Previous business/academic article Next business/academic article
Business Articles Awards > Mergers

Non-Reportable ≠ Non-Reviewable: Antitrust Insights for Smaller US Mergers

Mike Cowie, Blair Kuykendall, Dechert ONPOINT, February 2017

See Mike Cowie's resume See Blair Kuykendall's resume

Vote for this articleHelp

* Average
** Interesting
*** Good
**** Excellent
***** Must receive an Award!

Please note that the star(s) appearing on the article page before you have voted reflect the status of all votes registered to date.

Readers’ vote will close on February 9, 2018. Readers’ vote will allow you to nominate 1 article for each of the Awards, i.e., 10 Academic articles, 10 Business articles, and the best Soft Laws. The readers’ short-list of Academic and Business Articles will be communicated to the Board together with the 20 articles nominated by the Steering Committees. The Board will decide on the award-winning articles. Results will be announced at the Awards ceremony to take place in Washington DC on the eve of the ABA Antitrust Spring Meeting on April 10, 2018.

Click here to read the full article online

Acquisitions of U.S. companies that fall below the $80.8 million Hart-Scott-Rodino (HSR) reporting threshold may pose unique risks to buyers. Unlike HSR reportable transactions, non-reportable transactions typically do not allow for contractual allocation of antitrust risk. The buyer is left shouldering the risk. A recent Federal Trade Commission (FTC) enforcement action confirms that the risk taken by buyers includes not only the possibility that the acquired assets will have to be divested, but also the possibility that the buyer will be forced to disgorge profits earned after the acquisition. For Mallinckrodt, the subject of the most recent consummated merger challenge, the disgorgement remedy was $100 million, on top of divestiture of part of the acquired assets.

Download our brochure