In North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. FTC, 135 S. Ct. 1101 (2015), the Supreme Court held that the North Carolina Board of Dental Examiners (“Board”), a state agency, was not exempt from federal antitrust laws when it prohibited non-dentists from providing teeth whitening services in competition with the state’s licensed dentists.
The Court, thus, concluded that the antitrust laws apply to state agencies and regulatory boards comprised of market participants if the Board’s challenged conduct is not actively supervised by the state.
In the wake of that decision, state officials have sought advice from the FTC regarding antitrust compliance for state boards responsible for regulating occupations. In response to such requests, on October 14, 2015, the FTC Staff (“Staff”) issued guidance addressing the parameters of the “active supervision” requirement under the state action doctrine and its proper application, including the Staff’s perspective on when a state regulatory body requires active supervision in order to invoke the state action defense, and the factors that are relevant to determining whether the active supervision requirement is satisfied.
This guidance is an important tool to help state officials assess – and perhaps revise – the structure and operation of their regulatory boards to ensure they provide the necessary antitrust protection under the more narrow scope of the state action immunity doctrine.
Full content: Federal Trade Commission
Want more news? Subscribe to CPI’s free daily newsletter for more headlines and updates on antitrust developments around the world.
Featured News
FTC Lawyers Wrap Up Arguments to Block Kroger-Albertsons Merger
Sep 17, 2024 by
CPI
Financial Regulator to Monitor CNMC’s Ruling on BBVA-Sabadell Acquisition
Sep 17, 2024 by
CPI
Green Day Ticket Prices Spark Controversy Amid Dynamic Pricing Concerns
Sep 17, 2024 by
CPI
Michael Kors Points to TikTok and Taylor Swift in Defense of Luxury Handbag Market in FTC Case
Sep 17, 2024 by
CPI
Irish Watchdog Probes Google’s AI Data Practices
Sep 17, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Canada & Mexico
Sep 3, 2024 by
CPI
Competitive Convergence: Mexico’s 30-Year Quest for Antitrust Parity with its Northern Neighbor
Sep 3, 2024 by
Francisco Javier Núñez Melgoza
Competition and Digital Markets in North America: A Comparative Study of Antitrust Investigations in Mexico and the United States
Sep 3, 2024 by
Julio Garcia
Recent Antitrust Development in Mexico: COFECE’s Preliminary Report on Amazon and Mercado Libre
Sep 3, 2024 by
Alejandra Palacios Prieto
The Cost of Making COFECE Disappear
Sep 3, 2024 by
Mateo Fernández