Skip to main content

The Pros and Cons of Price Controls

By
Image: deargdoom57

A version of this article also appeared in the South China Morning Post's Young Post on Thursday, May 12. http://yp.scmp.com/news/features/article/103436/pros-and-cons-price-controls

How much should an ice cream cost? Is there a justified level of profit, and when does profit turn into consumers being cheated? Should governments try to protect people from high prices? Questions on fair pricing have been at the centre of economic policy discussions for a long time.

There is evidence to show that government price controls generally lead to economic dysfunction and the breakdown of effective markets. One of the most striking examples today is the crippling shortage of basic necessities in Venezuela. This is a result of the government’s attempt to manage retail prices and protect consumers from inflation.
Although most economists have long agreed that government price controls are not effective, there is still the question of how to ensure buyers are not exploited by unscrupulous sellers.

In economics, information asymmetry describes situations in which one party in a transaction has more and better information that the other. The result is an imbalance of power, with one side having a greater ability to influence the terms of trade. In retail, this could be represented by a poorly-educated individual who is charged excessive prices at a corner shop because he is unaware of how much a particular item should actually cost.

With such situations in mind, India introduced a maximum retail price (MRP) in 1990, before the country opened up its economy. The MRP, which includes taxes, is printed on all packaged goods sold in India. An item’s MRP is decided by its manufacturer, and it is against the law to sell at a price above the MRP. However, many do choose to sell below the maximum price. India remains the only country with a legally permitted MRP, although many nations have recommended retail prices.

One of the key criticisms of price controls is that they harm consumers by creating shortages of goods. What commonly occurs is that producers, faced with a government-approved maximum price, are unable to make reasonable profits, so they scale back production. The result is less choice for consumers and lower-quality goods in the market as manufacturers try to cut costs.

The MRP tries to avoid this problem by giving manufacturers the right to set prices. Retailers may not sell at any price above the MRP, but the manufacturer can choose to set the ceiling as high as they wish.

Unfortunately, this causes problems for sellers in rural areas. They have to pay more for transportation but cannot increase their prices. As a result, it’s consumers in less accessible areas who are affected. They have fewer options to choose from, and even if they are willing to pay a higher price for an item, it may not be available at their local shop.

There is also a strong case to be made that information asymmetries will eventually be eliminated by the market. Unscrupulous merchants, the theory predicts, will soon find themselves out of business as people realise they are getting a bad deal. In competitive markets, and with the help of the internet, it is easy to compare prices to get the best deal.

But the problem is that in many rural areas, there may not be enough sellers to choose from, so it’s hard to rely on the competitiveness of the market. Additionally, the role of the internet as a price regulator is not realistic in areas with limited internet access. It is ultimately the people who have few choices and few sources of information whom the MRP seeks to protect.

There will no doubt be times when policies such as the MRP benefit vulnerable consumers. Economic history suggests, however, that the greatest benefit to the greatest number of people occurs when free market prevails. Fairness may best be achieved through fewer barriers to competition, not through government directives.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

On Myanmar

By
This is adapted from a paper I wrote for my Comparative Politics class at Harvard . A Friendless People Thousands have been killed. Hundreds of thousands have fled. They are a people without a home, much less a state. Such is the plight of the Rohingya, whom a UN spokesperson once called the most friendless people in the world. The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights has called the situation a “textbook example of ethnic cleansing” (“UN”). This latest wave of state-sponsored violence follows a series of attacks by militants—a small insurgent group, the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA)—in August on Myanmarese military outposts. The brutal military crackdown is ostensibly targeted at insurgents. Yet, it is unmistakably civilians who are bearing the brunt of the violence, with the UN High Commissioner calling the response “clearly disproportionate” and “without regard for basic principles of international law” (“UN”). The approach of ethnic institutionalism has
Post a Comment
Read more

The Tax Reform India Needs

By
Image: Tizi A version of this article also appeared in the South China Morning Post's Young Post on Thursday, May 5.  http://yp.scmp.com/news/features/article/103398/india%E2%80%99s-economy-taking-right-steps-goods-and-service-tax India’s current prime minister, Narendra Modi, was elected in 2014 on his economic credentials and the promise that he would bring to the nation the same prosperity he brought, as chief minister, to his home state of Gujarat.  The keystone of Modi’s economic policy is a nationwide goods-and-service tax (GST), intended to streamline the myriad state and central-government levies currently encumbering business in the country.   Under the prevailing tax regime, multiple layers of tax are imposed on the same good, and interstate trade is complicated by varying tax rates between states. Transporting goods across state borders can entail long waiting times to resolve tax matters, and the plethora of obscure charges leaves ample room for co
1 comment
Read more

Where Lurks the Next Crisis?

By
Photo: SCMP Optimism flows freely through the markets today. Asset prices are at record highs: investors are happier than ever to throw money at barely profitable technology companies, debt issuances from dubious companies and volatile governments, and anything blockchain related—from Bitcoin to Ethereum to Insanecoin, which does actually exist.     Most observers think that the coin mania is a bubble waiting to burst. But bears have been calling the whole market a bubble for a while, predicting an end to the years-long economic recovery and stock market boom. The old joke goes that economists have called seven of the last two recessions. It still rings true. Doomsayers have been convinced of a market crash since the post-recession recovery had barely gotten on its legs. But with things as they are today, are we on a path toward crisis?   I will not engage in the perilous business of trying to predict when the next economic downturn or market tumble will occur. Any such p
Post a Comment
Read more