HB384, titled the One Agency Act, would transfer all antitrust enforcement functions from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to the Department of Justice (DOJ). It defines key terms, sets a transition period, and directs the Attorney General to implement the transfer, moving FTC antitrust actions, personnel, assets, and funding to DOJ.
The bill also addresses ongoing investigations, consent decrees, and premerger notification filings, and it authorizes the DOJ to restructure the Antitrust Division to carry out the enforcement mandate.
The bill is designed to centralize federal antitrust enforcement under a single agency to avoid duplication and streamline procedures. It establishes the framework for the transfer, ensures continuity for ongoing actions, and provides for the publication of non-privileged information while protecting confidential data.
The act would take effect in the first fiscal year at least 90 days after enactment, with a lengthy transition period and potential extensions.Professionals should assess how this shift would affect enforcement pace, interagency coordination, and compliance planning across industries.
At a Glance
What It Does
Transfers FTC antitrust actions, employees, assets, and funding to the Attorney General at the earlier of a date set by the AG or the end of the transition period. The DOJ’s Antitrust Division will assume oversight, and the Attorney General may restructure as needed.
Who It Affects
FTC antitrust personnel, FTC antitrust assets, and FTC funding; DOJ’s Antitrust Division; courts handling antitrust matters; entities under investigation or facing enforcement actions.
Why It Matters
Consolidates enforcement to a single federal lead agency, aiming to reduce duplication, align procedures, and potentially accelerate or standardize antitrust remedies and settlements.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The One Agency Act consolidates federal antitrust enforcement by moving the FTC’s antitrust activities to the Department of Justice. It creates a transition framework that assigns transferred FTC personnel to DOJ’s Antitrust Division, transfers assets, and reallocates funding to support the unified enforcement posture.
The act also sets rules for handling ongoing investigations and consent decrees, ensuring that open matters can continue without abrupt disruption and that DOJ can deputize former FTC staff to carry forward cases if needed.
Key mechanics include the definition of an effective date and a transition period with a specified end date, during which the FTC cannot initiate new antitrust matters without DOJ approval. The bill authorizes the Attorney General to restructure the DOJ Antitrust Division as necessary to fulfill the act’s goals and requires coordination with the FTC for the transfer process.
It also includes technical amendments about consultation requirements and premerger filing notifications to reflect the DOJ-led regime while preserving certain enforcement authorities.Overall, the bill aims to remove interagency friction in antitrust enforcement, create a single, accountable lead agency for the antitrust laws, and provide a clear path for the seamless transfer of ongoing matters while protecting confidential information and preserving the integrity of past actions.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill transfers all FTC antitrust actions, employees, assets, and funding to the Attorney General at the earlier of a date set by the AG or the end of the transition period.
Transferred FTC personnel are to be reassigned to the DOJ Antitrust Division, and the DOJ may restructure the division before the transition ends to ensure efficiency.
Open investigations, studies, and other proceedings supervised by an FTC antitrust unit on the day before the effective date will be transferred to the Attorney General during the transition period; the FTC may deputize former employees to continue such actions.
At the end of the transition period, the Attorney General gains sole authority to receive, enforce, modify, or rescind consent decrees related to antitrust law, with potential deputization provisions for the FTC.
FTC premerger filing requirements are waived, while the DOJ retains the authority to require premerger filings going forward; this helps align merger review under the DOJ framework.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Findings
This section states the policy aim to vigorously and efficiently enforce antitrust laws and identifies current inefficiencies due to overlapping enforcement between the DOJ and the FTC. The practical implication is a presumption in favor of centralized enforcement by a single agency, which informs the transfer rationale and sets expectations for the transition’s direction.
Definitions
Key terms define the scope of the bill: what counts as antitrust laws (Sherman and Clayton Acts), the idea of an effective date, and the identification of the FTC’s antitrust unit and related assets, personnel, and funding. These definitions anchor the transfer mechanics and ensure consistent application across the statute.
Transfer of antitrust enforcement functions
Section 4 lays out the core mechanics of the transfer. It provides for the transfer of FTC antitrust actions, personnel, assets, and funding to the Attorney General at the earlier of a date set by the AG or the end of the transition period. The Attorney General is charged with completing implementation, possibly restructuring the DOJ’s Antitrust Division, and managing space and resources previously used by FTC antitrust units. It also covers how ongoing actions and consent decrees will be handled during the transition and sets the framework for deputizing former FTC staff with the Attorney General’s consent.
Technical and conforming amendments
This section directs the transfer of consultation obligations and premerger notification functions from the FTC to the Attorney General when related to antitrust law. It also preserves existing litigation resources during the transition and clarifies that nothing in the act limits the Attorney General’s future enforcement powers. The aim is to minimize procedural disruption and align enforcement authorities with the new structure.
Effective date
The act takes effect at the start of the first fiscal year at least 90 days after enactment, establishing a concrete timing for the transition and ensuring that agencies prepare for the shift in a defined timeframe.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Justice across all five countries.
Explore Justice in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- DOJ Antitrust Division gains consolidated authority and a clear mandate to lead antitrust enforcement with unified procedures.
- Federal courts handling antitrust matters benefit from a single, consistent enforcement framework, reducing jurisdictional ambiguity and potential procedural delays.
- Law firms and corporate legal teams specializing in antitrust gain predictability and a clearer enforcement path under a unified DOJ regime.
Who Bears the Cost
- FTC antitrust unit loses its enforcement jurisdiction and funding after transfer, with costs associated with staff relocation and resource reallocation.
- FTC’s space and facilities previously used by antitrust units will shift under DOJ management, incurring transition-related costs and potential space reallocation.
- Some interagency coordination and historical practices may need adjustment, potentially creating short-term administrative burdens during handoff.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
Centralization vs. continuity: consolidating antitrust enforcement in DOJ could improve consistency and efficiency, but risks slower decision-making and disruption to ongoing cases if transfers are not well managed.
The central policy choice is whether centralizing antitrust enforcement under DOJ will improve efficiency and consistency or raise concerns about bureaucratic delays and politicization. The act includes transitional provisions to minimize disruption, such as deputizing former FTC staff to continue ongoing actions and providing for the continued handling of consent decrees during the transition.
It also raises questions about how data, confidential information, and ongoing enforcement strategies will be managed under a single lead agency, and how premerger notifications will evolve in the new regime. The bill relies on administrative actions and budgetary appropriations to implement the transfer, which could affect the pace and manner of enforcement if funding or personnel flexibilities are constrained.
The arrangement presumes that a unified DOJ structure will reduce duplication and improve enforcement leverage, but it leaves open how rapid response to urgent matters will compare to the FTC’s prior operations and what safeguards exist to preserve independent investigative or due-process rights during handoff.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.