Competition Law and Antitrust Law

The Manhattan District Attorney's Office has launched its first Corporate Crime and Antitrust Task Force, targeting fraud and misconduct by corporations and executives in areas including antitrust violations, healthcare fraud, and consumer fraud. Led by a 40-year veteran prosecutor, the Task Force aims for "systemic accountability" by investigating high-level actors and corporate structures that enable crime, marking a significant expansion of state-level enforcement into traditionally federal territory.

A federal court dismissed antitrust claims against major concrete and cement additives manufacturers, ruling that plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a plausible conspiracy to fix prices in the United States. The decision clarifies the stringent requirements for alleging foreign-origin price-fixing conspiracies under U.S. antitrust law, particularly regarding the need for direct evidence of domestic conspiratorial conduct and parallel pricing behavior among U.S. defendants.

Global antitrust and competition law developments from September 2026 reveal significant enforcement actions across multiple jurisdictions, including U.S. litigation over price-fixing in medical school applications and frozen potato markets, FTC investigations into healthcare mergers and pesticide loyalty programs, and international regulatory activity spanning Mexico's soccer industry, European digital markets, and Japanese price cartel warnings amid inflation.

Global antitrust and competition law developments from September 2026 reveal significant enforcement actions across multiple jurisdictions, including U.S. litigation over price-fixing in medical school applications and frozen potato markets, FTC investigations into healthcare mergers and pesticide loyalty programs, and international regulatory activity spanning Mexico's soccer industry, European digital markets, and Japanese price cartel warnings amid inflation.

California's new COMPETE Act expands state antitrust enforcement to target single-firm monopolization and monopsonization conduct, creating a broader mandate than federal law. Beginning January 1, 2027, public enforcers will have authority to challenge exclusionary business practices that fall outside the Sherman Act's scope, potentially reshaping the competitive landscape for companies operating in California.

The European Commission's 2020 enforcement action against ethylene purchasers for coordinating buy-side pricing strategies has triggered over €10 billion in follow-on damages claims and raised fundamental questions about the legality of competitor collaborations in the chemicals industry. While naked buyer cartels remain per se illegal, this analysis examines why the ancillary restraints doctrine should protect legitimate industry collaborations—including product swaps, joint purchasing agreemen

California's new COMPETE Act fundamentally transforms state antitrust enforcement by allowing prosecutors to target single dominant firms for monopolistic conduct. With $14.3 million in new funding...

California's new COMPETE Act expands state antitrust enforcement to target single-firm monopolization and monopsonization conduct, creating a broader mandate than federal law. Beginning January 1, 2027, public enforcers will have authority to challenge exclusionary business practices that fall outside the Sherman Act's scope, potentially reshaping the competitive landscape for companies operating in California.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection is considering significant regulatory amendments that would require importers to provide enhanced supply chain visibility, implement technical tracing solutions, and submit foreign export documentation. These proposed changes could fundamentally alter import procedures and compliance requirements for businesses bringing goods into the United States, with public comments due by December 1, 2026.