February 29, 2020

February 28, 2020

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

February 27, 2020

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

February 26, 2020

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

Hart-Scott-Rodino Reporting Thresholds to Increase Once Again

On January 28, 2020, the Federal Register published an FTC notice with the latest annual adjustments to the statutory thresholds under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976 (15 U.S.C. § 18a) (HSR). Once the new thresholds come into effect, the HSR size-of-the-transaction threshold will increase from $90 million to $94 million. The revised HSR thresholds will apply for transactions that close on or after February 27, 2020.

On January 21, 2020, the Federal Register also published an FTC notice with the latest annual adjustments to the statutory thresholds under Section 8 of the Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. § 19). The revised Section 8 thresholds are effective immediately.

Size-of-the-Transaction Test

(Original: $50 Million; New as of February 27, 2020: $94 Million)

The 2000 HSR amendments raised the size-of-the-transaction test to $50 million. This figure is currently $90 million, based upon the 2019 annual adjustment. On February 27, 2020, however, it will increase to $94 million. Accordingly, for transactions that close on or after February 27, 2020, no HSR filing will be required unless the acquisition will result in the acquiring person holding an aggregate total amount of voting securities, non-corporate interests, and/or assets of the acquired person in excess of $94 million.

Size-of-the-Parties Test

(Original: $10 Million/$100 Million; New as of February 27, 2020: $18.8 Million/$188 Million)

Under the new adjustments, acquisitions valued above $376 million will be reportable regardless of the size of the parties, and acquisitions valued at greater than $94 million, but less than or equal to $376 million, will only be reportable if the size-of-the-parties test is met. The revised thresholds adjust the size-of-the-parties test so that it (typically) will be met if either the acquiring or acquired person has annual net sales or total assets of $188 million or more, and the other person has annual net sales or total assets of $18.8 million or more.

Notification Thresholds for Acquisitions of Voting Securities

For acquisitions of voting securities, an acquiring person files for the highest applicable notification threshold among five choices. Acquiring 50 percent or greater of an issuer’s voting securities is the highest threshold, but below that level there are four different tiers for reporting acquisitions of minority interests in voting securities. The notification threshold may determine, for example, whether a subsequent acquisition of additional voting securities in the same issuer will require another HSR filing. The new notification thresholds will be, in ascending order:

  • An aggregate total amount of voting securities valued at greater than $94 million, but less than $188 million

  • An aggregate total amount of voting securities valued at $188 million or greater, but less than $940.1 million

  • An aggregate total amount of voting securities valued at $940.1 million or greater

  • Twenty-five percent of an issuer’s outstanding voting securities, if valued at greater than $1,880.2 million

  • Fifty percent of an issuer’s outstanding voting securities, if valued at greater than $94 million

Filing Fee Thresholds

The filing fee amounts are not changing; in fact, the HSR filing fee amounts have not been adjusted in more than a decade. However, the thresholds for the application of the fees are increasing, meaning that for transactions on the margin, the cost of making an HSR filing is going down.

  • For transactions where the aggregate amount of assets, non-corporate interests, and voting securities to be held as a result of the acquisition will be more than $94 million, but less than $188 million, the filing fee will be $45,000.

  • For transactions where the aggregate amount of assets, non-corporate interests, and voting securities to be held as a result of the acquisition will be $188 million or more, but less than $940.1 million, the filing fee will be $125,000.

  • For transactions where the aggregate amount of assets, non-corporate interests, and voting securities to be held as a result of the acquisition will be $940.1 million or more, the filing fee will be $280,000.

Previous Size-of-the-Transaction Thresholds

For purposes of disclosing past asset acquisitions for Item 8 of the HSR form, and for analyzing a potential past failure to file under HSR, it remains necessary to look at the thresholds that were in place at the time of the prior acquisition. The size-of-the-transaction thresholds since the 2000 HSR amendments have been:

  • $50 million as of February 1, 2001

  • $53.1 million as of March 2, 2005

  • $56.7 million as of February 17, 2006

  • $59.8 million as of February 21, 2007

  • $63.1 million as of February 28, 2008

  • $65.2 million as of February 12, 2009

  • $63.4 million as of February 22, 2010

  • $66.0 million as of February 24, 2011

  • $68.2 million as of February 27, 2012

  • $70.9 million as of February 11, 2013

  • $75.9 million as of February 24, 2014

  • $76.3 million as of February 20, 2015

  • $78.2 million as of February 25, 2016

  • $80.8 million as of February 27, 2017

  • $84.4 million as of February 28, 2018

  • $90.0 million as of April 3, 2019

  • $94.0 million as of February 27, 2020

Most, although not all, of the dollar amounts in the HSR rules will be adjusted upward based upon the threshold indexing discussed above. It remains important for parties to be very careful in determining if a threshold is met given that the process can be very complex, the rules are highly technical, and failure to comply with HSR can result in significant civil penalties. Incidentally, the maximum civil penalty was recently increased to up to $43,280 for each day of noncompliance.

Interlocking Directorates Thresholds

(Original: $10 Million; New as of January 21, 2020: $38,204,000)

Finally, in a separate Federal Register notice, the Federal Trade Commission updated the jurisdictional threshold for interlocking directorates under Section 8 of the Clayton Act. Section 8 prohibits, subject to certain exceptions, persons from serving as an officer or director of two competing corporations (a practice known as “interlocking”), provided that each corporation has “capital, surplus, and undivided profits” above the statutory threshold. The 1990 amendments to Section 8 set this threshold at $10 million, but based on the latest annual adjustment, the threshold has been increased to $38,204,000.

Section 8 also has three safe harbor exceptions. One exception states that Section 8 does not apply if the competitive sales of either interlocked corporation are less than $1 million in 1989 dollars, as adjusted annually. This safe harbor has adjusted to $3,820,400 based on the new thresholds.

© 2020 Foley & Lardner LLP

TRENDING LEGAL ANALYSIS


About this Author

Jesse Beringer, Foley Lardner Law Firm, Business Litigation Attorney
Associate

Jesse L. Beringer is an associate and litigation lawyer with Foley & Lardner LLP. She is a member of the Business Litigation & Dispute Resolution and Government Enforcement, Compliance & White Collar Defense Practices.

Ms. Beringer worked as a summer associate with Foley in 2012. She also held the position of judicial intern to the Honorable Chief Judge Charles N. Clevert, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin during the summer of 2011. Between 2009 and 2010, Ms. Beringer worked as both an intern and staff...

202-295-4099
H. Holden Brooks, Food and Beverage Lawyer, Complex Litigation
Partner

Holden Brooks is a senior counsel and litigation attorney at Foley & Lardner LLP, where her practice focuses on mergers, complex litigation, and counseling, with experience across several industries, including health care. Ms. Brooks is a member of the firm’s Antitrust and Business Litigation & Dispute Resolution Practices and the Health Care and Food & Beverage Industry Teams.

Prior to joining Foley, Ms. Brooks was an associate in the antitrust group at Arnold & Porter LLP. Previously, she was a law clerk to the Honorable Peter J. Messitte of the United States District Court for the District of Maryland.

Prior to beginning her legal career, Ms. Brooks was a newspaper journalist and broadcast/film producer.

414-297-5711
James McKeown, Foley Lardner, antitrust attorney, litigation department lawyer, distribution disputes legal counsel, enforcement agency law
Partner

Jim McKeown is a partner with Foley & Lardner LLP and a member of the firm’s Management Committee. He is the former chair of the firm’s national Antitrust Practice and is a member of the Litigation Department and the Sports and Automotive Industry Teams. Mr. McKeown’s litigation practice includes antitrust litigation (including class action defense), distribution disputes, and general litigation. An experienced trial lawyer, he has represented clients in a number of high profile antitrust and sports cases, and he has defended several lawsuits in which the plaintiffs...

414-297-5530
Gregory E. Neppl, Foley Lardner, Antitrust Lawyer, Trade Regulation Attorney
Partner

Gregory E. Neppl is a partner and antitrust lawyer with Foley & Lardner LLP. His practice includes antitrust counseling, merger review and HSR notification preparation, government investigation response, antitrust compliance program development, and the litigation of antitrust, intellectual property and commercial matters. He also counsels numerous hedge funds and other institutional investors pursuing event driven and risk arbitrage investment strategies, including merger, litigation, regulatory and public policy arbitrage situations. Mr. Neppl has significant jury...

202-672-5451
Alan D. Rutenberg, Foley, Washington DC, Antitrust, International Lawyer
Partner

Alan D. Rutenberg is a partner in the Washington, D.C. office of Foley & Lardner LLP. He is chair of the firm’s national Antitrust Practice; a member of its Litigation Department and its International Practice. Mr. Rutenberg's practice includes antitrust, commercial litigation, and regulatory law.

In the antitrust area, Mr. Rutenberg:

  • Counsels clients on a variety of issues, including those arising in mergers and acquisitions, joint ventures, competitor collaborations, licensing and other intellectual...

202-672-5491