Legislature(2011 - 2012)CAPITOL 120
03/23/2011 01:00 PM House JUDICIARY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB87 | |
| HB23 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HB 87 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 23 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 6 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 168 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 87 - ANTITRUST VIOLATION PENALTIES
1:40:07 PM
CHAIR GATTO announced that the first order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 87, "An Act relating to penalties for antitrust
violations." [Before the committee was CSHB 87(L&C).]
1:40:39 PM
JAMES R. WALDO, Staff, Representative Lindsey Holmes, Alaska
State Legislature, on behalf of Representative Holmes, one of
the bill's joint prime sponsors, explained that HB 87 would
update the penalties for certain violations of Alaska's
antitrust laws. Currently, violations of AS 45.50.562 and AS
45.50.564 - combinations in restraint of trade unlawful, and
monopolies and attempted monopolies unlawful, respectively -
constitute a misdemeanor with a maximum fine of $20,000, or a
maximum prison sentence of one year, or both, if committed by a
natural person, and constitute a misdemeanor with a maximum fine
of $50,000 if committed by an entity other than a natural
person. By amending AS 45.50.578, Section 1 of the bill would
make such violations a class C felony with a maximum fine of
$1,000,000, or a prison sentence as provided for in AS 12.55, or
both, if committed by a natural person, and a class C felony
with a maximum fine of $50,000,000 if committed by an entity
other than a natural person. Section 2 of the bill would add a
new subsection (b) to AS 45.50.578 authorizing civil actions by
the attorney general against those who violate AS 45.50.562; AS
45.50.564; AS 45.50.568 - mergers and acquisitions unlawful when
competition unlawful; AS 45.50.570 - interlocking directorates
and relationships; or an injunction issued under AS 45.50.580 -
injunction by attorney general. The maximum civil penalty
authorized under this new subsection (b) would be $1,000,000 for
a violation committed by a natural person, and $50,000,000 for a
violation committed by an entity other than a natural person.
MR. WALDO mentioned that the joint prime sponsors obtained input
from the Department of Law (DOL) regarding the bill's language;
that the proposed penalties are far less than those imposed for
violating [similar federal law]; that the proposed penalties are
merely maximum amounts, rather than mandatory amounts, and so
the court would have the same discretion under the bill as it
has now in determining how high a penalty to impose; and that
making the bill's civil penalty section congruent with its
criminal penalty section is meant to ensure that if the state is
one of the prevailing parties in a multi-state antitrust suit,
that the damages awarded the state won't be limited to just its
existing criminal penalty amounts.
1:45:20 PM
CLYDE (ED) SNIFFEN, JR., Senior Assistant Attorney General,
Commercial/Fair Business Section, Civil Division (Anchorage),
Department of Law (DOL), in response to questions, concurred
that the proposed penalty amounts would be maximum amounts, not
mandated amounts, and that damage award amounts in multi-state
antitrust cases hinge on a state's existing penalties; ventured
that the bill's proposed changes would provide the DOL with the
flexibility and strength to pursue "bigger" cases; and explained
that the bill would apply to the person/entity that commits the
wrongdoing and not necessarily to a parent company, subsidiary
company, or other affiliated company unless such was actually
responsible for the conduct, that he is not aware of anything
illegal going on in Alaska with regard to gasoline pricing, and
that although there are a few "local" antitrust investigations
underway, most of the DOL's antitrust investigations pertain to
multi-state antitrust cases. For example, currently the state
is involved in a multi-state case involving shipping, one
involving liquid crystal displays (LCDs), and one involving
computer memory chips.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG, in response to comments and a
question, noted that AS 01.10.060(a)(8) defines the word,
"person" as:
(8) "person" includes a corporation, company,
partnership, firm, association, organization, business
trust, or society, as well as a natural person;
CHAIR GATTO, after ascertaining that no one else wished to
testify, closed public testimony on HB 87.
1:58:39 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES, speaking as one of HB 87's joint prime
sponsors, moved to report CSHB 87(L&C) out of committee with
individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes.
There being no objection, CSHB 87(L&C) was reported from the
House Judiciary Standing Committee.