1. Map Antitrust Risks before Drafting Policies
Start with the decisions employees actually make: who approves prices, prepares bids, exchanges market information, and meets competitors. This assessment should determine which activities need restrictions, advance approval, or legal review.
Identify Competitor Relationships
Review trade associations, joint ventures, benchmarking projects, and distribution relationships. A supplier or customer may also compete with the company, so record each relationship’s purpose, participants, and information flows rather than relying on commercial labels.
Distinguish Prohibitions from Review Triggers
Agreements among competitors to fix prices, rig bids, or divide markets are core prohibitions. Legitimate collaborations require a different analysis of their structure and competitive effects; employees need clear examples showing when to stop a discussion and when to request advice.
2. Connect Global Standards with Applicable Laws
A group policy provides common expectations, while local procedures address jurisdictional differences. Assign responsibility for identifying those differences and resolving questions before employees commit the company to a commercial arrangement.
Separate Federal and State Requirements
The Sherman Act addresses unlawful restraints of trade and monopolization, while the Clayton Act covers additional practices, including certain mergers. In New York, General Business Law §340, the Donnelly Act, separately prohibits specified anticompetitive agreements and combinations and permits qualifying indirect-purchaser claims.
Give Subsidiaries Clear Responsibilities
Designate a group program owner and a contact within each subsidiary. Define who approves sensitive activities, arranges translations, updates training, and escalates unresolved questions; local teams should know where to obtain advice before proceeding.
3. Put Controls into Commercial Workflows
A policy should tell employees what to do at the moment a risk arises. The following examples are starting points for program design, rather than universal legal requirements.
| Activity | Practical control |
|---|---|
| Trade association meetings | Review agendas and explain how to leave and report improper discussions |
| Competitor collaborations | Approve the purpose, information exchanged, and permitted recipients |
| Tender submissions | Document independent preparation and review unusual competitor contacts |
| Benchmarking | Assess data sensitivity, age, detail, and access |
| Pricing software | Review data sources and vendor practices before deployment |
Trade association meetings
- Practical controlReview agendas and explain how to leave and report improper discussions
Competitor collaborations
- Practical controlApprove the purpose, information exchanged, and permitted recipients
Tender submissions
- Practical controlDocument independent preparation and review unusual competitor contacts
Benchmarking
- Practical controlAssess data sensitivity, age, detail, and access
Pricing software
- Practical controlReview data sources and vendor practices before deployment
Make Information-Sharing Rules Specific
Employees need instructions covering future prices, bids, customers, output, and other sensitive information. An exchange through a consultant or shared platform still requires review; an intermediary does not automatically remove competition concerns.
Train Employees for Their Roles
Sales training should address discounts and competitor conversations, while procurement training should cover tenders and supplier contacts. Use realistic scenarios, explain reporting channels, and check understanding instead of relying solely on attendance records.
4. Test Controls and Correct Weaknesses
A written policy cannot demonstrate whether employees follow it. DOJ’s Antitrust Division evaluates program design, implementation, and effectiveness, but its guidance does not create a mandatory checklist or guarantee favorable enforcement treatment.
Check Decisions against Approved Procedures
Sample activities such as industry meetings or collaboration projects to confirm that employees obtained approvals and followed restrictions. Record each identified gap, its responsible owner, the corrective action, and a follow-up date.
Maintain Reporting and Review Triggers
Provide reporting routes employees can use without fear of retaliation, including an alternative when a supervisor is involved. Reassess controls after acquisitions, market entry, or major business changes, and escalate suspected misconduct promptly for legal assessment.
5. Questions about Program Implementation
Implementation requires decisions about scope, timing, and resources. These questions help distinguish a workable program from a policy that subsidiaries receive but cannot apply.
Can Existing Corporate Training Cover an Acquired Subsidiary?
Possibly, but first assess the acquired business’s products, competitor contacts, languages, and decision-making structure. Existing materials may need adaptation, and the integration plan should assign responsibility for closing identified gaps.
How Often Should the Program Be Reviewed?
There is no single review interval that establishes compliance for every company. Set a schedule based on risk and add reviews when operations, applicable law, or reported concerns indicate that existing controls may be inadequate.
6. Define the Development Project’s Deliverables
Before engaging an attorney, identify the subsidiaries, markets, and activities the project will cover. The scope should specify the policies, approval procedures, training, and testing plan to be delivered, with clear responsibility for implementation.
16 Sep, 2026
