FTC Issues Fines Totaling Nearly $2 Million For Failures To File HSR Notifications – The National Law Review

wp header logo 328
Spread the love

The Federal Trade Commission is closing out the year with vigorous enforcement of the Hart Scott Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976 (“HSR Act”) by imposing fines totaling nearly $2 million.  On December 22, 2021, the FTC settled charges in two separate matters for repeated violations of the HSR Act.  In one, investment fund operator Biglari Holdings Inc. will pay $1.4 million to settle charges that it failed to file the required HSR notification for stock acquisitions it made in 2020.  In the other, Clarence L. Werner, founder of Werner Enterprises, Inc. will pay $486,900 to settle charges that he failed to file for acquisitions between May 2007 and February 2020 of his company’s stock.
As discussed below, neither case involved an acquisition of stock that standing alone triggered a reporting requirement.  However, it underscores that the HSR notification standards are cumulative, and parties need to look back and determine whether an incremental acquisition puts them over the notification threshold.  In these cases, the acquisitions did, and the FTC is making the parties pay the price of their failure to file—even when no M&A activity was involved.
The HSR Act requires companies and individuals acquiring voting securities or assets, where jurisdictional dollar thresholds are met, to file a premerger notification and report form with the FTC and the Department of Justice and to observe a statutory waiting period (usually 30 days) prior to consummating the transaction.  Smaller transactions may also be reportable due to the need to aggregate new acquisitions with current holdings.  The notification process and waiting period are designed to allow the federal antitrust agencies to investigate the potential competitive impact of the proposed transaction before it is consummated.  The maximum civil penalty for HSR violations is currently $43,792 per day.
Biglari’s alleged violation was the result of its failure to file an HSR notification for acquisitions it made in March 2020 of shares of Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, Inc., that, together with its prior holdings of Cracker Barrel, caused it to exceed an HSR filing threshold.  Prior to March 2020, Biglari already held Cracker Barrel stock.  Then, on March 16, 2020, Biglari acquired additional Cracker Barrel stock through two entities that, on their own were below the reporting threshold, but when aggregated with the stock it already held, resulted in it exceeding the threshold.  Biglari did not identify the error on its own.  According to the complaint, Biglari made a corrective filing in June 2020 for the March 2020 acquisitions, only after the FTC contacted the company to ask why no filing had been made.  The alleged violation lasted from the March 16, 2020 acquisitions until July 20, 2020 when the waiting period for the corrective filing expired. 
Biglari claimed that it was unaware that it had to aggregate its current holding with the new acquisitions.  The FTC’s Director of the Bureau of Competition said that such ignorance “even if true, is grossly negligent.”  Particularly as this was not Biglari’s first HSR violation.  Biglari had previously been fined $850,000 in 2011 for an HSR violation related to another purchase of Cracker Barrel stock. As part of its corrective filing at the time, Biglari committed to seeking advice from HSR counsel prior to making future acquisitions of stock.
Werner’s alleged violation was the result of his failure to file an HSR notification for several acquisitions of stock of Werner Enterprises, Inc.—the company he founded.  According to the complaint, in May 2007 Werner exercised options to acquire Werner Enterprises stock that, when aggregated with stock he already held of the company, caused him to exceed the reporting threshold.  In 2009, according to the complaint, Werner made four open market purchases of Werner Enterprises stock.  In November 2012, Werner again exercised options to acquire Werner Enterprises stock that exceeded the reporting threshold.  Finally, in February 2019, Werner received additional Werner Enterprises stock that also crossed the reporting threshold when some restricted stock vested.  Then, in January 2020 Werner’s counsel notified the FTC that the prior acquisitions were being analyzed and that it was likely that multiple corrective filings would be required.  According to the complaint, at least as of that January 2020 date, Werner was aware of his prior HSR Act violations.  Nonetheless, according to the complaint, Werner made two additional acquisitions of Werner Enterprises stock in February 2020 through the vesting of restricted stock awards.  Werner submitted his corrective HSR notifications in March 2020.
Werner’s alleged violation lasted from May 2007 through April 2020.  In the complaint, the FTC stated that “in particular, for very large open market acquisitions, it is not excusable negligence to be unaware of the HSR Act legal requirements.”
The proposed settlements in both matters will be published in the Federal Register for a 60-day public comment period in accordance with the requirements of the Tunney Act.  At the end of the comment period, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia may approve the proposed settlements upon a finding that they are in the public interest.
These cases remind investors—both institutional and individual—to actively evaluate all changes in their voting security holdings for potential HSR reporting triggers.  Notably, neither of these cases involved traditional M&A activity, nor did they raise any substantive competitive concerns.
About this Author
Bruce is Chair of the Antitrust Section and in his over 30 years in private practice, he has developed extensive experience in both antitrust and communications regulation, including associated First Amendment and copyright law matters
In the antitrust area, Bruce’s practice includes antitrust counseling and representation in connection with federal and state governmental matters, as well as private antitrust litigation. He counsels and has represented Fortune 100 companies, not-for-profits, start-up entities, and domestic and international joint ventures. Bruce has been involved in…
Farrah advises on all aspects of antitrust and competition law, including merger review, competitor collaborations, government investigations, private class action litigation, and general antitrust compliance.
Farrah specializes in counseling clients through the Hart-Scott-Rodino (HSR) merger review process at the U.S. Federal Trade Commission and the U.S. Department of Justice, including responding to Second Requests and providing substantive antitrust risk analysis for strategic acquisitions. She has obtained antitrust clearance for major,…
 
As a woman owned company, The National Law Review is a certified member of the Women's Business Enterprise National Council
You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review’s (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC’s  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  
Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be  a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 
Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.
The National Law Review – National Law Forum LLC 4700 Gilbert Ave. Suite 47 #230 Western Springs, IL 60558  Telephone  (708) 357-3317 or toll free (877) 357-3317.  If you would ike to contact us via email please click here.

source

Read Previous

The Supreme Court's 'shadow docket': What you need to know – PolitiFact

Read Next

2023: PDP Govs Pledge To Rescue Nigeria – :::…The Tide News Online:::… – The Tide

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.