May 21, 2012

For Better or Worse? FTC and DOJ Remake Hart-Scott-Rodino Act Premerger Notification Form and Rules

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) recently modified the premerger notification form and rules for transactions reportable under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act (HSR Act). The new form and the amendments to the HSR rules will become effective 30 days after publication in the Federal Register, which is expected shortly. Transactions filed with the FTC and the DOJ prior to this date, meaning at least prior to August 10, 2011, will NOT be required to comply with the new rules.

Almost every aspect of the form will be affected in some way. With the exceptions noted below, the changes will reduce the burden on filing parties, particularly for acquisitive clients such as private equity firms and certain strategic buyers.

Reduced Burdens

The FTC recognized that many items in the HSR Form do not generate information useful to antitrust enforcement. As a result, many of these items have been modified or dropped completely. The most significant of these changes are summarized below:

Item

Current

Change

4(b)

Provide the most recent balance sheet (even if unaudited) for all unconsolidated U.S. corporations within the filing person[1]

 

Eliminated

5(a), 5(b)(i)

Provide 2002 base year revenue by 6-digit NAICS code and 10-digit product code even for companies not owned by the filing person in 2002

 

Eliminated

5(b)(ii)

List 10-digit product codes and revenues for manufactured products added or codes deleted between the 2002 base year and most recent year by the filing person

Eliminated

6(a)

List names and addresses of all entities with at least $10 million in assets within the person filing notification

Limited to entities that generate U.S. revenues with at least $10 million in assets

6(b)

Provide all 5% or greater shareholders of corporations within the person filing

Limited to holders of 5% or more of the voting securities or noncorporate interests of the Ultimate Parent of the Acquiring Person and the Acquiring Entity. For limited partnerships such as private equity funds only general partners need to be named regardless of percentage held (private equity investor limited partners need NOT be listed)

6(c)

List shareholdings of at least 5% of corporations with at least $10 million in assets for person filing notification

Now 6(c)(i); added holdings of noncorporate interests, but limited to holdings of at least 5% but less than 50% in entities that derive revenues in the same NAICS code(s) as the target firm

New Items

In addition to removing or altering certain items on the HSR Form, the new rules also require parties to submit additional information. These new requirements are intended to permit the agencies to more thoughtfully study the competitive effects of the proposed transaction. In some cases, these changes formalize long-standing informal FTC requirements and practices. Some of the key changes are:

Item(s)

Current

Change

4(d)(i)

None

Provide all Confidential Information Memoranda or, if none exist, similar documents provided to potential buyer(s) specifically relating to the sale of the target business, created up to one (1) year prior to filing; this is limited to documents prepared by or for an officer, director, or its equivalent, but need not include traditional "4(c)" content (i.e, not limited to documents that analyze the target with respect to competition, sales growth, or expansion in product and geographic areas)

4(d)(ii)

None

Provide studies created by third-party advisors (e.g., investment bankers and consultants) during an engagement or for the purpose of being engaged by the filing parties, seen by an officer, director, or its equivalent, created up to one (1) year prior to filing and including "4(c)" content that relate to the sale of the target, even if not prepared specifically for the transaction to which the filing relates

4(d)(iii)

None

Provide all studies prepared for the transaction (except those without stated assumptions) seen by an officer, director, or its equivalent that evaluate or analyze efficiencies and/or synergies created for the transaction to which the filing relates

 

5(a)

5(b)(iii), 5(c)

Provide revenues derived in the United States by 6-digit NAICS code for nonmanufactured products and by 10-digit product code for manufactured products, including for products manufactured outside the United States

7(b)(ii)

None

Identify any "Associate" of the Acquiring Person that reports revenues in the same NAICS code(s) as the target (e.g., identify any investment funds managed by the same private equity firm as the fund making such acquisition that derive revenue in the same NAICS code(s) as the target even if different than the fund making such acquisition)

 

[1]. Under the HSR Rules, "person" here refers to the "Ultimate Parent" of the filing acquiring party and any entity it "Controls." To avoid reader exhaustion, we have not incorporated the detailed rules relating to "ultimate parent" and "control" in this LawFlash.

Copyright © 2012 by Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP. All Rights Reserved.

About the Author

Partner

Harry T. Robins is a partner in Morgan Lewis's Antitrust Practice. Mr. Robins represents clients, including a number of prominent private equity firms and Fortune 500 companies, before the U.S. Federal Trade Commission and the U.S. Department of Justice, as well as international regulatory agencies, in connection with mergers and acquisitions and joint venture transactions.

212-309-6728

About the Author

Partner

Jonathan M. Rich is a partner in Morgan Lewis's Antitrust Practice. Mr. Rich's practice includes litigation and representation before the federal enforcement agencies, including grand jury investigations, mergers and acquisitions, and other civil investigations. His practice focuses on antitrust matters in a variety of industries, with a particular focus on financial institutions. Both at Morgan Lewis and previously at the U.S. Department of Justice, Mr. Rich has been involved in all of the major government antitrust investigations of the financial...

202.739.5433

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.