1 option
Antitrust and Higher Education: Was There a Conspiracy to Restrict Financial Aid? / Dennis W. Carlton, Gustavo E. Bamberger, Roy J. Epstein.
- Format:
- Book
- Author/Creator:
- Carlton, Dennis W.
- Series:
- Working Paper Series (National Bureau of Economic Research) no. w4998.
- NBER working paper series no. w4998
- Language:
- English
- Subjects (All):
- Antitrust law--United States.
- Antitrust law.
- College costs.
- Universities and colleges--United States.
- Universities and colleges.
- Physical Description:
- 1 online resource: illustrations (black and white);
- Other Title:
- Antitrust and Higher Education
- Place of Publication:
- Cambridge, Mass. National Bureau of Economic Research 1995.
- Cambridge, Massachusetts : National Bureau of Economic Research, 1995.
- Summary:
- In 1991, the Antitrust Division sued MIT and the eight schools in the Ivy League under Section 1 of the Sherman Act for engaging in a conspiracy to fix the prices that students pay. The Antitrust Division claimed that the schools conspired on financial aid policies in an effort to reduce aid and raise their revenues. The schools justified their cooperative behavior by explaining that it enabled them to concentrate aid on only those in need and thereby helped the schools to achieve their goals of need-blind admission coupled with financial aid to all needy admittees. This paper analyzes the empirical determinants of tuition and finds that the schools' agreement had no effect on average tuition paid. The paper also analyzes the appropriate application of the antitrust laws to not-for-profit institutions. The Court of Appeals found that it is appropriate for the courts to consider non-profit institutions' justifications for collective action (in this case, to enable the poor to attend school) under a Rule of Reason. The Court of Appeals overturned the District Court's opinion against MIT, citing the failure of the District Court to properly apply the Rule of Reason.
- Notes:
- Print version record
- January 1995.
The Penn Libraries is committed to describing library materials using current, accurate, and responsible language. If you discover outdated or inaccurate language, please fill out this feedback form to report it and suggest alternative language.