Early Termination of Merger Reviews "Temporarily" Suspended
Client Alert | 1 min read | 02.04.21
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Department of Justice (DOJ) announced today that the agencies will stop granting “early termination” (ET) requests in premerger reviews so they can review the procedures for granting ET. The agencies describe this move as a “temporary suspension,” but did not provide any description of the procedures under review or a timeline for resumption of the normal process.
When the parties to a transaction file a Hart-Scott-Rodino (HSR) Act premerger notification form with the FTC and DOJ, they may request that the review be completed before the end of the 30-day waiting period. If a transaction receives ET, the deal may close at any time after that ET notice is received. Grants of ET are entirely discretionary and not guaranteed, but they are routine in transactions (such as private equity investments) that obviously raise no competitive issues.
The FTC cited the transition to a new administration, as well as the record number of HSR filings received at the close of the 2020 calendar year, as reasons for the suspension of ET. In a dissenting statement from two FTC commissioners, the reasoning is further described as “a desire to avoid inadvertently allowing potentially anticompetitive transactions to evade scrutiny during a period of political transition, a heightened number of HSR filings, and the ongoing COVID-19 emergency.” The dissent describes this motivation as “unpersuasive” and argues that transactions with no apparent competitive concern will be delayed, and businesses and consumers will be harmed.
The agencies last issued a temporary suspension of ETs at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020, which lasted two weeks (March 16 to March 30, 2020). There has been no indication of when the current suspension will end.
Click here to read the FTC’s press release. Click here to read the dissenting statement by Commissioners Noah Joshua Phillips and Christine S. Wilson.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.12.26
DOJ Guidance Backs Away From Disparate Impact Liability
On June 9, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) issued a formal opinion concluding that the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission’s (EEOC) existing interpretations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) disparate-impact liability, including the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (UGESP), are unconstitutional. According to the opinion, EEOC’s prior interpretations contemplate liability based on disproportionately adverse effects alone, without regard to an employer’s likely intent, rather than treating disparate impact as an evidentiary mechanism to “smoke out” intentional discrimination. DOJ found that this approach functions as a “qualified racial-proportionality mandate” that places “a racial thumb on the scales, often requiring employers to evaluate the racial outcomes of their policies, and to make decisions based on (because of) those racial outcomes.” The opinion fulfills one mandate of Executive Order 14281, which rejected disparate-impact liability insofar as it “creates a near insurmountable presumption that unlawful discrimination exists wherever there are any differences in outcomes among different [demographic groups].”
Client Alert | 4 min read | 06.12.26
Auto Dealers: The FTC Is Back in the Driver’s Seat — Warning Letters Signal Renewed Federal Scrutiny
Client Alert | 13 min read | 06.12.26
Client Alert | 4 min read | 06.12.26
