  A prevalent assumption in auction theory is that the auctioneer has full
control over the market and that the allocation she dictates is final. In
practice, however, agents might be able to resell acquired items in an
aftermarket. A prominent example is the market for carbon emission allowances.
These allowances are commonly allocated by the government using uniform-price
auctions, and firms can typically trade these allowances among themselves in an
aftermarket that may not be fully under the auctioneer's control. While the
uniform-price auction is approximately efficient in isolation, we show that
speculation and resale in aftermarkets might result in a significant welfare
loss. Motivated by this issue, we consider three approaches, each ensuring high
equilibrium welfare in the combined market. The first approach is to adopt
smooth auctions such as discriminatory auctions. This approach is robust to
correlated valuations and to participants acquiring information about others'
types. However, discriminatory auctions have several downsides, notably that of
charging bidders different prices for identical items, resulting in fairness
concerns that make the format unpopular. Two other approaches we suggest are
either using posted-pricing mechanisms, or using uniform-price auctions with
anonymous reserves. We show that when using balanced prices, both these
approaches ensure high equilibrium welfare in the combined market. The latter
also inherits many of the benefits from uniform-price auctions such as price
discovery, and can be introduced with a minor modification to auctions
currently in use to sell carbon emission allowances.
