Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Venturing and Entrepreneurship (벤처창업연구)

The Korean Society of Business Venturing (한국벤처창업학회)
권호 표지

The Economic Cost of the Fair Online Platform Intermediary Transactions Act: A Comparative Case Study

디지털 플랫폼 규제의 경제적 비용: '온라인 플랫폼 공정화법(안)' 사례 연구

  • Ahn, Yongkil (Department of Business Administration, Seoul National University of Science and Technology) ;
  • Kim, Yonghwan (Naver Agenda Resarch) ;
  • Song, Myungjin (Research Team Leader, Startup Alliance)
  • 안용길 (서울과학기술대학교 경영학과) ;
  • 김용환 (네이버 Agenda Research) ;
  • 송명진 (스타트업얼라이언스 리서치팀)
  • Received : 2022.08.11
  • Accepted : 2022.10.18
  • Published : 2022.10.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

On September 28, 2020, the Korea Fair Trade Commission introduced a proposed bill entitled the "Fair Online Platform Intermediary Transactions Act." We quantify the impact of this proposed act on Naver, Korea's major digital platform. Finding a proper control unit is not an easy task in social science studies. We overcome this caveat by constructing a synthetic version of Naver using Abadie & Gardeazabal's (2003) synthetic control method. It appears that the economic cost of the proposed act is not negligible at all. Naver's opportunity loss amounted to 16.18% of its market capitalization (approximately 8.5 trillion won in comparison with its pre-regulation market capitalization). Any regulation-based approaches to resolving digital platform issues have both promises and pitfalls. The results highlight that regulatory bodies should carefully gauge the impact of such regulations, as we have seen with Naver's case.

본 연구는 '온라인 플랫폼 공정화법(안)'(이하 '온플법(안)')이 디지털 플랫폼 기업들의 시장 가치에 미친 영향을 네이버의 사례를 통해 계량 분석한다. 우리는 Abadie & Gardeazabal(2003)의 통제집단합성법(synthetic control method)을 사용하여 '온플법(안)' 규제를 받지 않는 가상의 네이버의 기업가치를 추정하여 실제 네이버의 기업가치와 비교하였다. '온플법(안)' 입법예고 직전 기간 '온플법(안)' 적용대상인 실제 네이버와 '온플법(안)' 규제를 받지 않는 가상의 네이버의 주가 움직임을 일치시켜 다양한 복합 효과(compounding effects)를 통제했다. 연구 결과 '온플법(안)' 입법예고 기간 (2020년 9월 28일 ~ 2020년 11월 9일) 전후로 네이버는 '온플법(안)' 규제 전 시가 총액의 16.18%인 약 8조 5천억 원에 달하는 기업 가치를 상실한 것으로 나타났다. 지금까지 규제의 경제적 비용편익분석을 할 때 간접비용 부분은 정량화된 분석이 용이하지 못하다는 이유로 간과되는 것이 사실이다. 우리는 향후 다양한 규제에 대한 사회적/경제적 비용편익분석에서 참조할 수 있도록, 자본시장 정보를 통해 특정 규제가 기업의 경제적 가치에 미치는 영향을 엄밀하게 추정할 수 있는 방법론과 실제 사례를 제시했다. 분석 방법과 기간에 따라 경제적 비용은 달라지겠지만, 본 연구의 결과는 디지털 플랫폼에 대한 규제 영향 분석의 방향을 제시하는데 효시가 될 수 있다.

Keywords

References

  1. Abadie, A., & Gardeazabal, J.(2003). The economic costs of conflict: a case study of the Basque country. American Economic Review, 93(1), 113-132. https://doi.org/10.1257/000282803321455188
  2. Abadie, A., Diamond, A., & Hainmueller, J.(2015). Comparative politics and the synthetic control method. American Journal of Political Science, 59(2), 495-510. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12116
  3. Ahn, H. K.(2014). Measures to Enhance the Effectiveness of a Regulatory Impact Analysis System, Korea Institute of Public Administration, 1-155.
  4. Ahn, Y.(2021). The economic cost of a fat finger mistake: a comparative case study from Samsung Securities's ghost stock blunder. Journal of Operational Risk, 16(2), 49-60.
  5. Altman, E. I.(1984). A further empirical investigation of the bankruptcy cost question. The Journal of Finance, 39(4), 1067-1089. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1984.tb03893.x
  6. Carhart, M. M.(1997). On persistence in mutual fund performance. The Journal of Finance, 52(1), 57-82. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1997.tb03808.x
  7. Choi, B. S.(1992). The Theory of Government Regulation. Seoul. Bakmunsa.
  8. Choi, B. S., Kim, C. W., & Cho, W., Y.(2014). Platform: Change Management. Seoul: Samsung Economic Research Institute.
  9. Choi, S. R., & Lee, H. Y.(2020). A Study on the Current Status and Limitations of the Cost-Benefit Analysis Section of the Regulatory Impact Analysis Report. Regulation Research, 29(1),3-34.
  10. Constantinides, P., Henfridsson, O., & Parker, G. G.(2018). Introduction-platforms and infrastructures in the digital age. Information Systems Research, 29(2), 381-400. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2018.0794
  11. Crain, W. M., & Crain, N. V.(2014). The cost of federal regulation to the US economy, manufacturing and small business. National Association of Manufacturers.
  12. Cutler, D., & Summers, L.(1988). The Costs of Conflict Resolution and Financial Distress: Evidence from the Texaco-Pennzoil Litigation. RAND Journal of Economics, 19(2), 157-172. https://doi.org/10.2307/2555697
  13. De Reuver, M., Sorensen, C., & Basole, R. C.(2018). The digital platform: a research agenda. Journal of information technology, 33(2), 124-135. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41265-016-0033-3
  14. Fama, E. F.(1970). Efficient capital markets: A review of theory and empirical work. The Journal of Finance, 25(2), 383-417. https://doi.org/10.2307/2325486
  15. Fama, E. F., & French, K. R.(1993). Common risk factors in the returns on stocks and bonds. Journal of Financial Economics, 33(1), 3-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(93)90023-5
  16. Francesco, F. D.(2012). Diffusion of regulatory impact analysis among OECD and EU member states. Comparative Political Studies, 45(10), 1277-1305. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414011434297
  17. Gray, W. B.(1987). The cost of regulation: OSHA, EPA and the productivity slowdown. The American Economic Review, 77(5), 998-1006.
  18. Hill, S., Ionescu-Somers, A., Coduras, A., Guerrero, M., Roomi, M. A., Bosma, N.,Sahasranamam, S. & Shay, J.(2022). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2021/2022 Global Report: Opportunity Amid Disruption. In Expo 2020 Dubai.
  19. Hyeon, D. H.(2009). Studies on the Improvement of the Legal System concerning the Expansion of Self-Regulation(I), Korea Legislation Research Institute.
  20. Jegadeesh, N.(1990). Evidence of predictable behavior of security returns. The Journal of finance, 45(3), 881-898. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1990.tb05110.x
  21. Jegadeesh, N., & Titman, S.(1993). Returns to buying winners and selling losers: Implications for stock market efficiency. The Journal of Finance, 48(1), 65-91. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1993.tb04702.x
  22. Jeon, S. M.(2014). Feasibility of the Crowd Funding Platforms for Start-Ups: With Focus on Information Goods. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Venturing and Entrepreneurship, 9(1), 97-105. https://doi.org/10.16972/APJBVE.9.1.201402.97
  23. Jeon, S. M., & Pak, D. H.(2020). An Exploratory Study on Fintech Regulations and Start-ups: Focusing on the US, China, and Korea Cases. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Venturing and Entrepreneurship, 15(1), 45-57. https://doi.org/10.16972/APJBVE.15.1.202002.45
  24. Kahane, L. H., & Sannicandro, P.(2019). The impact of 1998 Massachusetts gun laws on suicide: a synthetic control approach. Economics Letters, 174, 104-108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2018.11.004
  25. Kim J. K., & Yoo S. H.(2021). Cost-benefit Analysis for Estimating the Effect of the Fair Online Platform Intermediary Transactions Act. Science & Technology Policy, 4(2), 213-249.
  26. Kim, J. H., & Kim, D. H.(2021). The Benefits of Digital Platform on Complementors: A Systemic Review of the Literature. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Venturing and Entrepreneurship,16(3), 159-175. https://doi.org/10.16972/APJBVE.16.3.202106.159
  27. Kim, Y. H.(2019). Improving the Use of Cost-Benefit Analysis in Regulatory Impact Assessments by Reforming Legal Structures. Public Law, 48(2),241-276. https://doi.org/10.38176/PublicLaw.2019.12.48.2.241
  28. Lehmann, B. N.(1990). Fads, martingales, and market efficiency. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 105(1), 1-28. https://doi.org/10.2307/2937816
  29. Song, M.(2022). Digital platform and regulation, Local Self-government Issue and Forum, 42, 44-55. Wonju-si; Korea Research Institute for Local Administration.
  30. Stigler, G. J.(1971). The theory of economic regulation. The Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science, 3-21.
  31. The Asan Nanum Foundation, Google for Startups, Startup Alliance, Korea Startup Forum(2019). Startup ecosystem activation research, Seoul: The Asan Nanum Foundation, Google for Startups, Startup Alliance, Korea Startup Forum.
  32. The Korea Fair Trade Commission(2020). Public Hearings on the Fair Online Platform Intermediary Transactions Act, Retrieved on 2022.10.21. from http://www.ftc.go.kr/www/selectReportUserView.do?key=10&rpttype=1&report_data_no=8677
  33. Van Alstyne, M.W., Choudary, S.P., & Parker., G. G.(2017). Platform Revolution, How Networked Markets Are Transforming the Economy-and How to Make Them Work for You, Seoul: Bookie.
  34. Yoo, B. J., & Jeon, S. M.(2014). An Empirical Analysis of the Regulation Effects on Webboard Games using VECM. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Venturing and Entrepreneurship, 9(6), 109-115. https://doi.org/10.16972/APJBVE.9.6.201412.109
  35. Yoo, B. J., Jeon, S. M., & Kang, H. G.(2021). The Economic Impact of the Enactment of the Fair Online Platform Intermediary Transactions Act and the Amendments to the Act on the Consumer Protection in Electronic Commerce, Joint Conference on the Fair Online Platform Intermediary Transactions Act and the Amendments to the Act on the Consumer Protection in Electronic Commerce. Seoul: The Korean Society of Business Venturing and Entrepreneurship and the Korean Association of Law and Politics.