{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.009439200444197668, 'fraction_numerical': 0.001110494169905608, 'mean_word_length': 5.749063670411985, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Antitrust compliance: system standardization issues

The article examines the etymology and prehistory of the introduction of the institution of antimonopoly compliance in Russian business practice, the relationship of this institution with the institution of general compliance. The article considers the definition of the concept of antimonopoly compliance, enshrined in the new article 91 of the Federal Law "On Protection of Competition".The authors propose their own definition of the concept of antimonopoly compliance as an activity of an economic entity aimed at ensuring compliance with antimonopoly legislation by employees of an economic entity and an economic entity as a whole by preventing and suppressing violations of the requirements of such legislation and regulatory legal and law enforcement acts based on it.The authors also substantiate the advisability of developing a special national standard GOST R "System of internal compliance with the requirements of antimonopoly legislation (antimonopoly compliance system) of an economic entity".It is noted that the effectiveness of the antimonopoly compliance system will depend not only on the ability of an economic entity to form an antimonopoly compliance system on the basis of an appropriate national standard, but also on the state's ability to determine and guarantee effective incentives to comply with antimonopoly legislation.The authors substantiate the advisability of supplementing the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation with provisions that provide for the obligation and limits to reduce the amount of punishment or replace the punishment with a softer one in the event of an anticompetitive administrative offense by a person who has implemented an effective system of antimonopoly compliance.