IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/jlawec/v51y2008i1p1-23.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

State Casket Sales Restrictions: A Pointless Undertaking?

Author

Listed:
  • Judith A. Chevalier
  • Fiona M. Scott Morton

Abstract

We utilize a new micro data set of prices of funeral goods and services at individual funeral homes, plus data from the Economic Census, to examine the effects of state regulations that restrict entry into the funeral goods market. In particular, some states have regulations that allow only licensed funeral homes to sell caskets, while others allow unlicensed retailers, such as Costco, to sell them. However, as caskets and funeral services are complements, generally purchased in one-to-one proportions, it is not a priori clear that casket sales restrictions can expand the rent extraction capabilities of licensed funeral homes. Our results suggest that when courts lift funeral goods sales restrictions, the prices of funeral goods fall but the prices of funeral services rise by nearly as much. Overall, our results support the one-monopoly-rent hypothesis; we do not find that, overall, funeral home revenues decline when restrictions on funeral goods sales are lifted. (c) 2008 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved.

Suggested Citation

  • Judith A. Chevalier & Fiona M. Scott Morton, 2008. "State Casket Sales Restrictions: A Pointless Undertaking?," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 51(1), pages 1-23, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:ucp:jlawec:v:51:y:2008:i:1:p:1-23
    DOI: 10.1086/588595
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/588595
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/588595?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Harrington, David E & Krynski, Kathy J, 2002. "The Effect of State Funeral Regulations on Cremations Rates: Testing for Demand Inducement in Funeral Markets," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 45(1), pages 199-225, April.
    2. Whinston, Michael D, 1990. "Tying, Foreclosure, and Exclusion," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(4), pages 837-859, September.
    3. Blackstone, Erwin A, 1975. "Restrictive Practices in the Marketing of Electrofax Copying Machines and Supplies: The SC M Corporation Case," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(3), pages 189-202, March.
    4. Barry Nalebuff, 2004. "Bundling as an Entry Barrier," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(1), pages 159-187.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bruno Deffains & Dominique Demougin, 2023. "Capitation taxes and the regulation of professional services," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 55(2), pages 167-193, April.
    2. Thierry Blayac & Patrice Bougette & Christian Montet, 2014. "How consumer information curtails market power in the funeral industry," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 421-437, June.
    3. Daniel J. Smith & Noah J. Trudeau, 2019. "The Undertaker’s Cut: Challenging the Rational Basis for Casket Licensure," Journal of Private Enterprise, The Association of Private Enterprise Education, vol. 34(Summer 20), pages 23-41.
    4. repec:inr:wpaper:248291 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Jerry Ellig, 2015. "State funeral regulations: inside the black box," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 97-123, August.
    6. David E. Harrington & Jaret Treber, 2020. "Constraining Competition With State Mandated Facility Requirements," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 38(4), pages 659-674, October.
    7. Conor Norris & Edward J. Timmons, 2020. "Restoring vision to consumers and competition to the marketplace: analyzing the effects of required prescription release," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 57(1), pages 1-19, February.
    8. Ramon Corona & Nelson Altamirano, 2010. "Is The Treasure Hunt Strategy Working For Costco?," International Journal of Management and Marketing Research, The Institute for Business and Finance Research, vol. 3(3), pages 83-93.
    9. repec:inr:wpaper:248290 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Chiara Farronato & Andrey Fradkin & Bradley J. Larsen & Erik Brynjolfsson, 2024. "Consumer Protection in an Online World: An Analysis of Occupational Licensing," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 16(3), pages 549-579, July.
    11. Harrington, David, 2018. "Constraining Rivals: The Effect of State-Mandated Facility Requirements on the Locations and Sizes of Funeral Homes," Working Papers 06958, George Mason University, Mercatus Center.
    12. Ramon Corona, 2014. "A Comparative Analysis Of Major Us Retailers Based On Enterprise Marketing Efficiency," Global Journal of Business Research, The Institute for Business and Finance Research, vol. 8(4), pages 25-39.
    13. David E. Harrington, 2007. "Markets: Preserving Funeral Markets with Ready-to-Embalm Laws," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 21(4), pages 201-216, Fall.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jeon, Doh-Shin & Menicucci, Domenico, 2009. "Bundling and Competition for Slots: On the Portfolio Effects of Bundling," IDEI Working Papers 574, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse, revised Jul 2011.
    2. Crawford, Gregory, 2013. "Cable Regulation in the Internet Era," CEPR Discussion Papers 9316, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Jihui Chen & Qiang Fu, 2017. "Do exclusivity arrangements harm consumers?," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 51(3), pages 311-339, June.
    4. Qing Hu & Tomomichi Mizuno, 2021. "Positive Effects of Bundling on Rival's Profit and Social Welfare in a Vertical Relationship," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 41(1), pages 85-92.
    5. Stole, Lars A., 2007. "Price Discrimination and Competition," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: Mark Armstrong & Robert Porter (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 34, pages 2221-2299, Elsevier.
    6. Alexei Alexandrov & Özlem Bedre-Defolie, 2014. "The Equivalence of Bundling and Advance Sales," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(2), pages 259-272, March.
    7. Layne-Farrar, Anne & Salinger, Michael A., 2016. "Bundling of RAND-committed patents," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1155-1164.
    8. Arribas, I. & Urbano, A., 2017. "Multiproduct trading with a common agent under complete information: Existence and characterization of Nash equilibrium," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 14-38.
    9. Zhou, Jidong, 2021. "Mixed bundling in oligopoly markets," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    10. Kuroda, Toshifumi & Ida, Takanori & Koguchi, Teppei, 2015. "The impact of asymmetric regulation on product bundling: The case of fixed broadband and mobile communications in Japan," 2015 Regional ITS Conference, Los Angeles 2015 146318, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    11. Andrea Greppi & Domenico Menicucci, 2021. "On Bundling and Entry Deterrence," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 58(4), pages 561-581, June.
    12. Halmenschlager, Christine & Mantovani, Andrea, 2017. "On the private and social desirability of mixed bundling in complementary markets with cost savings," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 45-59.
    13. Markus Reisinger & Jens Schmidt & Nils Stieglitz, 2021. "How Complementors Benefit from Taking Competition to the System Level," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(8), pages 5106-5123, August.
    14. Hinloopen, Jeroen & Müller, Wieland & Normann, Hans-Theo, 2014. "Output commitment through product bundling: Experimental evidence," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 164-180.
    15. Qianbo Yin & Baojun Jiang & Sean Xiang Zhou, 2023. "Effects of consumers' context‐dependent preferences on product bundling," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 32(6), pages 1674-1691, June.
    16. Cao, Qingning & Geng, Xianjun & Zhang, Jun, 2015. "Strategic Role of Retailer Bundling in a Distribution Channel," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 91(1), pages 50-67.
    17. Chen, Bo & Ni, Debing, 2017. "Optimal bundle pricing under correlated valuations," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 248-281.
    18. Kenneth S. Corts, 2018. "How the source of the entrant's advantage limits entry‐deterring tying," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 51(2), pages 510-527, May.
    19. Robert Innes & Stephen F. Hamilton, 2009. "Vertical restraints and horizontal control," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 40(1), pages 120-143, March.
    20. Gastón Llanes & Andrea Mantovani & Francisco Ruiz-Aliseda, 2019. "Entry into Complementary Good Markets with Network Effects," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 4(4), pages 262-282, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ucp:jlawec:v:51:y:2008:i:1:p:1-23. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JLE .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.