Antitrust experts say the modern administration’s hands-off approach to technology regulation may gain the president’s loyalty among technology executives in the tiny term, but could harm the competitiveness of the U.S. tech sector in the long term. (Photo: hapabapa/Getty Images)
Under Trump, tech industry leaders have enjoyed greater business freedom and an overall deregulatory stance, but antitrust experts say the administration’s hands-off approach could ultimately harm the ability of U.S. companies to innovate and compete globally.
Antitrust laws protect fair competition by ensuring that no one company controls the entire market, overprices its products, or controls labor costs. In the tiny term, a lax approach to these regulations could mean Americans could see more huge tech companies merge with or acquire smaller competitors.
In the long run, that means the already tiny group of people running the nation’s most powerful tech companies would gain even more control over the market, said Illinois-based legislative lawyer Maaria Mozaffar.
“Traditionally, technological innovation is inspired by how we can solve problems. And if fewer people are not investing in solving problems and more are investing in making profits, the intention of innovation will be different,” Mozaffar said. “What we end up with is a repetition of the same models and the same products that don’t actually solve the problems but just provide a faster way to make money.”
Trump’s approach to the FTC
While Democrats and Republicans may have had different antitrust “philosophies” in the past, it’s unusual to see wide swings in the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) approach, said Nadine Jones, an antitrust lawyer based in New Jersey.
Jones said the independent regulatory agency, which protects consumer interests and anticompetitive business practices such as price fixing, illegal mergers and monopolization, has historically operated with little presidential influence, although it technically reports to the executive branch.
But recent moves by the Trump administration suggest it wants a much more practical approach, Jones said. Before taking office, Trump chose Andrew Ferguson to chair the FTC, replacing Lina Khan, who fought against Big Tech’s overreach during her term. He and antitrust specialist Mark Meador focused on issues of “censorship” by huge tech, arguing that tech platforms unfairly restrict conservative views.
Earlier this year, Trump fired two Democratic commissioners from the FTC, which was a decision recently endorsed by the Supreme Courtand set a precedent for greater executive control over the independent agency.
And in August Trump rescinded the Biden-era executive order which called for antitrust enforcement to promote greater competition in industries and prevent business monopolization.
Everything points to the main topic of deregulation for the technology industry, with the goal of growing the industry with as little government involvement as possible. Jones said Trump’s dealings with huge tech leaders during the 2024 election were likely the first indication that he would treat the FTC differently.
“I think if I had tried to read the tea leaves in previous administrations, winning the president’s favor would have mattered less,” Jones said. “The DOJ, the antitrust division, the deputy attorney general of the division was who you wanted to gain favor with, or the chairman of the FTC. Whether you smiled nicely at the president mattered less, in my opinion, because they tended to leave these technical areas of the law to the experts.”
According to California tech founder and author Mark Weinstein, the FTC plays a key role in upholding democracy and free market capitalism. He said that Trump’s attempts to staff the commission with Republicans pose a threat to both concepts.
“It’s concerning, even if he appoints people who are willing to strongly enforce antitrust laws, because they’re still appointed by the president,” Weinstein said. “A quid pro quo was clearly inferred.”
Weinstein believes that by his second term, Trump had realized the enormous power that IT giants like Meta and Apple had in controlling content and shaping public opinion. Deregulatory policies could gain favor with Big Tech leaders and assist them control information, Weinstein said.
“If Meta kicks him off their platform, then they will have all the power,” he said. “And he wants all the power.”
Mozaffar said that Trump, by having influence over immense tech platforms, can more easily spread his ideas about diversity, equality and inclusion, and the former “censorship” of conservatives.
“When you see the tech giants behind Donald Trump, people think it’s just about making them richer,” Mozaffar said. “It’s real [Trump’s] the ability to control how these technology platforms conduct their business, in terms of content control.”
What does this mean for US tech companies?
So far, the FTC is continuing previous administrations’ antitrust lawsuits against some tech giants like Google, which is currently awaiting a decision on trial in which he was accused of monopolizing his search engineafter being found liable in separate advertising proceedings trial in 2024.
The commission is also awaiting the outcome of a six-week trial in a case filed against Meta, Facebook’s parent company, alleging in 2020 – under the direction of the first Trump administration – that the company created a monopoly by taking over Instagram and WhatsApp.
Trump-appointed FTC Commissioner Meador told the New York University Law Forum last month that he believes most Americans support scrutiny of huge tech companies.
“I don’t think this moment is a flash in the pan,” Meador said at the event. “I think it comes from a deeper sentiment and concern about economic integrity and regulation and economic policy at a very broad level. And this is just one manifestation of that. I think it’s a generational thing. I think it’s only going to get worse. So I don’t think it’s going to go away.”
However, the current Trump administration has brought only one antitrust case against a tech merger sued for blocking Hewlett Packard Enterprise since purchasing Juniper Networks for $14 billion earlier this year.
Mozaffar said Trump is likely weighing his options – he could pursue more established Republican efforts to enforce antitrust laws to promote competition. But he could also utilize the FTC chairman’s framework Ferguson, who criticizes the technology platform’s content moderation policies, as a way to rein in platforms that the GOP has long accused of censoring conservative viewpoints.
Mozaffar said she is watching how the administration handles horizontal and vertical mergers. Horizontal mergers, where two similar companies combine to form one company, are probably more familiar to the average American. But vertical mergers, which involve partnerships between companies at several levels of the supply chain, can be truly extensive.
One possible example is a recent one A deal worth $100 billion between AI giant OpenAI and computing powerhouse Nvidia. Nvidia’s investment in OpenAI includes the ability to expand data center capacity and compute chip demand, connecting businesses’ growth and success. Agreement he immediately raised the antitrust issue worries.
“How much control do you have over each element of the process? To the point where there is no product innovation or competition leading to the final product?” – said Mozafar. “And how much control do you have over protecting workers’ rights and best practices, because you can always cut corners to make sure the end product delivers the profit it’s supposed to deliver.”
Amid conflicting federal antitrust cases, Jones advised corporate lawyers to pay attention to their rights state antitrust lawsbecause attorneys general are some of the largest antitrust enforcers in the country.
She said that while allowing tech companies to operate freely may meet some of Trump’s short-term goals, a lack of enforcement will ultimately make the U.S. a less competitive and less inventive place.
“The antitrust philosophy believes that the only way to get real benefits to consumers and to get people to race to get to the finish line with their money — and you choose them with your money — is to compete with each other,” Jones said. “And then we, consumers, will be able to enjoy the fruits of these competitions.”
This story was originally produced by News from the USwhich is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network that includes the Ohio Capital Journal and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.
