Merger control under the second Trump administrationDuring its first year, the second Trump administration has reshaped U.S. merger control. This reshaping has comprised the retention, return, and introduction of several enforcement tools and priorities, with the central aim of imbuing predictability for businesses by removing procedural and substantive roadblocks. The current federal antitrust enforcers appear to be taking a pragmatic, deal-friendly posture in merger control, while remaining committed to vigorously enforcing the U.S. antitrust laws. State antitrust enforcers will undoubtedly continue to play an indelible role in merger control, alongside sectoral regulators and private litigants.Retention of the 2023 Merger GuidelinesA stage-setting source of continuity at the onset of the second Trump administration was the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) and Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) joint decision to continue using the merger guidelines promulgated during the Biden administration in 2023. Chairman Ferguson’s memorandum to agency staff cited stability as a primary reason for the decision and that “[n]o business can plan for the future on the basis of guidelines they know are one election away from rescission.” (See FTC Internal Memorandum (February 18, 2025), available at www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/ferguson-memo-re-merger-guidelines.pdf.) The agencies have kept open the possibility of future changes to the guidelines, but any revisions would be implemented “with the same transparency and careful thought that have become hallmarks of the merger guidelines since their inception.” (See DOJ Internal Memorandum (February 18, 2025), available at www.justice.gov/atr/media/1389861/dl?inline.)Return of merger remediesUnder the second Trump administration, federal antitrust regulators are much more willing to use remedies to address concerns with proposed transactions instead of “costly and time-consuming litigation.” (See Congressional Testimony of FTC Chairman Ferguson (May 15, 2025), available at www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/FTC-Chairman-Andrew-N-Ferguson-FSGG-Testimony-05-15-2025.pdf.) This is a drastic shift from the Biden administration that consistently deployed AAG Kanter’s sentiment that “flimsy settlements often fail.” (See Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Kanter Delivers Opening Remarks at 2022 Spring Enforcers Summit (April 4, 2022), available at www.justice.gov/archives/opa/speech/assistant-attorney-general-jonathan-kanter-delivers-opening-remarks-2022-spring-enforcers) and Chairwoman Khan’s philosophy that the FTC would be “focusing … resources on litigating, rather than on settling.” (See Axios, FTC’s new stance: Litigate, don’t negotiate (June 8, 2022), available at www.axios.com/2022/06/09/ftcs-new-stance-litigate-dont-negotiate-lina-khan.)The DOJ and FTC in the second Trump administration have already adopted a renewed willingness to negotiate remedies with merging parties to resolve competition concerns. In April 2025, Chairman Ferguson noted that a “realistic approach” to merger remedies is to accept them when the reviewing agency is “quite confident that they will be successful, help … block more anticompetitive conduct, and protect more Americans.” (See Capitol Forum/FGS Global Keynote Speech (April 2, 2025), available at www.thecapitolforum.com/resource/antitrust-under-trump-keynote at 30:34). In June 2025, in a statement in Alimentation Couche-Tard/Giant Eagle, Commissioner Meador outlined some guiding principles for the FTC’s evaluation of a proposed remedy package: “[t]he FTC should, in all but extremely rare cases, insist on clean divestitures of standalone business lines when negotiating merger remedy packages. Remedy proposals should fully and durably resolve competitive concerns. Structural remedies must be self-sustaining.” (See FTC Statement (June 26, 2025), available at www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/mark-meador-statement-act-giant-eagle.pdf.)Since mid-2025, the DOJ an
