When Little Things Mean a Lot: On the Inefficiency of Item‐Pricing Laws
- 1 May 2008
- journal article
- research article
- Published by University of Chicago Press in The Journal of Law and Economics
- Vol. 51 (2), 209-250
- https://doi.org/10.1086/589660
Abstract
Item‐pricing laws (IPLs) require a price tag on every item sold by a retailer. We study IPLs and assess their efficiency by quantifying their costs and comparing them to previously documented benefits. On the cost side, we posit that IPLs should lead to higher prices because they increase the costs of pricing and price adjustment. We test this prediction using data collected from large supermarket chains in the tri‐state area of New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut. We find that IPL store prices are higher by about 20¢–25¢ per item on average. As a control, we use data from stores that use electronic shelf labels and find that their prices fall between IPL and no‐IPL store prices. We compare the costs of IPLs to existing measures of the benefits and find that the costs are an order of magnitude higher than the upper bound of the estimated benefits.Keywords
This publication has 32 references indexed in Scilit:
- Non‐price rigidity and cost of adjustmentManagerial and Decision Economics, 2007
- "The Real Thing": Nominal Price Rigidity of the Nickel Coke, 1886-1959Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 2004
- Why Don't Prices Rise During Periods of Peak Demand? Evidence from Scanner DataAmerican Economic Review, 2003
- The Effect of Price Advertising on Prices: Evidence in the Wake of 44 LiquormartThe American Economic Review, 1999
- Branded Variants: A Retail PerspectiveJournal of Marketing Research, 1996
- EDLP, Hi-Lo, and Margin ArithmeticJournal of Marketing, 1994
- UPC Scanner Pricing Systems: Are They Accurate?Journal of Marketing, 1994
- The frequency of price adjustment: A study of the newsstand prices of magazinesJournal of Econometrics, 1986
- The Effects of FTC Advertising RegulationThe Journal of Law and Economics, 1981
- The Efficient Regulation of Consumer InformationThe Journal of Law and Economics, 1981