Antitrust Laws and Competition Issues

Subterms

    Latest story

    75 Shares110 Views

    One Month into the Trump Presidency

    by

    The president has moved swiftly to remake Washington. But for business leaders, that volatility has often been hard to navigate. In his first month back in office, President Trump has rapidly begun to remake Washington. But with that has come big questions about what’s next.Al Drago for The New York TimesThe good, bad and puzzlingCorporate leaders and investors expected a bit of volatility to accompany President Trump’s second term. In many ways, that’s exactly what has happened one month in, with the radical cutting of the federal government, threats of trade wars and more.But amid a flurry of unexpected announcements — talks over a possible Ukraine peace plan that exclude Kyiv, the retention of tough Biden-era deal guidelines and a potential Elon Musk-enabled stimulus plan, for starters — and a lack of clarity over where Trump stands on a host of issues, many executives are asking themselves: How do we navigate this?Trump has made good on some of his campaign promises. He has vowed to impose tariffs to bolster American manufacturing. He has waged war on diversity, equity and inclusion programs, and more and more companies have fallen into line.And most notably, he has unleashed subordinates and Musk to raze huge portions of the Washington bureaucracy, with some courts refusing to stand in the way. The latest on that: The I.R.S. fired 6,700 workers on the eve of tax-filing season; Trump claimed the power to dismiss administrative law judges at will; and he reportedly plans to take control of the U.S. Postal Service, according to The Washington Post.But there’s a lot that business leaders and others are trying to figure out:Where does Trump actually stand on tariffs? He has spoken of a potential wide-ranging trade deal with China, even as he threatens Europe with huge levies.Trump’s position on Ukraine is increasingly unclear, as he publicly embraces Russia and castigates Kyiv and Europe. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent is said to have pressured President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine to hand over billions’ worth of Ukrainian mineral resources, according to The Wall Street Journal, while Secretary of State Marco Rubio privately told European leaders that Washington wasn’t looking to disrupt the diplomatic status quo.The administration’s antitrust cops have kept in place Biden era merger rules, dampening hopes for a deal resurgence. And despite efforts by tech companies like Meta to forge closer ties to Trump, the Federal Trade Commission’s new chief is weighing a scrutiny of Big Tech over censorship concerns.Trump’s efforts to gain more control over independent agencies may reach further into the Fed, with Musk vaguely promising an audit of the central bank.The president’s floating of potentially inflationary taxpayer payouts, funded by Musk’s government cost-cutting (whose true extent appears to change frequently), is drawing lukewarm support from congressional Republicans.Trump’s legislative agenda is in limbo, with the president splitting Republican lawmakers over matters like the budget.For now, corporate America appears to be along for the ride. A new survey by the Conference Board found that C.E.O. confidence recently reached a three-year peak, reflecting “confident optimism.”Whether that will persist — Americans appear increasingly worried about rising inflation and the Musk cost-cutting — remains to be seen. Stay tuned.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    More stories

    • 138 Shares91 Views

      in Elections

      PGA Tour and LIV Golf Look for Merger Deal Under Trump

      by

      A tie-up involving the tour and LIV Golf was stalled under President Biden. They’re aiming to forge a new agreement under President Trump.The PGA Tour and Saudi Arabia’s sovereign wealth fund are racing to reshape their plans to combine their rival golf circuits, emboldened by President Donald J. Trump’s eagerness to play peacemaker for a fractured sport, according to four people familiar with the matter.Since the start of secret talks in April 2023, PGA Tour executives and their Saudi counterparts have been weighing how they could somehow blend the premier American golf circuit with the Saudis’ LIV Golf operation. But negotiators have struggled to design a deal that would satisfy regulators along with players, investors and executives.Mr. Trump’s return to Washington has offered a new opening: After an Oval Office meeting this month that ethics experts have said tested the bounds of propriety, the two sides are considering options that might have stalled during Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s presidency but that the Trump administration’s antitrust enforcers could offer a friendlier glance.The details of any prospective agreement, including LIV’s fate, remain in flux. In general, regulators would see any transaction that led to the dissolution of one of the leagues as anticompetitive; under Mr. Trump, though, antitrust regulators could take a more relaxed view.The two sides are looking beyond a simple cash transaction, though it is unclear how exactly the deal would be structured. The PGA Tour commissioner, Jay Monahan, has said they are looking at a “reunification,” but there are many complicating factors, including how to value both ventures.There is also the matter of how to handle any deal alongside a separate $1.5 billion investment in the PGA Tour by a band of American sports magnates.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Vance, in First Foreign Speech, Tells Europe That U.S. Will Dominate A.I.

      by

      Speaking in Paris at an artificial intelligence summit, the vice president gave an America First vision of the technology — with the U.S. dominating the chips, the software and the rules.Vice President JD Vance told European and Asian leaders in Paris on Tuesday that the Trump Administration was adopting an aggressive, America First approach to the race to dominate all the building blocks of artificial intelligence, and warned Europeans to dismantle regulations and get aboard with Washington.On his first foreign trip since taking office, Mr. Vance used his opening address at an A.I. summit meeting hosted by France and India to describe his vision of a coming era of American technological domination. Europe, he said, would be forced to chose between using American-designed and manufactured technology or siding with authoritarian competitors — a not-very-veiled reference to China — who would exploit the technology to their detriment.“The Trump administration will ensure that the most powerful A.I. systems are built in the U.S. with American design and manufactured chips,” he said, quickly adding that “just because we are the leader doesn’t mean we want to or need to go it alone.”But he said that for Europe to become what he clearly envisions as a junior partner, it must eliminate much of its digital regulatory structure — and much of its policing of the internet for what its governments define as disinformation.For Mr. Vance, who is on a weeklong tour that will take him next to the Munich Security Conference, Europe’s premier meeting of leaders, foreign and defense ministers and others, the speech was clearly intended as a warning shot. It largely silenced the hall in a wing of the Grand Palais in the center of Paris. Leaders accustomed to talking about “guardrails” for emerging artificial intelligence applications and “equity” to assure the technology is available and comfortable for underserved populations heard none of those phrases from Mr. Vance.He spoke only hours after President Trump put new 25 percent tariffs on foreign steel, essentially negating trade agreements with Europe and other regions. Mr. Vance’s speech, precisely composed and delivered with emphasis, seemed an indicator of the tone Mr. Trump’s national security leaders plan to take to Europe this week.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 100 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Amazon Sued Over Slow Deliveries to Low-Income Areas

      by

      The District of Columbia’s attorney general said the company deliberately outsourced Prime member deliveries in certain ZIP codes.The attorney general of the District of Columbia sued Amazon on Wednesday, accusing it of violating consumer protection laws by making slower deliveries to Prime members in historically lower-income neighborhoods.In one of the first complaints of its kind, which was filed with the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, Attorney General Brian L. Schwalb said Amazon had deliberately and secretly stopped its fastest delivery service to the nearly 50,000 Prime subscribers in certain ZIP codes that were lower-income neighborhoods.According to the lawsuit, Amazon has used third parties like United Parcel Service and the Postal Service to make Prime deliveries in those areas for the past two years. That resulted in slower deliveries than those made by Amazon’s own delivery drivers, who serve other Washington residents.Amazon “cannot covertly decide that a dollar in one ZIP code is worth less than a dollar in another,” Mr. Schwalb said in a statement. “We’re suing to stop this deceptive conduct and make sure District residents get what they’re paying for.”Amazon told Mr. Schwalb that it had made the change because of safety concerns in those neighborhoods, the attorney general said. He said the company had violated consumer protection laws by failing to disclose the change to consumers.Amazon said that it disagreed that it had deceived customers and that it had informed Prime subscribers in those areas about each stage of the delivery process. The company said it tried to work with the office of the attorney general to support crime prevention and improve safety for drivers in those areas.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 100 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Canada Accuses Google of Creating Advertising Tech Monopoly

      by

      The case largely echoes an antitrust action in the United States and seeks to force Google to sell off sections of its online ad business.Canada’s competition authority on Thursday accused Google of abusing its tools for buying and selling online advertising to create a monopoly, and filed a complaint seeking to force the company to sell two of its main advertising technology services.The case strikes at the heart of Google’s business and echoes an ongoing U.S. antitrust lawsuit against the Silicon Valley giant.Both cases come amid four other lawsuits filed in the United States against Google since 2020 and other efforts by officials around the world to reign in the power that large technological companies like Google, Amazon and Apple hold over information and commerce online.Canada is also attempting to use new laws to limit harms caused by social media and to require tech companies to compensate traditional news organizations.In a statement, Canada’s Bureau of Competition Policy, a law enforcement agency, charged that Google has used its position as the largest provider of software for buying and selling ads, its marketplace for ad auctions and its services for showcasing the ads to illegally dominate the sector.The company’s conduct, it said, ensured that the Alphabet-owned Google “would maintain and entrench its market power,” adding that it “locks market participants into using its own ad tech tools, prevents rivals from being able to compete on the merits of their offering.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      U.S. Plans to Propose Breakup of Google to Fix Search Monopoly

      by

      In a landmark antitrust case, the government will ask a judge to force the company to sell its popular Chrome browser, people with knowledge of the matter said.The Justice Department and a group of states plan to ask a federal court late Wednesday to force Google to sell Chrome, its popular web browser, two people with knowledge of the decision said, a move that could fundamentally alter the $2 trillion company’s business and reshape competition on the internet.The request would follow a landmark ruling in August by Judge Amit P. Mehta of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia that found Google had illegally maintained a monopoly in online search. Judge Mehta asked the Justice Department and the states that brought the antitrust case to submit solutions by the end of Wednesday to correct the search monopoly.Beyond the sale of Chrome, the government is set to ask Judge Mehta to bar Google from entering into paid agreements with Apple and others to be the automatic search engine on smartphones and in browsers, the people said. Google should also be required to share data with rivals, they said.The proposals would likely be the most significant remedies to be requested in a tech antitrust case since the Justice Department asked to break up Microsoft in 2000. If Judge Mehta adopts the proposals, they will set the tone for a string of other antitrust cases that challenge the dominance of tech behemoths including Apple, Amazon and Meta.Being forced to sell Chrome would be among the worst possible outcomes for Google. Chrome, which is free to use, is the most popular web browser in the world and part of an elaborate Google ecosystem that keeps people using the company’s products. Google’s search engine is bundled into Chrome.Google is set to file its own suggestions for fixing the search monopoly by Dec. 20. Both sides can modify their requests before Judge Mehta is expected to hear arguments on the remedies this spring. He is expected to rule by the end of the summer.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 88 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Is the Biden Administration Coming for Chrome?

      by

      The Justice Department is reportedly targeting Google’s web browser as its antitrust enforcers seek to cement a major win before Donald Trump takes office.Can the Biden administration’s antitrust enforcers succeed in breaking up Google before they leave office?Josh Edelson/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesA parting antitrust shot by Biden’s enforcersBefore the Biden administration’s antitrust leaders step down, they’re taking their final shots at Big Tech. That will reportedly include an effort to break up Google as a consequence of the Justice Department’s successful competition lawsuit against the company.A forthcoming request to force the sale of the Chrome browser, according to Bloomberg, would be one of the most sweeping competition demands in years. But it will also be a test of the second Trump administration’s own antitrust agenda.Chrome is a crucial part of Google’s business. The industry’s dominant web browser — it controls about 61 percent of the U.S. market, according to Bloomberg — is a potent data-collection portal, steering people to the company’s search engine. That gives Google the ability to track users when they are signed in, and can be used to for targeted ads.Chrome has also become a gateway for Google’s A.I. services, including its Gemini chatbot, which some say could eventually follow user activity across the web.The Justice Department decided against requesting the divestiture of Google’s Android smartphone operating system, Bloomberg reports. But it wants the company to stop bundling it with services including search and the Google Play app store.If successful, the split would cement a crucial legacy for Biden’s antitrust team. It’s unclear how much of the aggressive approach promoted by Lina Khan of the F.T.C. and Jonathan Kanter of the Justice Department will survive. A Chrome divestiture would achieve the kind of corporate breakup that regulators failed to force upon Microsoft two decades ago.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 100 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      What Can the Department of Government Efficiency Do?

      by

      President-elect Trump has indicated the entity will operate outside the government, a position that comes with legal limits.In between the cabinet nominations that President-elect Donald Trump announced this week was an unusual appointment: Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy will lead a newly created Department of Government Efficiency.While Trump has not detailed how the entity will operate, he said in a statement that it would “slash excess regulations, cut wasteful expenditures and restructure federal agencies” and “provide advice and guidance from outside of government.”Conventionally, what outsiders can do in the government has been pretty limited. But with Trump and Musk both known for pushing boundaries, it’s not clear what “DOGE” will look like.The federal code’s primary conflict-of-interest law is a big deterrent to adopting government authority. It bans government employees from participating in government matters where they have a financial stake. But it doesn’t apply to outside contractors or advisers, which could be important to Musk, whose businesses interact with many federal agencies and who would most likely be required to make divestments if he became a federal employee.Things get complicated if an outsider acts on behalf of the government. Just saying you’re not a government employee doesn’t mean the law will treat you that way, even if you’re not paid. Acting like a government employee — for example, by managing government employees — may open the door to being charged with a felony under the conflict-of-interest law.“What he shouldn’t do is pretend he’s not a government employee and then come in there and start running around acting like a government employee — supervising government employees, giving orders, performing the functions of a government employee,” Richard Painter, who was the principal lawyer responsible for clearing financial conflicts of interest in the George W. Bush administration, said of Musk.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Tapestry and Capri End Plans for ‘Accessible Luxury’ Merger

      by

      Tapestry, the owner of Coach, said it would abandon its $8.5 billion deal to buy Capri, the parent company of Michael Kors, after the Federal Trade Commission successfully sued to stop the transaction.An attempt to assemble an “accessible luxury” powerhouse in the United States has unraveled.Tapestry, the owner of Coach and Kate Spade, and Capri Holdings, the parent company of Versace and Michael Kors, on Thursday called off their plan to merge, which was first announced last year. The Federal Trade Commission had sued to block the $8.5 billion deal last spring over antitrust concerns, and a federal judge sided with the agency last month.At the center of the F.TC’s case was a worry that consumers would end up paying more for the relatively less expensive handbags and other fashion items sold by Coach, Kate Spade and Michael Kors in what the industry calls the accessible luxury market.While Tapestry and Capri argued that it was not a defined category, the federal judge ruled that accessible luxury handbags appeared to have traits that distinguished them from true luxury brands. The court determined that the category was defined by bags that start with a price of about $100 and “heavily rely on discounting.”Tapestry and Capri said that they had “mutually agreed that terminating the merger agreement was in the best interests of both companies.” The decision to abandon their appeal suggested that the companies were not more optimistic about a judge’s ruling under the Trump administration, and that they did not think putting in the time and money required by a lengthy appeal process would result in a viable pathway to acquisition.“We are now focusing on the future of Capri and our three iconic luxury houses,” John Idol, Capri’s chief executive, said in a statement. Mr. Idol stressed Capri’s strong customer loyalty and store base, with more than 1,200 retail locations worldwide.Joanne Crevoiserat, the chief executive of Tapestry, said in a statement that “we have always had multiple paths to growth, and our decision today clarifies the forward strategy.”“Tapestry remains in a position of strength,” she added.Tapestry also said its board had approved a program in which the company would buy an additional $2 billion of its own shares.The company’s shares rose about 10 percent, and shares of Capri fell 4 percent, in early trading on Thursday. More