Sponsors (8)
The bill aims to reduce market concentration and increase transparency in digital advertising—potentially lowering fees and improving enforcement—while imposing costly restructuring and compliance burdens and creating sharp regulatory thresholds that could unsettle firms near the limits.
Advertisers and publishers gain stronger competition and potentially lower fees because very large ad companies (>$20B revenue) would be barred from vertically owning both exchanges and brokerages, opening market choice.
Advertisers and publishers can request detailed bid, price, and routing data from brokerages, increasing transaction transparency to verify fair execution and detect overcharging.
The Department of Justice and state attorneys general get stronger enforcement tools and a dedicated Antitrust Consumer Damages Fund to return money to harmed businesses, improving remediation for anticompetitive conduct.
Large digital-ad firms required to divest assets or restructure could face significant costs from forced sales and prolonged legal and compliance processes, which may reduce shareholder value and disrupt services.
The $20B and $5B revenue thresholds create regulatory cliffs where CPI-driven changes could unpredictably pull firms above or below limits, causing sudden shifts in obligations and market structure for companies near the cutoffs.
Smaller brokerages and exchanges face new reporting, data-retention, clock-synchronization (2 ms), and other technical requirements that will raise operational and compliance costs.
Based on analysis of 2 sections of legislative text.
Creates a new Clayton Act section that bars firms with over $20B in digital-ad revenue from owning certain ad-technology combinations and sets divestiture timing and definitions.
Official title: Amend the Clayton Act to prevent conflicts of interest and promote competition in the sale and purchase of digital advertising.
Introduced March 13, 2025 by Mike Lee · Last progress March 13, 2025
Creates a new antitrust rule in the Clayton Act targeting the digital advertising industry: companies with more than $20 billion in annual digital-advertising revenue would be barred from owning certain combinations of ad technology and exchange functions, required to divest conflicting assets on a set timetable, and subject to new statutory definitions and timing rules. The law defines key terms (like digital advertising exchange, buy- and sell-side brokerage, and digital advertising revenue), sets the revenue threshold (indexed to CPI), and establishes an effective date one year after enactment. The new section sets how to measure covered firms' advertising revenue, who counts as a related party, and when mandated divestitures must occur following enforcement actions or merger waiting-period outcomes. It creates a legal framework for future enforcement actions focused on competition and transparency in digital advertising markets rather than detailing specific remedies beyond divestiture timing and ownership prohibitions.