Federal antitrust regulators are weighing a major update to how businesses evaluate partnerships and cooperative arrangements with rivals, following the withdrawal of decades-old federal guidance that had served as a key reference point for companies navigating U.S. competition law.
The U.S. Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division and the Federal Trade Commission are reviewing public feedback on potential replacement guidance governing collaborations between competitors. According to Bloomberg, the agencies recently completed a public comment process aimed at gathering views on how modern antitrust rules should apply to increasingly complex business relationships.
The initiative follows the agencies’ decision in late 2024 to rescind the 2000 Antitrust Guidelines for Collaborations Among Competitors. The move removed a framework many companies had relied on when assessing the legality of joint ventures, information-sharing arrangements and other cooperative activities.
According to Bloomberg, regulators are now exploring whether new guidance could provide businesses with clearer direction while maintaining strong enforcement against anticompetitive conduct.
The effort reflects the growing challenge of applying traditional antitrust principles to an economy shaped by artificial intelligence, sophisticated data analytics and cross-industry partnerships. Per Bloomberg, the agencies specifically requested input on topics including algorithm-driven pricing systems, data exchanges, labor-market cooperation, AI-related partnerships and licensing arrangements.
Legal experts note that U.S. antitrust law generally does not prohibit companies from working together. Instead, courts often examine whether a particular arrangement harms competition or produces benefits such as innovation, efficiency or expanded output.
A frequently cited example is the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Aya Healthcare Services, Inc. v. AMN Healthcare, Inc., where judges evaluated a staffing-industry agreement under the rule-of-reason framework rather than treating it as automatically unlawful. The case underscored the fact that cooperative agreements can be legal when tied to broader business collaborations.
Since the withdrawal of the 2000 guidance, companies have largely been left to interpret antitrust risks through court decisions and enforcement actions rather than a dedicated federal framework. According to Bloomberg, many stakeholders have argued that the lack of updated guidance has made compliance planning more difficult and increased uncertainty around lawful business conduct.
Business groups and practitioners have urged regulators to provide more detailed explanations of how they distinguish legitimate cooperation from illegal coordination. Areas such as data sharing, joint research projects and industry standard-setting efforts have become particularly important as companies seek ways to innovate while remaining compliant with competition laws.
Read more: EU-US Data Privacy Framework Facing New Stress as Old Questions Resurface
The agencies have previously acknowledged the value of certain forms of cooperation. The now-withdrawn 2000 guidelines stated that “to compete in modern markets, competitors sometimes need to collaborate,” a principle that continues to influence discussions surrounding the replacement framework.
According to Bloomberg, supporters of new guidance argue that clearer standards could encourage lawful partnerships that help companies develop technologies, improve products and reduce costs, while still allowing regulators to pursue cases involving price-fixing, bid-rigging and market allocation.
Technology and cybersecurity sectors are among the industries expected to benefit from greater clarity. Companies in those fields frequently exchange technical information, participate in standards organizations or cooperate on security threats. Similar issues arise in transportation, healthcare and infrastructure industries, where operational partnerships can play a significant role in delivering services.
Another issue under consideration is how federal regulators assess information exchanges between competitors. According to Bloomberg, stakeholders have asked for more detailed explanations regarding what safeguards—such as anonymization, aggregation and restricted access controls—may help reduce antitrust concerns.
Supporters of the initiative also point to international competition. Regulators in Europe and the United Kingdom have issued more detailed frameworks addressing horizontal cooperation among competitors, providing businesses with guidance on how collaborative activities will be evaluated. Per Bloomberg, some observers believe a modernized U.S. framework could help domestic companies compete more effectively while maintaining compliance with antitrust law.
The DOJ and FTC have not announced a timeline for releasing revised guidance. However, according to Bloomberg, the agencies appear focused on developing a framework that reflects current market realities while preserving the core principles of the Sherman Act.
Source: Bloomberg
