The Justice Dept. released remedy merger guidelines late Thurs. h...
The Justice Dept. released remedy merger guidelines late Thurs. holding explicitly that structural remedies, including the sale of assets, are preferable to “conduct” remedies. Several attorneys with antitrust and telecom expertise were reviewing the guidelines Fri. The release comes…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
as the Dept. nears the release of its order on the Cingular-AT&T Wireless merger, which may be just days away. Among the principles DoJ endorses is that the remedy should promote “competition, not competitors” and that all remedies must be enforceable: “A defendant will scrupulously obey a decree only when the decree’s meaning is clear, and when the defendant and its agents know they face the prospect of fines or imprisonment if they disregard the decree.” The guidelines are consistent with a stance taken by FCC Chmn. Powell that in general structural remedies, such as asset sales, are preferable to behavioral remedies. The guidelines state that “conduct” remedies are appropriate in limited cases, such as when a “full- stop prohibition” of the merger would “sacrifice significant efficiencies and a structural remedy would also sacrifice such inefficiencies or is infeasible.” Hewitt Pate, asst. attorney gen.-Antitrust Div., said the guidelines provide more clarity for all involved in mergers. “Effective antitrust enforcement requires remedies based on sound legal and economic principles and closely related to the identified competitive harm,” Pate said. “Once we have determined that a merger may substantially lessen competition, the division will insist upon relief that fully restores competition to the market… The Remedies Guide provides the tools needed to more quickly identify critical legal and economic issues regarding merger remedies and devise a remedy specifically tailored to the competitive harm.”