Re:Mastercard sued for $19B in Britain's biggest damages claim
by rayiner on Friday September 09, 2016 @12:45PM
(#12463881)
It's not that unusual in the antitrust context. The whole theory of antitrust is that anti-competitive behavior allows a company to charge prices greater than they would be able to charge in a competitive market. If a company is found to have engaged in anticompetitive conduct, it's common in a civil suit for the measure of damages to be the difference between the prices actually charged and some judicially-determined market price (usually based on an econometric expert analysis).
Re:Mastercard sued for $19B in Britain's biggest damages claim
by bimmer44 on Friday September 09, 2016 @12:48PM
(#12463919)
This makes sense - I think the Reuters article was quite misleading. I posted another comment [1] with a link to a Guardian article that supports what you wrote.
Re:Mastercard sued for $19B in Britain's biggest damages claim
by FLUX-YOU on Friday September 09, 2016 @12:22PM
(#12463642)
My guess is they are trying to get it labeled as an invisible tax because a mastercard transaction fee wouldn't have shown on the receipt or the customer wouldn't have known they are paying higher prices due to the transaction fee.
This is similar to the case of Apple and their tax dues in Ireland.
Maybe someone with a better grasp of legal matters can explain a mechanism that gives this case a chance. Otherwise I can't see this claim succeeding without causing a great deal of business uncertainty.