FTC Announces Annual Update to HSR and Section 8 Thresholds
Client Alert | 2 min read | 01.13.25
The Federal Trade Commission has announced its annual updates to the thresholds and filing fees related to the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976 (the HSR Act). These dollar thresholds are indexed annually based on changes in the U.S. gross national product and the Consumer Price Index.
The HSR Act requires that certain transactions be notified prior to their consummation. This year, the “size-of-transaction" threshold for reporting mergers and acquisitions under the HSR Act will increase from $119.5 million to $126.4 million. In addition, the "size-of-person" threshold, the filing fee thresholds, and the fee schedule will all also increase. The new filing fee thresholds and fee schedule are as follows:
|
2025 Filing Fee |
2025 Size of Transaction |
|
$30,000 |
Less than $179.4 million |
|
$105,000 |
Not less than $179.4 million but less than $555.5 million |
|
$265,000 |
Not less than $555.5 million but less than $1.111 billion |
|
$425,000 |
Not less than $1.111 billion but less than $2.222 billion |
|
$850,000 |
Not less than $2.222 billion but less than $5.555 billion |
|
$2,390,000 |
$5.555 billion or more |
The Commission also issued revised thresholds relating to the prohibition of certain interlocking directorates under Section 8 of the Clayton Act.
The revised thresholds were published in the Federal Register on January 22, 2025, and become effective thirty days after publication on February 21, 2025. Click here to read a full copy of the Commission's announcement, including a complete listing of the revised thresholds. Click here for a copy of the FTC’s announcement and information regarding the Clayton Act, Section 8 thresholds.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.12.25
Eleventh Circuit Hears Argument on False Claims Act Qui Tam Constitutionality
On the morning of December 12, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit heard argument in United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC, et al., No. 24-13581 (11th Cir. 2025). This case concerns the constitutionality of the False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam provisions and a groundbreaking September 2024 opinion in which the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida held that the FCA’s qui tam provisions were unconstitutional under Article II. See United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Fla. Med. Assocs., LLC, 751 F. Supp. 3d 1293 (M.D. Fla. 2024). That decision, penned by District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, was the first success story for a legal theory that has been gaining steam ever since Justices Thomas, Barrett, and Kavanaugh indicated they would be willing to consider arguments about the constitutionality of the qui tam provisions in U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Exec. Health Res., 599 U.S. 419 (2023). In her opinion, Judge Mizelle held (1) qui tam relators are officers of the U.S. who must be appointed under the Appointments Clause; and (2) historical practice treating qui tam and similar relators as less than “officers” for constitutional purposes was not enough to save the qui tam provisions from the fundamental Article II infirmity the court identified. That ruling was appealed and, after full briefing, including by the government and a bevy of amici, the litigants stepped up to the plate this morning for oral argument.
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.11.25
Director Squires Revamps the Workings of the U.S. Patent Office
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.10.25
Creativity You Can Use: CJEU Clarifies Copyright for Applied Art
Client Alert | 4 min read | 12.10.25
Federal Court Strikes Down Interior Order Suspending Wind Energy Development
