Tag Archives: merger notification

Notification Threshold Under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act Increased to $78.2 Million

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) recently announced increased thresholds for the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976 (HSR) and 2016 thresholds for determining whether parties trigger the prohibition against interlocking directors under Section 8 of the Clayton Act. Read the full article.… Continue Reading

Notification Threshold Under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act Increased to $76.3 Million

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) recently announced increased thresholds for the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976 (HSR) and 2015 thresholds for determining whether parties trigger the prohibition against interlocking directors under Section 8 of the Clayton Act. Notification Threshold Adjustments Pursuant to the amendments passed by the U.S. Congress in 2000, the FTC … Continue Reading

German Federal Cartel Office Levies Administrative Fine Due to Incomplete Merger Notification

by Martina Maier, Philipp Werner and Robert Bäuerle The German Federal Cartel Office (FCO) has imposed an administrative fine for the submission of incomplete information in a merger notification.  The missing information concerned details about shareholdings essential for the competitive assessment analysis.  The shareholdings belong to a private individual who controlled the notifying party.  Companies … Continue Reading

China Streamlines Antitrust Notification Process

by Henry L.T. Chen, Frank Schonveld and Brian Fu The Ministry of Commerce of China (MOFCOM) recently promulgated a new amended merger notification form along with instructions for completing the form.  In doing so, MOFCOM aims to further regulate the procedures regarding antitrust review of large mergers, acquisitions and joint ventures; to promote transparency in … Continue Reading

The Top Five (Avoidable) Antitrust Traps in M&A Transactions

by Jon B. Dubrow, Joseph F. Winterscheid and Carla A. R. Hine In M&A transactions, early involvement of antitrust counsel is essential to avoid unnecessary expense, delay and antitrust risks.  Failure to involve antitrust counsel early on in the process may not only jeopardize the parties’ ability to obtain antitrust clearance, but it can also … Continue Reading
LexBlog