their agenda to reform antitrust. This upheaval that we are witnessing attacks the core pillars of the current law: the consumer welfare standard, the accompanying economic analysis as well as the general attitude that favor under-enforcement than over-enforcement. In particular, the advocates of the reform argue that the original purpose of the antitrust laws in the U.S. are multi-faceted to include protection of smaller business, labor as well as the U.S. democracy; they further argue that the current economic analysis is too complex and hence beyond democratic accountability and that the laws should favor over-enforcement than under-enforcement. To that end, they suggest shifting the burden of proof as well as introducing ex-ante regulation and remedies previously foreign to U.S. laws. While the on-going effort to reform the law, if successful, may significantly alter how antitrust law is enforced in the U.S., it is facing significant limitations in providing a workable alternative to the current law based on consumer welfare standard and the economic analysis.