Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 10 FEBRUARY 2021

New Year, New Thresholds For Premerger Notifications Under Hart-Scott-Rodino Act

Duane Morris LLP
Duane Morris LLP
Contributor
Explore more from Duane Morris LLP

On February 2, 2021, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) published its annual change to the jurisdictional thresholds for premerger notification under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act.

United StatesAntitrust/Competition Law
Edward Biester III
Edward Biester III
Sean P. McConnell
Sean P. McConnell
Author LinkedIn connections

On February 2, 2021, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) published its annual change to the jurisdictional thresholds for premerger notification under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act (HSR Act). The FTC revises the thresholds to stay consistent with changes to gross national product (GNP), and this year's thresholds are lower than last year. The changes apply to transactions closing on or after March 4, 2021.

The HSR Act requires both acquiring and acquired persons to file notification forms including certain documents with the FTC and Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice, and observe certain waiting periods before consummating a covered transaction. This process allows these agencies to screen transactions for potential anticompetitive effects and to determine whether to challenge such transactions under the antitrust laws. The basic filing threshold, $94 million in 2020, will fall slightly to $92 million, taking into account last

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

Disclaimer: This Alert has been prepared and published for informational purposes only and is not offered, nor should be construed, as legal advice. For more information, please see the firm's full disclaimer.

View source

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

Booking Holdings v. Commission: General Court Clears The Way For Reverse Leveraging

The General Court of the European Union has upheld the European Commission's prohibition of Booking Holdings' acquisition of eTraveli Group, endorsing for the first time a 'reverse leveraging' theory of harm in conglomerate mergers. This landmark judgment establishes that dominant companies can be blocked from acquiring complementary businesses even when the target operates in a market where the acquirer lacks dominance, fundamentally reshaping merger control enforcement in digital and ecosystem-driven mark
United StatesAntitrust/Competition Law
Baker Botts L.L.P.
Baker Botts L.L.P.
Article

KKR Agrees To Historic $250 Million Penalty For Alleged Violations Of HSR...

The Department of Justice announced a landmark $250 million settlement with KKR & Co. for allegedly submitting deficient Hart-Scott-Rodino Act notification forms across at least 16 transactions. This unprecedented penalty, the largest ever for HSR violations, raises critical questions about merger notification compliance obligations and the consequences of systemic noncompliance with federal antitrust review requirements.
United StatesAntitrust/Competition Law
Bracewell LLP
Bracewell LLP
Article

Recent Significant Federal Merger Enforcement Developments

The Justice Department has resumed targeted Second Request investigations to expedite merger reviews, while major entertainment industry consolidation faces legal challenges and the FTC secures record penalties for Hart-Scott-Rodino Act violations. These developments signal a shifting landscape in federal merger enforcement, balancing efficiency with rigorous antitrust scrutiny across multiple industries.
United StatesAntitrust/Competition Law
Wiggin and Dana LLP
Wiggin and Dana LLP
Article

DHS Proposes $70,000 And $30,000 Fees For F-1 Optional Practical Training

The Department of Homeland Security has proposed a controversial new rule requiring SEVP-certified schools to pay substantial fees—$70,000 for a student's first Optional Practical Training recommendation and $30,000 for each subsequent OPT application, including STEM extensions. With only a 30-day comment period and potential annual costs reaching up to $16.5 billion across nearly 2,500 affected institutions, the proposed regulation is expected to face significant legal challenges if finalized.
United StatesImmigration
Duane Morris LLP
Duane Morris LLP
Article

SEC Proposes Rule Amendments To Expand Retail Access To Private Markets

The SEC has proposed sweeping amendments to expand retail investor access to private market strategies, including changes to performance-based compensation rules for registered investment advisers and modernization of the interval fund framework. The proposals also explore new credential-based pathways for individuals to qualify as accredited investors, potentially opening private offerings to a broader pool of eligible participants.
United StatesFinance and Banking
Duane Morris LLP
Duane Morris LLP
Video

The Class Action Weekly Wire – Episode 168: Maryland Federal Court Dismisses ‘Drip Pricing’ Class Action Against Ticket Reseller (Video)

A federal court in Maryland recently ruled on a consumer protection class action against Vivid Seats involving allegations of "drip pricing" - the practice of advertising ticket prices without mandatory fees that are revealed later in checkout. While the court found the company's arbitration agreement unenforceable due to its unilateral modification clause, it ultimately dismissed the lawsuit for failure to adequately allege reliance or injury under Maryland's Consumer Protection Act.
United StatesConsumer Protection
Duane Morris LLP
Duane Morris LLP
Article

California Court Of Appeal Finds That An Employment Arbitration Agreement Entered Into “Freely And Voluntarily” Actually Was Forced, Illegal, And Invalid Under California Law

The California Court of Appeal ruled that requiring employees to sign arbitration agreements as a condition of employment violates California Labor Code section 432.6 when the Federal Arbitration Act does not apply. The court found that even agreements stating they are "voluntary" on their face may be unenforceable if evidence shows employees had no real choice but to sign or seek other employment.
United StatesEmployment and HR
Duane Morris LLP
Duane Morris LLP