Bill Overview
Title: Prohibiting Anticompetitive Mergers Act of 2022
Description: This bill prohibits certain business mergers, modifies the procedures for reviewing mergers, and establishes procedures for reversing certain mergers. Specifically, the bill prohibits mergers that (1) are valued at more than $5 billion in total assets, (2) result in the acquiring entity having a market share of greater than 33% (or a share of a labor market as an employer of greater than 25%), or (3) result in market concentration levels that exceed specified thresholds. The bill also expands the authority of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ) to review pending mergers, including whether a merger is likely to harm the competitive process and the effect of a merger on relevant labor markets. Finally, the bill authorizes the FTC and the Antitrust Division of the DOJ to retroactively unwind mergers that are prohibited under the bill or that meet certain other anticompetitive criteria such as a merger that results in a greater than 50% share of a relevant market.
Sponsors: Sen. Warren, Elizabeth [D-MA]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals impacted by corporate mergers and antitrust activities
Estimated Size: 250000000
- The bill targets anticompetitive mergers, which typically involve large corporations with significant market values exceeding $5 billion.
- Such mergers can involve various industries, meaning that various stakeholders within different sectors— from consumers to labor forces— can be affected.
- The modification of review procedures not only affects the corporations but also influences competitive dynamics in industries, potentially leading to more varied and competitive markets.
- The ability to retroactively unwind mergers means existing large entities could be separated, changing industry landscapes.
- Increased authority to review mergers could lead to more stringent checks on market monopolization, potentially benefitting smaller businesses and new market entrants.
Reasoning
- The Prohibiting Anticompetitive Mergers Act of 2022 primarily targets large corporations with significant market power, potentially affecting industries like technology, pharmaceuticals, and telecommunications.
- The legislation can lead to more competitive markets by preventing dominant mergers and breaking up existing monopolies, which can benefit consumers with better prices and product choices.
- Employees in industries dominated by a few large employers may have more labor market competition, potentially improving job conditions and wages.
- The policy could lead to economic restructuring, benefitting small- to medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and local businesses, which increases market dynamics and innovation.
- Within the budget limits, the policy has to focus on significant but select high-impact cases to ensure the most effective economic outcomes.
Simulated Interviews
Software Engineer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've seen how these big tech mergers can stifle competition and innovation.
- This policy might give smaller companies a better chance to grow, which is good for the industry.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 3 |
Media Analyst (New York, NY)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could significantly impact major media mergers, affecting market dynamics.
- Unwinding large mergers might lead to more diverse media content and benefits to consumers.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
Healthcare Professional (Boston, MA)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Pharmaceutical mergers are a big issue as they can reduce drug innovation and increase prices.
- This policy could lead to more drug options and better pricing.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 3 |
Small Business Owner (Cleveland, OH)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 17/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Big mergers have hurt local businesses by creating overwhelming competition.
- Stronger controls could level the playing field for small businesses like mine.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Freelancer (Houston, TX)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Tech and platform companies dominate freelancer opportunities, reducing negotiating power.
- This policy might increase competition and opportunities for freelancers.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Union Representative (Chicago, IL)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Job security is at risk when companies merge, especially in terms of reducing workforce.
- This policy could protect jobs by keeping companies in check.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 2 |
Student (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 23 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Anticompetitive mergers harm consumers and economy.
- This bill supports fair competition and benefits economic growth.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Retired (Seattle, WA)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 16/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Corporate mergers reduce consumer choices and rights.
- This policy could restore fairness in consumer markets.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Telecom Manager (Dallas, TX)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Telecom mergers often restrict competition and lead to high consumer prices.
- Restricting such mergers can benefit the market and consumer options.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Financial Analyst (Miami, FL)
Age: 47 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could lead to more careful and justified mergers.
- Reduces risks of poor market health and overly large conglomerates.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 3 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $1000000000 (Low: $800000000, High: $1200000000)
Year 2: $1050000000 (Low: $850000000, High: $1250000000)
Year 3: $1100000000 (Low: $900000000, High: $1300000000)
Year 5: $1200000000 (Low: $1000000000, High: $1400000000)
Year 10: $1500000000 (Low: $1200000000, High: $1800000000)
Year 100: $4000000000 (Low: $3200000000, High: $4800000000)
Key Considerations
- Initial implementation could face significant logistical and legal challenges, potentially delaying anticipated benefits.
- Administrative cost increases are expected due to the comprehensive nature of the bill's oversight mechanisms.
- Significant impact on large corporations exceeding $5 billion in assets, potentially changing their strategic decisions regarding mergers and acquisitions.