两法共治背景下掠夺性定价的实施困境与制度完善  

The implementation dilemma and system improvement of predatory pricing under the background of co-governance of two laws

作　　者：汪晓贺 WANG Xiao-he(School of Civil Commercial and Economic Law,Henan University of Economics and Law,Zhengzhou,Henan 450016)

机构地区：[1]河南财经政法大学民商经济法学院,河南郑州450016

出　　处：《价格月刊》2023年第7期7-13,共7页

基　　金：国家社科基金项目“数据共谋法律防控机制研究”(编号:20FFXB066)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：《价格法》与《反垄断法》的双重规制并没有使得掠夺性定价制度趋于完善,更没有对损害竞争的低价行为形成有效规制。与之相反,两部法律规制原则与规制方式的巨大差异,造成了执法实践无所适从与选择性执法两个极端,进而影响了掠夺性定价的制度发展与作用发挥。究其缘由,两法实质性内容的交叉重叠、成本标准缺失、新兴业态规制缺位是造成目前制度困境的三大主因。对此,应通过删除《价格法》中的重复性规定来确立《反垄断法》绝对单一规制模式,并通过出台《掠夺性定价指南》专门性规定及增设双边市场特别规定措施细化与完善具体制度体系,对低于成本销售行为实现有效规制。The dual regulation of the Price Law and the Anti-monopoly Law has not led to the improvement of predatory pricing systems,let alone the effective regulation of low price behaviors that harm competition.On the contrary,the significant differences in the principles and methods of regulation between the two laws have resulted in two extremes of law enforcement practice:arbitrary law enforcement and selective law enforcement,which in turn have affected the development and effectiveness of predatory pricing systems.The three main reasons for the current system dilemma are the overlapping of the substantive content of the two laws,the lack of cost standards and the absence of regulation of emerging business forms.In this regard,the absolute single regulatory model of the Anti-monopoly Law should be established by removing the repetitive provisions in the Price Law,and the specific system should be refined and improved by introducing specialized provisions in the Predatory Pricing Guideline and adding special provisions of the bilateral market,so as to achieve effective regulation of the sales behavior below cost.

关 键 词：两法共治 掠夺性定价 平均可变成本 双边市场 

分 类 号：F726[经济管理—产业经济]