FTC Chair Turns Antitrust Attention to Energy Industry
For the energy sector, one silver lining of the increasingly aggressive rhetoric from antitrust regulators has been their singular focus on “big tech.” It seemed, for a time, that oil & gas had finally abdicated its long-held position as the industry most likely to be on the receiving end of heightened antitrust scrutiny. Any such hope evaporated last week, when Lina Khan, the new chair of the Federal Trade Commission, sent a letter to the White House, making clear that she has the energy industry squarely within her sights.
This renewed focus on the energy industry comes at an already sensitive time. If gas prices rise in the wake of Ida, there will be loud calls for an investigation, as was the case after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita in 2005. Similar to those storms, Ida amounted to a direct hit on the industry, barreling through the Gulf Coast and Louisiana, leaving more than 1 million without power. While it remains to be seen what will ultimately happen with fuel prices, there were already calls for an investigation after prices rose through the summer, even before the hurricane was on the horizon.
I. Ms. Khan’s Letter
The letter, sent on August 25, came in response to a request from Brian Deese, Director of the National Economic Council, for the FTC to investigate elevated gas prices. In his August 11 letter, Deese noted, “During this summer driving season, there have been divergences between oil prices and the cost of gasoline at the pump.” He asked the FTC to investigate. Khan’s response went far beyond Deese’s straightforward request, outlining a three-part enforcement plan, tightly focused on the energy industry.
First, Khan stated, she plans to “identify additional legal theories” to challenge retail fuel station mergers “where dominant players are buying up family-run businesses.” This remarkably specific initiative, possibly untethered to traditional concerns about customer impacts, could mean longer and less predictable reviews for deals involving the sale of independent gas stations.
Second, Khan indicated she would be “taking steps to deter unlawful mergers in the oil and gas industry.” While she again made clear that she is focused on retail fuel deals, she clearly left the door open for a broader industry focus. Specifically, Khan referred to a July decision to rescind a prior FTC policy that limited requirements for parties to any merger ultimately deemed unlawful to obtain prior approval from the agency for any future transactions. In her letter from last week, Khan stated: “we will impose ‘prior approval’ requirements to deter those who propose illegal mergers, including in retail gas markets.”
Finally, Khan wrote that she “will be asking our staff to investigate abuses in the franchise market.” She hypothesized that “large national chains” might be forcing their “franchisees to sell gasoline at higher prices, benefitting the chain at the expense of the franchisee’s convenience store operations.” Khan then signed off, stating, “I will continue to assess how the FTC can use its tools to police unlawful business practices in oil and gas markets.”
All of this adds up to a notably focused promise to create new hurdles for proposed transactions in the energy industry and to find new reasons to investigate a variety of conduct.
II. Pricing Investigations
Whether triggered by Hurricane Ida or by letters from concerned officials such as Mr. Deese, any FTC gas pricing investigation would bring significant discovery burdens for industry participants. The post-Katrina report, released in May 2006, explained: “Since August 2005, the Commission has expended substantial resources on this investigation, including the full-time commitment of a significant number of attorneys, economists, financial analysts, paralegals, research analysts, and other support personnel with specialized expertise in the petroleum industry.” Specifically, FTC staff conducted 65 interviews, issued 139 Civil Investigative Demands (similar to subpoenas), and 99 orders seeking profitability and tax expenditure information. Staff identified more than 105 retailers accused of price gouging.
Despite the deep dive, the Commission uncovered very little evidence of wrongdoing. While finding that seven refiners, two wholesalers, and 24 single-location retailers had higher average gasoline prices that were not substantially attributable to higher costs during the relevant period, the report ultimately concluded: “additional analysis…showed that other factors, such as regional or local market trends, appeared to explain the pricing of these firms in nearly all cases.”
This prior failure to find illegal conduct is unlikely to dissuade the current slate of enforcers from pursuing a similar investigation. Aggressive antitrust enforcement has rapidly become a central cause of the current administration. Biden’s antitrust appointees, including Khan, are clearly intent on implementing an elevated level of antitrust scrutiny.
III. Conclusions
Being an old industry will not shield oil & gas from the renewed emphasis on aggressive antitrust enforcement.
Parties to proposed transactions, particularly those involving retail fuel outlets, should be prepared to encounter an agency anxious to find issues premised on theories that fall outside of modern antitrust precedent.
Industry participants will also want to be prepared for a potential pricing investigation, should gas prices go up meaningfully in the wake of Ida. Such preparation should include a thorough documentation of the business justifications for any price increases.
ABOUT BAKER BOTTS L.L.P.
Baker Botts is an international law firm whose lawyers practice throughout a network of offices around the globe. Based on our experience and knowledge of our clients' industries, we are recognized as a leading firm in the energy, technology and life sciences sectors. Since 1840, we have provided creative and effective legal solutions for our clients while demonstrating an unrelenting commitment to excellence. For more information, please visit bakerbotts.com.