Abstract:
This note shows that the argument of Šaljanin(2017) [Šaljanin, 2017. “Signaling through public
antitrust enforcement―, Economics Letters 169, 4 - 6] that public antitrust enforcement complements
private investment is robust to allowing public investment in anti-trust enforcement to be productive.
However, unlike as in the case of unproductive public investment, over investment in public antitrust
enforcement does not necessarily signal that the government is pro-competition: in pooling equilibria
either only the anti-competition government or both types of government over invests, whereas in the
separating equilibrium only the pro-competition government over invests.
