📅 2026 Update: Changes in Antitrust Enforcement

Since the original article was written, there have been several important updates to U.S. antitrust law, particularly regarding the Sherman Antitrust Act. These changes reflect ongoing efforts to maintain competition and adapt to new market practices. The earlier article continues to provide foundational information on the Sherman Act and its implications.

🏛️ 2024 Enforcement Actions

In fiscal year 2024, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) took 32 merger enforcement actions. These actions aimed to preserve competition in various sectors, such as healthcare, groceries, technology, labor, and manufacturing. This increased oversight demonstrates a commitment to preventing monopolistic behavior.

📈 2026 HSR Threshold Updates

On February 17, 2026, the FTC updated the Hart-Scott-Rodino (HSR) Act thresholds. The minimum reportable transaction value is now $133.9 million. This change indicates a refinement in the merger review process, making it crucial for companies to stay informed about these limits when planning transactions.

🔍 Noncompete Rule Implementation

A significant change came on February 12, 2026, with the FTC's implementation of a comprehensive ban on new noncompete clauses. This rule affects all employers, including senior executives. Employers must review and adjust existing agreements to comply with this shift in competition policy.

💻 Algorithmic Price Fixing Enforcement

From 2025 to 2026, the DOJ intensified its enforcement against algorithmic price fixing. This includes actions against companies using rental-pricing software. The enforcement highlights the application of the Sherman Act to automated pricing practices, showing that the law is evolving to address current market challenges.

📌 Key Points Summary

  • 🚦 2024 saw 32 merger enforcement actions by the FTC and DOJ.
  • 📊 The HSR filing threshold is now $133.9 million as of 2026.
  • ❌ A ban on new noncompete clauses was implemented on February 12, 2026.
  • ⚖️ Increased enforcement against algorithmic price fixing reflects evolving market practices.

💡 Tips for Understanding Antitrust Laws

Review the details of your specific situation with your attorney. Understanding antitrust laws can be complex, and it is important to consider your unique circumstances.

📄 Understand HSR Filing Requirements

If your transaction exceeds the $133.9 million threshold, you need to file a Premerger Notification and Report Form with the FTC and DOJ. This form requires detailed information about the transaction and the companies involved, which is essential for compliance.

🕒 Plan for the HSR Waiting Period

Remember that after filing the HSR form, there is a 30-day waiting period before a transaction can be completed. During this time, the FTC and DOJ will review the filing to ensure it complies with antitrust laws.

🔍 Review Noncompete Clauses

Employers must take action to review existing noncompete agreements by February 12, 2026. This includes removing or modifying clauses to align with the new FTC rule, which bans new noncompete clauses.

📊 Monitor Algorithmic Pricing

If your business uses automated pricing software, stay informed about the DOJ's enforcement actions against algorithmic price fixing. Compliance with antitrust laws is crucial to avoid potential legal issues.

📞 Utilize FTC and DOJ Resources

Both the FTC and DOJ offer resources and guidance on antitrust laws, including the Sherman Act. Businesses can access these resources for information on compliance and enforcement practices.

❓ Frequently Asked Questions

❓ What is the Sherman Antitrust Act?

The Sherman Antitrust Act is a federal law that prohibits monopolistic behavior and promotes competition. It aims to prevent practices like price fixing and market allocation that can harm consumers and other businesses.

⚖️ How does the HSR Act work?

The Hart-Scott-Rodino (HSR) Act requires companies to file a notification for certain large mergers and acquisitions. The goal is to allow the FTC and DOJ to review transactions for potential antitrust issues before they occur.

📅 What are the penalties for HSR violations?

If a company closes a reportable transaction without filing, the penalty exceeds $50,000 for every day they remain out of compliance. This highlights the importance of adhering to HSR requirements.

📊 What does the Noncompete Rule mean for employers?

The new Noncompete Rule bans employers from creating new noncompete clauses. Employers must review existing agreements to ensure they comply with this rule, which affects all employees, including executives.

💻 How is algorithmic price fixing enforced?

The DOJ is actively enforcing against algorithmic price fixing, particularly in rental-pricing software. This enforcement highlights that automated pricing practices can still violate antitrust laws.

📞 Where can I find more information on antitrust laws?

The FTC and DOJ both provide resources and guidance on antitrust laws, including the Sherman Act. These resources can help businesses understand their rights and obligations under current regulations.

⚖️ Recent Cases Related to Antitrust Laws

Recent court rulings have highlighted the ongoing importance of the Sherman Antitrust Act in regulating competition in various markets. These cases reflect how enforcement actions adapt to modern business practices.

For more recent rulings, browse more rulings on the news page.

End of October 2026 Update





Introduction


The Sherman Antitrust Act is an important federal law that promotes fair competition and prevents monopolies in the marketplace. Section 1 of the act is a critical component that prohibits certain types of business activities that are seen as anticompetitive. Here’s a guide to help you better understand Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act.

Overview of Section 1


Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act prohibits certain types of business activities that have the potential to limit competition and harm consumers. These activities include agreements among competitors to fix prices, allocate markets, or rig bids.

Prohibited Conduct


Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act prohibits three types of prohibited agreements:

1. Price-fixing: an agreement among competitors to fix prices, either by setting a minimum price or agreeing not to compete on price.

2. Market allocation: an agreement among competitors to divide markets, territories, or customers by either geographic area or product line.

3. Bid-rigging: an agreement among competitors to submit collusive bids in response to a request for proposals (RFP) or a competitive bidding process.

Enforcement


The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice are responsible for enforcing Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act. The FTC investigates possible violations of the act and enforces the provisions through administrative and court proceedings. The Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice works with the FTC and conducts criminal investigations and prosecutions.

Penalties


Violations of Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act can result in significant penalties, including both criminal and civil charges. Fines for violations can range from hundreds of thousands of dollars to millions of dollars. Individuals involved in antitrust violations may also face imprisonment.

Exceptions


There are some exceptions to Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act, including joint ventures and intellectual property licensing agreements. These exceptions must not have serious anticompetitive effects.

Conclusion


Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act is a critical component of this federal law that promotes fair competition and prevents monopolies in the marketplace. Its provisions prohibit certain types of business activities that limit competition and harm consumers. By avoiding Section 1 violations, businesses can ensure they are complying with antitrust laws and avoid potential penalties. Understanding Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act is essential for businesses involved in the markets and for legal experts to prevent anticompetitive behaviors to harm consumers.

The Sherman Antitrust Act, one of the first major business regulatory attempts after the Civil War, is broken down into two main parts: Section 1 and Section 2. Within Section 2, the main topics covered are the use of monopolies, whether intended or unintended, and either by an individual company or companies, to restrain interstate commerce.

Section 1, however, puts a greater emphasis on the actual nature of constraining interstate commerce. Within this vacuum many different forms of constraint come into play with different legal interpretations as well.

Violations of the Sherman Act under the provisions of Section 1 are considered ‘per se’ violations. These are blatantly obvious attempts by a company or individual to constrain the free market. While some cases do, in fact, fall under the per se logic of judicial reasoning, the second form of judicial restraint comes under the ‘rule of reason’.

To a degree, any business deal between two or more parties will constrain interstate commerce in some fashion. Because of this the rule of reason needs to be applied in order to differentiate between fair and unfair business practices. This brings into play the first section of the Act to the different types of restraint present within the market.

The first type of restraint addressed happens through a form of horizontal integration. This is the practice of two rival companies within the same sector colluding to gain a greater market share and squeeze out smaller competitors. Differing from vertical integration, horizontal integration will expose two or more companies to legal recourse.

Horizontal agreements between firms either manifest usually through attempts at price-fixing, which inhibits the free market’s ability to determine the fair price of a good in turn benefiting the company, or sector alignment, where companies agree to sell either within a certain state or certain area of their product’s consumers.

The second form sometimes is less obvious as a consumer in one state is free to purchase a good from any other state, but when companies agree to stay in their own regional zones this makes the choices less obvious to the consumers allowing the producers a greater control over prices within their sphere of influence.

Vertical integration, which occurred most notably at the turn of the 20th century, addressed constraints caused by producers colluding at different levels of the manufacturing process. For example, an oil producer makes exclusive agreements with one shipper. The shipper makes exclusive agreements with one extractor, thereby lowering the costs for the entire process. This vertically integrates the oil market and would give an advantage to each company along the manufacturing line. Instead of affecting the sector as a whole, it limits competition at each individual level, constraining free trade, making this practice illegal.

The first section of the Sherman Act brings into focus clearly business deals that would constrain interstate commerce. Businesses have a variety of ways to end up constraining the market. They can accomplish this goal either horizontally or vertically, and in some cases they can even exclude certain regional areas allowing them to focus on a specific area driving up prices. All of these practices are illegal under the Sherman Act and are punished as felonies.