ARTICLE
3 February 2022

Crafting Divestiture Agreements In The Context Of Merger Investigations

JD
Jones Day

Contributor

Jones Day is a global law firm with more than 2,500 lawyers across five continents. The Firm is distinguished by a singular tradition of client service; the mutual commitment to, and the seamless collaboration of, a true partnership; formidable legal talent across multiple disciplines and jurisdictions; and shared professional values that focus on client needs.
Antitrust scrutiny of M&A remained high during 2021, and merging parties continued to make follow-on divestitures designed to obtain antitrust clearance for their main transaction.
United States Antitrust/Competition Law
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

Antitrust scrutiny of M&A remained high during 2021, and merging parties continued to make follow-on divestitures designed to obtain antitrust clearance for their main transaction. While a divestiture for antitrust reasons is necessary in only a small number of deals, it can be critical to achieving timely regulatory approval for a major transaction.

Antitrust enforcers continue to require that merging parties identify both the asset package and proposed buyer(s) as early as possible to maximize agency vetting. To obtain swift approval, a strong proposal must include all the assets, tangible and intangible, that the enforcer thinks the buyer needs to replace competition purportedly lost by the original transaction. Enforcers may even want to include assets outside the market in which they allege harm.

Otherwise common transactional terms can slow (or sink) an attractive proposal if they create entanglements or undermine the divestiture buyer's incentive to compete. Parties should:

Avoid circumstances where the seller has an ongoing financial stake in the divested assets or the buyer. For example, enforcers may argue:

  • A large milestone payment may make aggressive competition less rewarding for either seller or buyer, or
  • A seller-financed buyer may be reluctant to jeopardize its funding by competing vigorously against its lender or place the seller in line to reacquire the assets if the buyer fails.

Maximize buyer's future independence. Enforcers will expect the divestiture seller to provide transition services, but shared assets or transition services should be limited in time and scope to avoid creating longer-term entanglements. Enforcers want the divestiture buyer to stand on its own and view such relationships as potential avenues for collusion. For example, an enforcer may require that:

  • Shared IP be transferred to the buyer and licensed back as needed;
  • Communal physical assets be subdivided; or
  • Transition service agreements be short and services provided at cost.

Read the full 2021 Transactional Year in Review and 2022 Forecast.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

ARTICLE
3 February 2022

Crafting Divestiture Agreements In The Context Of Merger Investigations

United States Antitrust/Competition Law

Contributor

Jones Day is a global law firm with more than 2,500 lawyers across five continents. The Firm is distinguished by a singular tradition of client service; the mutual commitment to, and the seamless collaboration of, a true partnership; formidable legal talent across multiple disciplines and jurisdictions; and shared professional values that focus on client needs.
See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More