Antitrust Shake-Up: Bill Proposes Transferring All FTC Enforcement Power to DOJ, Effective After Next Fiscal Year

This bill, the "One Agency Act," proposes a significant overhaul of how the federal government handles antitrust enforcement. Its core function is to consolidate these responsibilities by transferring all antitrust actions, personnel, assets, and funding currently managed by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) over to the Department of Justice (DOJ). The stated goal, according to the bill's findings (Sec. 2), is to streamline enforcement, eliminate overlap, and reduce uncertainty. The changes would take effect at the start of the first fiscal year that begins at least 90 days after the bill's enactment (Sec. 7).

One Sheriff in Town: What Changes?

The biggest shift is making the DOJ the primary federal agency responsible for enforcing antitrust laws like the Sherman and Clayton Acts (Sec. 3, Sec. 4). This means the FTC's Bureau of Competition and relevant parts of its Bureau of Economics—essentially its antitrust arm—would be absorbed into the DOJ's Antitrust Division. Current FTC antitrust employees would become DOJ employees, and all related files, equipment (excluding office space unless arranged), and allocated funds would move to the DOJ (Sec. 4). The Attorney General (AG) would gain sole authority over existing FTC consent decrees and inherit the power to conduct broad investigative studies into competition issues, similar to the FTC's current authority (Sec. 4). For businesses and individuals involved in ongoing FTC antitrust matters, this means their cases and the government teams handling them would eventually report up through the DOJ.

The Transition Tango: How Does This Roll Out?

The transfer isn't immediate. The bill establishes a "transition period" starting on the effective date and lasting one year, though the AG can extend this twice, each time by up to 180 days, if deemed necessary (Sec. 3). During this period, the FTC faces significant restrictions: it generally cannot hire new antitrust staff, initiate new antitrust investigations, enter into settlements without the AG's approval, or file new antitrust lawsuits (Sec. 4). Essentially, the FTC's independent antitrust actions would wind down. While the AG can deputize FTC staff to work on DOJ antitrust matters during this time (Sec. 4), the power to initiate new federal antitrust actions rests firmly with the DOJ from the effective date onward. This structure means any new competition concerns arising during the transition would likely need DOJ approval to be investigated at the federal level by either agency.

Ripple Effects: Who Feels This?

Consolidating power aims for efficiency, but concentrating antitrust authority within a single agency fundamentally changes the landscape. Previously, businesses faced potential scrutiny from two distinct federal bodies; this bill reduces that to one (Sec. 4, Sec. 5). The practical impact could mean a more unified federal approach, but it also removes an independent perspective on enforcement. Businesses might face less duplicative investigation, but the overall level of scrutiny could change depending on DOJ priorities and resources. For consumers and small businesses, the key question is whether a single, larger enforcement body under the AG will be as vigilant or pursue the same types of cases as two separate agencies previously did. The bill also necessitates numerous technical changes across existing laws, replacing references to the FTC with the Attorney General or DOJ, cementing this shift in authority across the U.S. Code (Sec. 6).