<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Thomas Hasenzagl | Macro Paper Warehouse</title><link>https://macropaperwarehouse.com/authors/thomas-hasenzagl/</link><description>Thomas Hasenzagl</description><generator>Hugo -- gohugo.io</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://macropaperwarehouse.com/authors/thomas-hasenzagl/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Merger guidelines for the labor market</title><link>https://macropaperwarehouse.com/papers/merger-guidelines-for-the-labor-market/</link><pubDate>Wed, 01 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://macropaperwarehouse.com/papers/merger-guidelines-for-the-labor-market/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;Research question and motivation. Antitrust review of mergers has historically focused almost entirely on harm to consumers (product-market monopoly), ignoring harm to workers (labor-market monopsony). Following the July 2021 White House executive order and the DOJ&amp;rsquo;s monopsony-based challenge to the Penguin Random House (PRH)/Simon &amp;amp; Schuster (SS) publishing merger, the agencies are now putting buyer power at the center of policy. The paper asks: how should Herfindahl-based merger-review thresholds, designed for product markets, perform if applied to local labor markets, and what efficiency gains would a merger need to leave workers unharmed?&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>