Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherBrowse by ChannelAbout the NetworkJoin the NetworkProductsSub-MenuProducts OverviewBlog ProBlog PlusBlog PremierMicrositeSyndication PortalsAbout UsContactSubscribeSupport
Book a Demo
Search
Close

FTC Publishes Final Revisions to HSR Rules:  A New Era of Regulatory Burden

By Michael A. Nemeroff, Jason Reese, Brian McCalmon & Greg Wrobel on October 24, 2024
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

On October 10, 2024, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) released final revisions of the rules that govern filings under the Hart-Scott-Rodino (“HSR”) Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976, as amended (the “Final Rules”). The Final Rules will take effect 90 days after they are ultimately published in the Federal Register.

The FTC scaled back or eliminated several categories of information currently required in HSR forms, but expanded others and added several new categories of information and data. The FTC estimates that completing the revised form will require an additional 68 hours of work per filing. In many cases, it will be much higher than that given the increased regulatory burden and information requests.

1. Major changes in content of HSR forms.

The FTC added several new requirements for information. Among the most significant are the following:

  • Explain the strategic rationale for the proposed transaction.
  • Identify additional minority interest holders, and make additional disclosures with respect to funds, investment groups, and similar entities.
  • Submit a diagram of the transaction (if one exists) and explain all relationships between the entities involved.
  • Provide detailed information and descriptions related to overlaps and supply arrangements within the United States between the parties.
  • Provide English translations of all foreign-language documents.
  • Require separate forms (with different information) for acquiring and acquired parties, and require information about prior acquisitions by acquired parties.

A number of these new requirements could add a significant burden to the filing parties, and some may have implications for companies’ ordinary course of business activities.

2. Requirement of specific transaction terms: filing only on a general letter of intent (“LOI”) or other preliminary agreement no longer permitted unless key terms are described.

The Final Rules no longer permit HSR forms (which trigger the initial waiting period) based only on an executed but non-binding preliminary LOI or basic term sheet if such document does not describe the transaction with specificity.  Currently, parties may file on any signed document, no matter how sparse, that simply evidences a good-faith intent to consummate a transaction. Under the Final Rules, where the parties file on a “preliminary agreement” like an LOI, it must include “some combination of the following terms: the identity of the parties; the structure of the transaction; the scope of what is being acquired; calculation of the purchase price; an estimated closing timeline; employee retention policies, including with respect to key personnel; post-closing governance; and transaction expenses or other material terms.” If it does not, the parties must also submit an additional, dated document (such as a draft agreement or detailed term sheet) that describes the agreement with the requisite specificity.

This new requirement will largely eliminate filing on a basic non-binding LOI where there are not advanced drafts of a purchase agreement or a detailed term sheet already negotiated between the parties.

3. Expanded scope for Item 4(c)/(d) documents to include the identified deal team lead and certain business plans prepared in the ordinary course of business.

The scope of documents responsive to Items 4(c) and 4(d) of the HSR form will be expanded.  Currently, these items require the filing person to submit pertinent documents that were prepared by or for officers or directors (or similar individuals for non-corporate entities). The revised rules cover pertinent documents prepared by or for an identified “supervisory deal team lead,” defined as the non-director/officer individual with “primary responsibility” for supervising the strategic assessment of the deal.

Notably, the Final Rules omit a requirement in the initial proposal that drafts of responsive documents must always be submitted. This would have imposed extraordinarily burdensome obligations on deal teams, as draft documents currently must be submitted only if they were shared with the entire board of directors or similar body. Under the Final Rules, drafts must be submitted if shared with any member of the board.

The revised rules also require submission of certain business plans and reports that analyze market shares, competition, competitors, or markets relating to any product or service sold by the other party. Currently, the filing person is not required to submit its own documents that were prepared in the ordinary course of business (although such documents are commonly requested when the DOJ or FTC opens an initial investigation and requests the voluntary production of documents). In response to comments, however, the Final Rules limit the reporting requirement to those quarterly, semi-annual, or annual plans and reports that were provided to the CEO within one year of the filing date, and any responsive reports (even those not regularly prepared) provided to the board within one year of the filing date.

Going forward, companies should consider this new filing requirement when drafting and distributing ordinary course documents that discuss competition topics, and carefully review characterizations of business segments, markets, competitors and other pertinent topics, recognizing that such documents may have to be submitted to the government with a future HSR filing.

4. Requirement for top customer/supplier information.

Filing parties will now be required to list their top 10 customers for overlapping products, and the top 10 customers and suppliers for products supplied to or purchased from the other party to the transaction. Currently, the agencies request customer and supplier information only in a preliminary investigation opened during the initial 30-day waiting period (when compliance with the request is voluntary), or as part of a formal “Second Request” near the end of the waiting period.

Although the Final Rules decline to adopt an earlier proposal to provide contact information for these customers and suppliers, this new requirement may nonetheless require parties to consider notifying top customers and suppliers that they have been identified in the HSR form. For non-publicly disclosed transactions, disclosure of the potential transaction to such customers and suppliers may need to occur earlier than the parties typically would disclose a proposed transaction. 

5. Impact on timeline for work on HSR filings.

As a result of the dramatic increase in information required, filing parties will likely need to begin work on HSR forms earlier in the transaction process. They may also need to develop and implement well before closing communication plans with key constituencies such as customers, suppliers and employees due to the regulatory process, and to assist in mitigating relationship issues and market rumors.

Photo of Michael A. Nemeroff Michael A. Nemeroff

Michael A. Nemeroff is President and CEO of Vedder Price and Chairman of the Finance & Transactions group. He is also a member of the Executive Committee of the firm’s Board of Directors. He is active in charitable and civic affairs as a…

Michael A. Nemeroff is President and CEO of Vedder Price and Chairman of the Finance & Transactions group. He is also a member of the Executive Committee of the firm’s Board of Directors. He is active in charitable and civic affairs as a Trustee of the Chicago History Museum, a member of the Executive Committee and Board of the Chicago Children’s Choir and a member of the Board of The Wallis Annenberg Center for the Performing Arts in Beverly Hills, California. In addition, Mr. Nemeroff is one of two legal advisors to the G100, an elite international organization of leading Chief Executive Officers from Fortune 500 publicly traded corporations who meet regularly to share practical collective experience about deal making and leadership challenges.

Mr. Nemeroff counsels corporations in mergers and acquisitions transactions and governance matters. He provides private equity firms and hedge funds with experienced direction in leveraged and management buyouts and guides financial institutions in complex finance transactions. Further, Mr. Nemeroff negotiates and structures executive compensation arrangements for companies, management teams, compensation committees and executives. His many clients include Ally Financial, L Squared Capital Partners, RoundTable Healthcare Partners, Citadel Investment Group, Allscripts, CIT Group, Bank of America, The PrivateBank, Oil-Dri Corporation of America, GrubHub, The Duchossois Group, Wynnchurch Capital, Valor Equity Partners and The Edgewater Funds.

Mr. Nemeroff, an authority on M&A and finance matters, makes frequent appearances on CNBC and Bloomberg Television and is often cited in publications such as the Wall Street Journal. He is a member of the American Bar Association, The Commercial Club of Chicago and The Economic Club of Chicago.

Read more about Michael A. NemeroffEmail
Show more Show less
Photo of Jason Reese Jason Reese

Jason W. Reese is an Administrative Shareholder at Vedder Price and Vice Chair of the Finance & Transactions group in the firm’s Los Angeles office.

Email
Photo of Brian McCalmon Brian McCalmon

Brian McCalmon is a Litigation shareholder in Vedder Price’s Washington, DC office, focusing on Antitrust and Consumer Protection. His antitrust practice focuses on conduct and merger investigations and cases brought by the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice, the Federal Trade Commission…

Brian McCalmon is a Litigation shareholder in Vedder Price’s Washington, DC office, focusing on Antitrust and Consumer Protection. His antitrust practice focuses on conduct and merger investigations and cases brought by the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice, the Federal Trade Commission and state attorneys general. He also represents companies in investigations of marketing, advertising, and privacy practices before the FTC and other consumer protection agencies.

Read more about Brian McCalmonEmail
Show more Show less
Photo of Greg Wrobel Greg Wrobel

Gregory G. Wrobel serves as the firm’s Antitrust group leader and maintains a broad litigation and counseling practice covering a range of substantive areas in both federal and state courts.

Email
  • Posted in:
    Administrative
  • Blog:
    Federal Regulatory & Enforcement Insider
  • Organization:
    Vedder Price PC
  • Article: View Original Source

LexBlog, Inc. logo
Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
Real Lawyers
99 Park Row
  • About LexBlog
  • Careers
  • Press
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Privacy Policy
  • Editorial Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Terms of Service
  • RSS Terms of Service
  • Products
  • Blog Pro
  • Blog Plus
  • Blog Premier
  • Microsite
  • Syndication Portals
  • LexBlog Community
  • Resource Center
  • 1-800-913-0988
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
  • Resource Center
  • Blogging 101

New to the Network

  • Beyond the First 100 Days
  • In the Legal Interest
  • Cooking with SALT
  • The Fiduciary Litigator
  • CCN Mexico Report™
Copyright © 2025, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo