Mergers over $5 billion would be prohibited if new bill becomes law

Posted:
in General Discussion
Big Tech critics in the Senate and Congress are proposing "bold action" to ban any merger deal valued at over $5 billion, with the bill aiming to stop anticompetitive moves, mostly by big tech.

House Democrats plan a series of Big Tech legislation
House Democrats plan a series of Big Tech legislation


House Democrats have previously launched proposals to limit Big Tech, include one regarding a limitation on mergers. Now a more specific bicameral legislation proposal that would make mergers illegal, has been introduced.

The Prohibiting Anticompetitive Mergers Act is proposed by Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and US Representative Mondaire Jones (D-NY). Warren has previously said that Apple is on her Big Tech breakup list.

"For the last five decades, big companies have had almost free reign over our economy, squashing competitors, growing bigger and bigger, and abusing their market power to price gouge consumers and crush workers and small businesses," said Senator Warren in a statement about the new proposal.

"This unconstitutional behavior has to stop," she continued. "My new bill with Rep. Jones would restore our country's anti-monopoly tradition by banning the biggest, most anticompetitive mergers and giving the DOJ and the FTC stronger tools to enforce our antitrust laws and restore real competition in our markets."

"Congress needs to take bold action to bring down prices for families and promote a fairer economy for all Americans," said, "and our bill would do just that."

If enacted, the new legislation would require the FTC and the DOJ to consider both the value of a merger, and its impact on workers. FTC and DOJ Antitrust Division would be empowered to reject mergers that would increase corporate domination, decrease employee benefits, and so on.

"In 2021, our antitrust agencies received more merger filings than in any other year during the last decade," Congressman Mondaire Jones said in the statement. "From major tech mergers between companies like Facebook and Instagram to agriculture mergers between companies like Wayne and Sanderson Farms, the recent rise in corporate consolidation has increased unemployment, suppressed wages, and allowed companies to hike up prices even further during this period of inflation."

"It's why we need the Prohibiting Anticompetitive Mergers Act, which I'm proud to introduce with Senator Elizabeth Warren," he continued. "Our bill would empower workers, raise wages, reduce prices, combat inequality, and enable small businesses to thrive."

"By banning the biggest, most anticompetitive mergers," he said, "overhauling the merger-review process to include consideration of labor-market consequences, and strengthening agencies' tools to break up harmful mergers, our bill will tackle corporate consolidation head on and help build a fairer, more vibrant economy that works for everyone."

Senator Warren's statement says that the legislation proposal is endorsed by "more than 70 antitrust, labor, agriculture, and advocacy organizations."

Read on AppleInsider
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 31
    hexclockhexclock Posts: 1,259member
    So they pick a number out of thin air, as usual. I love how they try to blame rising prices on these companies, what a nice touch. Warren’s third grade idea of how the economy works should be a real big clue that this bill is a bad idea. 
    edited March 2022 longpathtommikeleiOS_Guy80designrBeatsviclauyycJFC_PAgilly33radarthekatbyronl
  • Reply 2 of 31
    Nikon8Nikon8 Posts: 47member
    Microsoft should be on her list. 
    iOS_Guy80addison huy
  • Reply 3 of 31
    longpathlongpath Posts: 393member
    hexclock said:
    So they pick a number out of thin air, as usual. I love how they try to blame rising prices on these companies, what a nice touch. Warren’s third grade idea of how the economy works should be a real big clue that this bill is a bad idea. 
    Agreed. The rapid and reckless expansion of the M1 money supply is completely ignored, just as Congress’ irresponsible spending and expansion programs, departments, and agencies whose mere existence is an affront to the 10th Amendment is heart and soul of the issue.

    it’s also incredibly hypocritical for any member of Congress to malign the tech industry on the one hand, and in the other give a billion dollars in advertising funds to push an agenda.

    It’s also a massive conflict of interest when so many in Congress profit handsomely from big tech: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-01-27/congress-s-big-tech-stock-trading-makes-antitrust-regulation-awkward
    iOS_Guy80jcs2305designrgilly33
  • Reply 4 of 31
    An incredibly stupid proposal that will die before it gets to the floor.

    No surprise Elizabeth Warren dreamed this one up.
    iOS_Guy80jdwmike1designrBeatsJFC_PAradarthekat
  • Reply 5 of 31
    rob53rob53 Posts: 3,253member
    Why isn’t the military complex mentioned? BlackRock is a $10 trillion dollar multinational asset manager that owns way too many companies. 

    I’d rather see Warren go after the anticompetitive laws protecting automotive dealerships. Nothing Apple is doing is unconstitutional. They just sell products people buy. Breaking up Big Tech could actually drive salaries down not up. 
    addison huyviclauyycgilly33radarthekat
  • Reply 6 of 31
    thrangthrang Posts: 1,010member
    Things like this and the EU effort to force side loading of apps reinforce the stunning lack of practical intelligence and business acumen in so many elected officials.






    rob53designrBeatsviclauyycradarthekat
  • Reply 7 of 31
    blastdoorblastdoor Posts: 3,308member
    Elizabeth Warren is the kind of person who is smart but unbalanced. I don't mean 'unbalanced' as in 'crazy,' I mean it in terms of over-emphasizing the importance of some things and under-emphasizing others. And I don't think it's just a negotiating strategy -- I think she really means it. So it's fine for her to be 1 of 100 senators, but I'd say 1 of her in the senate is enough and she must never be president.

    So hopefully her good ideas survive the legislative process and the bad ones get cut. The $5 billion cap thing is definitely a bad one. Paying attention to the impact of mergers on employees sounds good, as does changing the burden of proof for DOJ and FTC. 
    dewme
  • Reply 8 of 31
    jdwjdw Posts: 1,340member
    Scary stuff.  And all the while Big Government grows and grows and grows without anyone having the guts to stop it at either end of the political divide.
    mike1Beatsviclauyyc
  • Reply 9 of 31
    mike1mike1 Posts: 3,286member

    Senator Warren's statement says that the legislation proposal is endorsed by "more than 70 antitrust, labor, agriculture, and advocacy organizations."

    Confirms that this would be a really bad idea.
    rob53
  • Reply 10 of 31
    rob53rob53 Posts: 3,253member
    mike1 said:

    Senator Warren's statement says that the legislation proposal is endorsed by "more than 70 antitrust, labor, agriculture, and advocacy organizations."

    Confirms that this would be a really bad idea.
    And I’m sure all 70 are lining her pocketbook. It all has to do with who’s buying Congress’ services. I’d like to see a citizen’s group against wasteful and misdirected legislation asked about big tech especially since we’re the ones buying things, both with our money and money we pay in taxes. 
  • Reply 11 of 31
    Crippling American companies that have to compete and innovate against global competitors with this blunt approach is colossally stupid. 
    Beatsradarthekat
  • Reply 12 of 31
    sphericspheric Posts: 2,564member
    rob53 said:
    mike1 said:

    Senator Warren's statement says that the legislation proposal is endorsed by "more than 70 antitrust, labor, agriculture, and advocacy organizations."

    Confirms that this would be a really bad idea.
    And I’m sure all 70 are lining her pocketbook.  
    I love this. 

    It's understandable that you would confuse her side with the side she's fighting. It's a common mistake to assume that the person you're arguing with works the same way that you do — ignoring the fact that, if they were, they'd probably be arguing your side. 
  • Reply 13 of 31
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 10,557member
    blastdoor said:
    Elizabeth Warren is the kind of person who is smart but unbalanced. I don't mean 'unbalanced' as in 'crazy,' I mean it in terms of over-emphasizing the importance of some things and under-emphasizing others. And I don't think it's just a negotiating strategy -- I think she really means it. So it's fine for her to be 1 of 100 senators, but I'd say 1 of her in the senate is enough and she must never be president.

    So hopefully her good ideas survive the legislative process and the bad ones get cut. The $5 billion cap thing is definitely a bad one. Paying attention to the impact of mergers on employees sounds good, as does changing the burden of proof for DOJ and FTC. 
    Elizabeth Warren is not a capitalist. She is about as anti-capitalist as it gets. She’s close to being a downright communist in that she thinks the state should control the entire economy from top to bottom, control prices, wages, production, the whole tamale. Her ideas are close to a centrally managed economy, regulate it until it is.
    A recent poll found that 50% of young Americans think they would like to ‘try’ communism. As if they could change back to capitalism if they wanted to.
    edited March 2022 designrBeatsviclauyyc
  • Reply 14 of 31
    BeatsBeats Posts: 3,073member
    Nikon8 said:
    Microsoft should be on her list. 

    The irony is, these are the same morons who point the finger at Apple every chance they get and I’ll bet they pointed their finger at Apple during discussions and writing the bill.
    ….yet Apple has never spent close to 5 billion on an acquisition. Tee hee.
  • Reply 15 of 31
    It just seems like they want to do something because they are board. The largest company Apple bought was Beats anyways and it was a bit over three billion dollars. Some other companies like Microsoft and Disney buy companies that are in the 60 billion dollar range those are the companies that the should potentially go after. Though I am glad that Disney owns Fox so they can finally bring more characters to the MCU. 
  • Reply 16 of 31
    sphericspheric Posts: 2,564member
    lkrupp said:
    blastdoor said:
    Elizabeth Warren is the kind of person who is smart but unbalanced. I don't mean 'unbalanced' as in 'crazy,' I mean it in terms of over-emphasizing the importance of some things and under-emphasizing others. And I don't think it's just a negotiating strategy -- I think she really means it. So it's fine for her to be 1 of 100 senators, but I'd say 1 of her in the senate is enough and she must never be president.

    So hopefully her good ideas survive the legislative process and the bad ones get cut. The $5 billion cap thing is definitely a bad one. Paying attention to the impact of mergers on employees sounds good, as does changing the burden of proof for DOJ and FTC. 
    Elizabeth Warren is not a capitalist. She is about as anti-capitalist as it gets. She’s close to being a downright communist in that she thinks the state should control the entire economy from top to bottom, control prices, wages, production, the whole tamale. Her ideas are close to a centrally managed economy, regulate it until it is.
    A recent poll found that 50% of young Americans think they would like to ‘try’ communism. As if they could change back to capitalism if they wanted to.
    Socialism. The word you are looking for, and what you are describing is "socialism". 

    Nowhere is she advocating that the state OWN all means of production. That would be communism. 

    In fact, she isn't even advocating socialism — she's just in favour of heavily regulating capitalism. 

    Kinda like that bastion of international communism, President Roosevelt. 
    tht
  • Reply 17 of 31
    blastdoorblastdoor Posts: 3,308member
    lkrupp said:
    blastdoor said:
    Elizabeth Warren is the kind of person who is smart but unbalanced. I don't mean 'unbalanced' as in 'crazy,' I mean it in terms of over-emphasizing the importance of some things and under-emphasizing others. And I don't think it's just a negotiating strategy -- I think she really means it. So it's fine for her to be 1 of 100 senators, but I'd say 1 of her in the senate is enough and she must never be president.

    So hopefully her good ideas survive the legislative process and the bad ones get cut. The $5 billion cap thing is definitely a bad one. Paying attention to the impact of mergers on employees sounds good, as does changing the burden of proof for DOJ and FTC. 
    Elizabeth Warren is not a capitalist. She is about as anti-capitalist as it gets. She’s close to being a downright communist in that she thinks the state should control the entire economy from top to bottom, control prices, wages, production, the whole tamale. Her ideas are close to a centrally managed economy, regulate it until it is.
    A recent poll found that 50% of young Americans think they would like to ‘try’ communism. As if they could change back to capitalism if they wanted to.
    I don't like her very much, but she's not a communist and she's not in favor of the level of central planning you describe. The problem with calling her a communist is that you won't know what to say if and when a real communist comes along. But the real communists know one of their own, and they know she isn't one of their own. 

    I think her main problem is personality/disposition. She's kind of like a cranky old man who posts comments on AppleInsider stories. 

    sphericKTRradarthekat
  • Reply 18 of 31
    blastdoorblastdoor Posts: 3,308member

    spheric said:
    lkrupp said:
    blastdoor said:
    Elizabeth Warren is the kind of person who is smart but unbalanced. I don't mean 'unbalanced' as in 'crazy,' I mean it in terms of over-emphasizing the importance of some things and under-emphasizing others. And I don't think it's just a negotiating strategy -- I think she really means it. So it's fine for her to be 1 of 100 senators, but I'd say 1 of her in the senate is enough and she must never be president.

    So hopefully her good ideas survive the legislative process and the bad ones get cut. The $5 billion cap thing is definitely a bad one. Paying attention to the impact of mergers on employees sounds good, as does changing the burden of proof for DOJ and FTC. 
    Elizabeth Warren is not a capitalist. She is about as anti-capitalist as it gets. She’s close to being a downright communist in that she thinks the state should control the entire economy from top to bottom, control prices, wages, production, the whole tamale. Her ideas are close to a centrally managed economy, regulate it until it is.
    A recent poll found that 50% of young Americans think they would like to ‘try’ communism. As if they could change back to capitalism if they wanted to.
    Socialism. The word you are looking for, and what you are describing is "socialism". 

    Nowhere is she advocating that the state OWN all means of production. That would be communism. 

    In fact, she isn't even advocating socialism — she's just in favour of heavily regulating capitalism. 

    Kinda like that bastion of international communism, President Roosevelt. 
    Exactly right. 

    Just as some people don't realize there really, truly is a Christian Left, there also really, truly is a Capitalist Left. And that's Warren -- capitalist left. 

    spheric
  • Reply 19 of 31
    DAalsethDAalseth Posts: 2,783member
    "This unconstitutional behavior has to stop," she continued.

    Won’t say if this is a good idea or a bad idea. But I don’t think there is anything in the Constitution about how big a company can get, or how big a merger can be. I don’t think the Constitution of the US says anything about this sort of behavior. I don’t think Unconstitutional is the right word for what this bill is supposed to prevent. 
    I don’t think that word means what she think’s it means.
    JFC_PA
  • Reply 20 of 31
    waveparticlewaveparticle Posts: 1,497member
    This is good for Apple. It will hurt Google (Alphabet).
Sign In or Register to comment.