Paul Weiss antitrust pro on evolving reg environment

The Trump administration seems more open to antitrust fixes in deals, but companies are seeing competition targeted in less traditional ways, Scott Sher, global co-chair of Paul Weiss' antitrust practice, tells Axios.

Why it matters: Dealmakers expected a friendlier, lighter touch to antitrust. The reality is more nuanced.

This Expert Voices interview was edited for length and style.

Are dealmakers approaching antitrust risks the same way they did under the previous administration?

• "The Trump administration has noted their willingness to accept remedies where a deal is otherwise not problematic, except for in a small area. Whereas the last administration really didn't accept any remedies.
• There seems to be an openness by this administration to accept remedies, and that changes the dealmaking dynamic, because you can consider deals that you may not have been able to consider in the last administration."

Any examples?

• "Not yet, because we're very early on in the administration. So there are no deals yet that have been settled with a consent decree."

How are you advising clients in terms of antitrust?

• "Let's think about creative ways to solve discrete problems with transactions because the agencies might be amenable to listening to those, so long as they actually solve a problem.
• If there are ways to explain how a transaction makes America more competitive globally, I think the agencies will at least entertain such arguments."

The Biden administration's FTC was very critical of Big Tech, but also groceries. Do you have a sense of a given industry the Trump administration expects to look closely at?

• "I think they've been pretty clear that two industries that are of particular importance to them are tech and health care."

The FTC and the DOJ recently supported litigation claiming asset managers undermined competition by advancing ESG. Why is that important?

• "It's just indicative that the two agencies are going to use the antitrust tools available to them to further issues that are important to the administration."

Dealmakers tell me there's still a slight chill from lawmakers regarding M&A. How serious are their concerns?

• "People are just trying to feel out what the priorities are of the administration and to the extent to which they can consider M&A that they hadn't considered over the past four years, because of an extremely aggressive enforcement agenda."
• "Generally, it takes six to 12 months to find out what the real priorities are of the administration and how far they are going to change the positions of the last administration."