Draft Merger Guidelines Unlikely to Unravel Schwab-TD Ameritrade Deal

What You Need to Know

Draft merger guidelines indicate that regulators plan a more stringent merger enforcement approach.
However, deals that have already been closed are likely not in danger.
Unwinding mergers after the fact would be like unscrambling an egg, noted one antitrust expert.

Draft merger guidelines from the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission indicate that regulators plan a more stringent merger enforcement approach, but that doesn’t necessarily mean the proposals will pose retrospective risk to deals that have closed at this point.

While those opposed to Charles Schwab’s TD Ameritrade acquisition, which closed nearly three years ago, for example, may view the draft guidelines as new fuel for a legal challenge and possible reversal, antitrust experts suggested in recent interviews that the proposals, if finalized, shouldn’t jeopardize the $22 billion deal.

“The proposed new merger guidelines clearly signal a more aggressive approach toward merger enforcement by the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission than might have been the case in earlier times,” John Mayo, Georgetown University economics, business and public policy professor and executive director of the school’s Center for Business and Public Policy, told ThinkAdvisor recently.

It’s unclear whether the draft guidelines will even survive in their current state, given substantive issues raised in the ongoing public commentary period about the agencies’ tenor and methods, Mayo, who authored an antitrust textbook, added.

Merger guidelines have always allowed for both prospective analysis that can halt mergers before they can happen and for unwinding mergers after the fact, Mayo noted in an interview.

“In reality, unwinding mergers after the fact is exceedingly difficult. It’s the problem of unscrambling an egg,” he said. 

Unwinding Schwab-TD Ameritrade Would Be ‘Very Difficult’

In the Schwab-TD Ameritrade deal, “these are companies that I gather spent a lot of time and effort trying to merge their operational systems so that investors could seamlessly use a common platform. That suggests to me that it would be very difficult to unwind their merger and that will probably give pause to the agencies — even if they were thinking about challenging this merger — that will give extra pause to the agencies,” Mayo said.

Given the three years of history with the merged company, it’s “highly unlikely” the agencies themselves would reopen the case absent striking evidence of anti-competitive effects, Mayo said.

Historically, merger guidelines have represented a consensus approach among antitrust economists and lawyers as to the appropriate lens for assessing merger competitiveness, the Georgetown professor said, adding, “The new proposed guidelines are straining that consensus.” 

Courts might even rely less heavily on the new guidelines considering the controversy surrounding them, Mayo suggested. Some people have also suggested the agencies might lose more antitrust challenges in the future by relying on the newly proposed guidelines and putting themselves at odds with the modern economic consensus on antitrust policies, he said.

Schwab continues to integrate its TD Ameritrade merger. The firm has been migrating client accounts this year, with the next group planned for Labor Day weekend, followed by another weekend in early November, then a small group in early 2024.

Meanwhile, a federal antitrust case in Texas seeks to unravel the deal; earlier this year, the judge denied Schwab’s motion to dismiss the case, ruling the retail investor plaintiffs had stated plausible claims for relief sufficient to defeat that motion.

In July, the DOJ and the FTC released the 13 draft merger guidelines, which are currently undergoing a 60-day public comment period, until Sept. 18.

“Unchecked consolidation threatens the free and fair markets upon which our economy is based,” Attorney General Merrick B. Garland said in a release. “These updated merger guidelines respond to modern market realities and will enable the Justice Department to transparently and effectively protect the American people from the damage that anticompetitive mergers cause.”