Doesn Robinson-Patman make exceptions where there is a “cost justification” for price discrimination?
“Cost justification” is one statutory defense to Robinson-Patman, but it doesn’t apply here. This defense is for the reseller buying a truckload that gets a better cost than another reseller buying one case. Any price difference must be attributable to the cost justification (i.e., there is X% savings in shipping larger quantities). Cost justification may well apply to differences in regular distributor cost, but since the questionable practices here involve sales through distributors, there is no valid cost justification defense. Further, the advantaged distributor with one GPO may well be the disadvantaged party with another, invalidating any notion of cost justification.
Related Questions
- Doesn Robinson-Patman make exceptions where the reason to offer a discriminatory price is to "meet competition"?
- Doesn Robinson-Patman make exceptions where there is a "cost justification" for price discrimination?
- Who Benefits and Who Is Harmed by Laws Against Below-Cost Sales and Price Discrimination?
