摘要 公平交易委員會(以下簡稱公平會)依據公平交易法(以下簡稱公平法)本應為維持市場交易機制之機關,但在與台灣微軟公司之行政和解過程中一直將調降價格作為重心之一,而在九二一集集大震時,對於調漲電池、發電機價格之商人施以重懲,亦顯示出公平會介入市場過高價格之管 我國關於過高價格之規範係公平法之第十條,而本條乃參酌歐盟競爭法第八十二條關於濫用優勢地位之行為而來,故了解歐盟的立法政策與執法情形是必要的。本文將先從最上位之歐盟經濟競爭管制政策的研析著手。又處罰價格過高乃對於事業向交易相對人(廣義之消費者)剝削之禁制,因此必須了解消費者在歐盟競爭法中之地位,以明瞭價格合理與否是否屬於消費者在歐盟競爭法中之主觀公權利。 歐盟「過高價格」之規定係置於優勢地位之濫用行為中,因此即為通稱之獨占性定價。而獨占性定價在競爭政策上的評價,甚具爭議性,因而本文將從經濟學之角度分析獨占性定價,以知悉為何處罰獨占性定價。接著再檢討歐盟對過高價格之處理情況,又為了能夠具體描繪出如何認定價格之設定是否過高,將援引德國的虛擬競爭理論作說明。惟鑒於虛擬競爭理論皆為主管機關事後進行價格上的比較,在大規模垂直整合事業中,欲單獨區隔出一項產品之成本,殊屬不易,因此當主管機關以超額利潤比較法處罰過高價格時,會使得事業有口難言,因此本文試圖藉由電話費率之理論來作為設定或管制價格之借鏡。 最後回到我國。既然過高價格被認係對於消費者之剝削,因此必須檢討我國是否有必要以競爭法處罰過高價格,以直接保障消費者經濟上之利益,或是認為消費者之權益僅為一種反射利益而已。因此透過立法意旨之分析去檢視我國消費者在公平法中之地位,據以了解面對第十條第二款應有的態度,並檢討公平會關於過高價格管制之處分,之後再對於管制過高價格提出質疑,如管制過高價格可能產生抑制競爭誘因、懲罰有效率廠商、削弱競爭者之效果等,最後再對公平會提出建議。
Abstract During the negotiation of Microsoft issue, the FTC put emphasis on prices. However, such regulation is most likely in conflict with the spirit of the market economy. The regulation of excessive pricing within the antitrust law is an issue that has given rise to much controversy. The statute concerning excessive prices in ROC is in wake of EC Competition Law. It’s necessary for us to recognize the policies and dispositions of Commission, Court of Justice and The Court of First Instance. The antitrust-regulation of excessive pricing is highly controversial both in relation to issues about “ whether” and “how” to regulate the excessive pricing in antitrust law, so this article shall analyze these. In fact, the regulation of excessive pricing might have kinds of undesirable side effects, such as holding back the incentives to engage in competition, weakening the competitors and punishing the efficient firms and so on. Then this article give FTC some suggestions with respect to pricing regulation.