FTC Approves Fiscal Year (FY) 2013 HSR Premerger Notification Report

The Federal Trade Commission, with the concurrence of the Department of Justice’s Assistant Attorney General for Antitrust, released the agencies’ 36th Annual Hart-Scott-Rodino (HSR) Annual Report (Fiscal Year 2013) regarding the HSR Premerger Notification Program. The premerger notification program is instrumental in alerting the agencies to transactions that may substantially lessen competition in violation of federal law.

The report notes that 1,326 transactions were reported to the antitrust agencies, a 7.2 percent decrease from the 1,429 transactions reported in FY 2012. The report also summarizes the agencies’ merger enforcement activities, highlighting the 38 merger enforcement actions that preserved competition in many sectors of the economy, including pharmaceuticals, health care and health insurance, industrial and high tech goods, commercial air travel, consumer goods, waste collection, and energy.

The agencies also brought two civil penalty actions against parties for failing to comply with the requirements of the HSR Act resulting in a combination of fines totaling $1.2 million. The report also summarizes recent amendments to the premerger notification rules, including a framework for the withdrawal of a premerger notification filing under the HSR Act, which allows parties to refile without incurring an additional filing fee.

Finally, statistical tables in the report contain data profiling HSR filings and investigations during FY 2013. Appendices provide a summary of transactions for the past ten years, and the number of transactions reported and the number of filings received by month during this time.

The report concludes with an assessment that, as Congress intended, the HSR Act continues to give the government the opportunity to investigate and challenge mergers that are likely to harm consumers before injury occurs. The Commission vote to issue the report was 5-0. It is available on the FTC’s website and as a link to this press release. (FTC File No. P110014; the staff contact is Jeanine Balbach, 202-326-2568)

The FTC’s Bureau of Competition works with the Bureau of Economics to investigate alleged anticompetitive business practices and, when appropriate, recommends that the Commission take law enforcement action. To inform the Bureau about particular business practices, call 202-326-3300, send an e-mail to antitrust{at}ftc{dot}gov, or write to the Office of Policy and Coordination, Bureau of Competition, Federal Trade Commission, 601 New Jersey Ave., N.W., Room 7117, Washington, DC 20001. To learn more about the Bureau of Competition, read Competition Counts. Like the FTC on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, and subscribe to press releases for the latest FTC news and resources.

Debt Collectors Who Posed as Process Servers and Intimidated Consumers Settle with FTC

A Southern California debt collection operation, Asset Capital and Management Group, will surrender more than $4 million for consumer redress to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that it extorted payments from consumers using false threats.

The defendants behind the scheme will turn over their personal assets and give up any claim to the business assets, under the FTC settlements. They also are banned from the debt collection industry.

“Consumers shouldn’t be subjected to threats and intimidation,” said Jessica Rich, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “We’re pleased that victims of this scheme will be getting money back from the defendants.”

The FTC alleged the defendants used a sprawling network of intertwined companies and dozens of fictitious names to illegally extract payments from consumers for credit card debt that they had purchased from creditors. According to the FTC, the defendants employed an assortment of deceptive and abusive tactics in collecting on the credit card debt, violating both the FTC Act and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. The FTC charged that the defendants posed as process servers in calls to consumers and third parties, falsely threatened consumers with lawsuits, wage garnishment, seizure of their property, and arrest, and disclosed debts to consumers’ employers, colleagues, and family members. The FTC also alleged that the defendants violated the FDCPA by failing to tell consumers they were attempting to collect a debt, and failing to notify consumers of their right to dispute and obtain verification of their debt.

At the FTC’s request, a federal court in Los Angeles halted the operation in July 2013, froze the defendants’ assets, and appointed a receiver to take charge of the defendants’ business.

The settlements that resolve the case impose judgments totaling $90.5 million. The judgments against Thai Han, Jim Tran Phelps, Keith Hua, and James Novella will be suspended when they surrender their personal assets. The proceeds from those assets, in addition to frozen corporate funds held by the receiver, total more than $4 million, which will be used to provide refunds to consumers.

Besides the monetary judgments imposed on the defendants, and the bans on collecting debt, the settlement orders prohibit them from misrepresenting any relevant fact in connection with promoting or selling credit repair, debt relief, mortgage assistance relief, or lending services.

For consumer information regarding debt collection see: Debt Collection.

The Commission vote approving the proposed settlements was 4-0. The FTC filed the stipulated final orders in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California and they were entered on May 19, 2014. The FTC would like to thank the U.S. Postal Inspection Service for its assistance in bringing this case.

The Federal Trade Commission works for consumers to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices and to provide information to help spot, stop, and avoid them. To file a complaint in English or Spanish, visit the FTC’s online Complaint Assistant or call 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357). The FTC enters complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database available to more than 2,000 civil and criminal law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad. The FTC’s website provides free information on a variety of consumer topics. Like the FTC on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, and subscribe to press releases for the latest FTC news and resources.

FTC Approves Final Order Settling Charges That CoreLogic’s Acquisition of DataQuick Was Likely to Harm Competition

Following a public comment period, the Federal Trade Commission has approved a final order settling charges that CoreLogic, Inc.’s $661 million acquisition of DataQuick Information Systems, Inc. from TPG VI Ontario 1 AIV L.P. was likely to harm competition in the market for national assessor and recorder bulk data.

According to the FTC’s complaint, first announced in March, the combination of CoreLogic’s and DataQuick’s national assessor and recorder bulk data businesses would eliminate one of only three providers of national assessor and recorder bulk data. The complaint alleges that the acquisition would increase the risk of anticompetitive coordination between the remaining two market participants and the risk of CoreLogic unilaterally exercising its market power to increase prices and reduce quality for customers.

To preserve competition that would be lost due to the acquisition, the FTC’s final order requires CoreLogic to license to Renwood RealtyTrac LLC national assessor and recorder bulk data as well as several ancillary data sets that DataQuick provides to its customers.

The Commission vote approving the final order and the responses to the public comments received [Letter To Commenter Nigro | Letter To Commenter Zillow] was 4-0-1, with Commissioner Terrell McSweeny not participating. (FTC File No. 131-0199; the staff contact is Cathlin Tully, Bureau of Competition, 202-326-3644)

The FTC’s Bureau of Competition works with the Bureau of Economics to investigate alleged anticompetitive business practices and, when appropriate, recommends that the Commission take law enforcement action. To inform the Bureau about particular business practices, call 202-326-3300, send an e-mail to antitrust{at}ftc{dot}gov, or write to the Office of Policy and Coordination, Bureau of Competition, Federal Trade Commission, 601 New Jersey Ave., N.W., Room 7117, Washington, DC 20001. To learn more about the Bureau of Competition, read Competition Counts. Like the FTC on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, and subscribe to press releases for the latest FTC news and resources.

FTC Approves SCI’s Application to Divest Assets in Kansas, Missouri, and Texas to Signature Funeral and Cemetery Investments LLC

Following a public comment period, the Federal Trade Commission has approved an application by Service Corporation International (SCI) to divest certain funeral and cemetery assets, as required under the FTC’s December 2013 proposed order settling charges that SCI’s acquisition of Stewart Enterprises, Inc. would be anticompetitive.  In total, the proposed order requires the combined SCI/Stewart to divest 53 funeral homes and 38 cemeteries to ensure competition is maintained in 59 communities throughout the United States.

Through this action, the FTC has approved the divestiture of funeral home and cemetery properties in Kansas, Missouri, and Texas to Signature Funeral and Cemetery Investments LLC, as detailed in SCI’s March 20, 2014, petition to the Commission.

The Commission vote to approve the application was 5-0. (FTC File No. 131-0163, Docket No. 4423; the staff contact is Elizabeth A. Piotrowski, Bureau of Competition, 202-326-2623)

The FTC’s Bureau of Competition works with the Bureau of Economics to investigate alleged anticompetitive business practices and, when appropriate, recommends that the Commission take law enforcement action. To inform the Bureau about particular business practices, call 202-326-3300, send an e-mail to antitrust{at}ftc{dot}gov, or write to the Office of Policy and Coordination, Bureau of Competition, Federal Trade Commission, 601 New Jersey Ave., N.W., Room 7117, Washington, DC 20001. To learn more about the Bureau of Competition, read Competition Counts. Like the FTC on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, and subscribe to press releases for the latest FTC news and resources.

FTC Chairwoman Meets with Officials of Chinese Antitrust Agencies

Federal Trade Commission Chairwoman Edith Ramirez met today in Beijing with officials from China’s three antitrust agencies to follow up on the U.S. and Chinese agencies’ high-level dialogue regarding antitrust developments and priorities.

Chairwoman Ramirez held meetings with Shang Ming, Director General of the Anti-Monopoly Bureau of the Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM), Hu Zucai, Vice Minister of the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), Xu Kunlin, Director General of NDRC’s Price Supervision and Anti-Monopoly Bureau, and Ren Airong, Director General of the Anti-Monopoly and Anti-Unfair Competition Enforcement Bureau of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce (SAIC).

Ramirez traveled to Beijing, along with FTC Commissioner Maureen K. Ohlhausen, Leslie Overton, Deputy Assistant Attorney General with the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) Antitrust Division, and other FTC and DOJ officials, to meet with Chinese officials and participate in the American Bar Association Section of Antitrust Law’s first conference in China. Ramirez will deliver a keynote speech at the conference on Thursday focusing on three keys to ensuring an effective competition agency and the sound application of the antitrust laws: fair and transparent investigative procedures; decisions based solely on competition considerations, not other economic or social goals; and the need to strike a careful balance that maximizes consumer welfare when competition principles touch on other important values, such as respect for intellectual property rights.  She will also deliver remarks as part of the opening plenary session.  In addition, Commissioner Ohlhausen will participate in a panel on Abuse of Dominance and the Intellectual Property Interface.

On July 27, 2011, the FTC and DOJ signed a landmark memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the three Chinese antitrust agencies, which is designed to enhance communication and cooperation, as well as periodic high-level consultations among all five agencies. Since then, officials with the U.S. and Chinese agencies have held two joint, high-level meetings.

As more U.S. companies and consumers do business overseas, more FTC work involves international cooperation.  The Office of International Affairs serves both as an internal resource to Commission staff on international aspects of their work and as an official representative to numerous international organizations.  In addition, the FTC cooperates with foreign authorities through formal and informal agreements.  The FTC works with more than 100 foreign competition and consumer protection authorities around the world to promote sound policy approaches.  For questions about the Office of International Affairs, send an e-mail to [email protected]. Like the FTC on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, and subscribe to press releases and the FTC International Monthly for the latest FTC news and resources.

Ski Manufacturers Marker Völkl and Tecnica Settle FTC Collusion Charges Related to Ski Endorsers and Employees

Ski equipment manufacturers Marker Völkl (International) GmbH and Tecnica Group S.p.A. have settled Federal Trade Commission charges that for many years they illegally agreed not to compete for one another’s ski endorsers or employees. The proposed orders settling the FTC’s charges bar each firm from engaging in similar anticompetitive conduct in the future.

According to the FTC’s complaints [Tecnica Group complaint | Marker Volkl complaint], the most effective and costly tool for marketing ski equipment is securing endorsement agreements from well-known skiers. Typically, ski equipment companies compete to secure the endorsement of prominent skiers. When an agreement expires, the companies may try to induce the skier to switch from one company to another, for example, by offering more money in exchange for an endorsement.

The FTC alleges that starting in 2004 Marker Völkl and Tecnica agreed not to compete with each other to secure endorsements by professional skiers, in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act. Specifically, the FTC charges that Marker Völkl agreed not to solicit, recruit, or contact any skier who previously endorsed Tecnica skis, and Tecnica agreed to a similar arrangement with respect to Marker Völkl’s endorsers. In addition, the complaint states that in 2007, the companies expanded the scope of their non-compete agreement to cover all of their employees.

The purpose of these anticompetitive agreements, according to the FTC, was to avoid bidding up the cost of securing endorsements from skiers, as well as the salaries of their employees. The complaints also state that while limited non-compete agreements may be legitimate in some cases, the agreements between Marker Völkl and Tecnica had no efficiency benefits to justify their anticompetitive harm. The proposed orders [Tecnica Group order | Marker Volkl order] settling the FTC’s charges are designed to stop the anticompetitive conduct alleged in the complaint and to prevent similar conduct in the future.

Marker Völkl makes skis and bindings and is a subsidiary of the Jarden Corporation, which also owns the K2 brand of skis, ski boots, snowboards, and other equipment. Jarden is the leading seller of skis in the United States.

Tecnica is a privately held maker of ski equipment, sporting goods, and sportswear, based in Treviso, Italy. The company makes and sells Tecnica ski boots, Nordica skis, boots, and bindings, and Blizzard skis.

The Commission vote approving the administrative complaints and proposed consent orders was 5-0. The FTC will publish a description of the consent agreements package in the Federal Register shortly. The agreements will be subject to public comment for 30 days, beginning today and continuing through June 18, 2014, after which the Commission will decide whether to make the proposed consent orders final. Interested parties can submit written comments electronically or in paper form by following the instructions in the “Invitation To Comment” part of the “Supplementary Information” section. Comments can also be submitted electronically.

Comments in paper form should be mailed or delivered to: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, Room H-113 (Annex D), 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20580. The FTC is requesting that any comment filed in paper form near the end of the public comment period be sent by courier or overnight service, if possible, because U.S. postal mail in the Washington area and at the Commission is subject to delay due to heightened security precautions.

NOTE: The Commission issues an administrative complaint when it has “reason to believe” that the law has been or is being violated, and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest. When the Commission issues a consent order on a final basis, it carries the force of law with respect to future actions. Each violation of such an order may result in a civil penalty of up to $16,000.

The FTC’s Bureau of Competition works with the Bureau of Economics to investigate alleged anticompetitive business practices and, when appropriate, recommends that the Commission take law enforcement action. To inform the Bureau about particular business practices, call 202-326-3300, send an e-mail to antitrust{at}ftc{dot}gov, or write to the Office of Policy and Coordination, Bureau of Competition, Federal Trade Commission, 601 New Jersey Ave., N.W., Room 7117, Washington, DC 20001. To learn more about the Bureau of Competition, read Competition Counts. Like the FTC on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, and subscribe to press releases for the latest FTC news and resources.

FTC Puts Texas-based Operation Permanently Out of the Debt Collection Business After It Allegedly Used Deception, Insults, and False Threats against Consumers

The owner of a Houston-based debt collection operation that the FTC charged used insults, lies, and false threats of imprisonment to collect on payday loans will surrender his assets, estimated to be worth $550,000, to pay restitution to consumers who were charged unauthorized fees. All the defendants will be permanently banned from debt collection under a settlement with the Federal Trade Commission.

In 2013, at the request of the FTC, a U.S. district court shut down Goldman Schwartz, Inc., froze its assets, and appointed a receiver to take control of the business while the case was in litigation. The debt collection operation did business nationwide, collecting primarily on payday loans. In some cases it owned the debt, and in others, it acted as a third-party collector. The operation was charged with multiple violations of both the FTC Act and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

“Debt collectors who harass consumers, make false threats, and charge bogus fees are violating federal law and will be held accountable,” said Jessica Rich, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection.

The defendants  were charged with making false threats that consumers would be arrested and jailed, and that their children would be taken into custody; falsely claiming to be attorneys or to work hand-in-hand with local sheriff’s offices; disclosing debts to consumers’ employers and military superiors; and collecting bogus late fees and attorneys’ fees, according to the complaint.

The defendants also harassed and abused consumers by using obscene language and by calling repeatedly and at odd hours early in the morning or late at night, and failed to inform consumers of their rights to dispute the debts, have the debts verified, and obtain the names of the original creditors, the complaint alleged.

The settlement resolves FTC allegations against company owner Gerald Wright, company managers Starlette Foster and Jennifer Zamora, and several corporate defendants. The settlement requires Wright to surrender his assets, estimated at $550,000, which include funds from personal and business accounts and proceeds from the sale of realty. The remainder of a $1.4 million judgment against Wright is suspended based on inability to pay. The judgment against Foster and Zamora also is suspended due to their inability to pay. If it is later determined that the financial information the defendants provided the FTC was false, the full amount of the judgment will become due.

The monetary judgment will be used to pay restitution to consumers who were charged unauthorized late fees and attorneys’ fees, often in the hundreds of dollars. The defendants privately referred to these bogus fees as “Juice,” and used them to inflate the cost to consumers who wished to settle their debts, the complaint alleged.

Also under the order, the defendants are prohibited from misrepresenting the characteristics of any financial product or service.

As part of its continuing crackdown on scams that target consumers in financial distress, the complaint named as defendants Goldman, Schwartz Inc, doing business as Goldman, Schwartz, Lieberman & Stein; Debtcom, Inc., doing business as Cole, Tanner, & Wright; Harris County Check Recovery Inc.; and The G. Wright Group Inc., doing business as The Wright Group. Under the terms of the order, these companies will be dissolved.

For consumer information about dealing with debt collectors, see Debt Collection.

The Commission vote approving the proposed consent decree was 5-0. It is subject to court approval. The FTC filed the proposed consent decree in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division on May 19, 2014.

NOTE: Consent decrees have the force of law when approved and signed by the District Court judge.

The Federal Trade Commission works for consumers to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices and to provide information to help spot, stop, and avoid them. To file a complaint in English or Spanish, visit the FTC’s online Complaint Assistant or call 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357). The FTC enters complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database available to more than 2,000 civil and criminal law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad. The FTC’s website provides free information on a variety of consumer topics. Like the FTC on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, and subscribe to press releases for the latest FTC news and resources.

FTC Charges Green Coffee Bean Sellers with Deceiving Consumers through Fake News Sites and Bogus Weight Loss Claims

The Federal Trade Commission has sued a Florida-based operation that capitalized on the green coffee diet fad by using bogus weight loss claims and fake news websites to market the dietary supplement Pure Green Coffee. Popularized on the syndicated talk show The Dr. Oz Show, green coffee bean extract was touted as a potent weight loss treatment that supposedly burns fat.

The FTC alleged that weeks after green coffee was first promoted on The Dr. Oz Show, the defendants behind Pure Green Coffee – Nicholas Congleton, Paul Pascual, Bryan Walsh, and the companies they control – began selling their Pure Green Coffee extract, charging about $50 for a one-month supply. They marketed the dietary supplement through ads on their own sales websites – with names such as buypuregreencoffee.com, buygreenweightloss.com, greencoffeeweightcontrol.com. The sites featured footage from The Dr. Oz Show, supposed consumer endorsements, and purported clinical proof that dieters could lose weight rapidly without changing their diet or exercise regimens. The defendants also ran paid banner and text ads that appeared on search engines and contained phony weight loss claims.

Women's Health Journal fake news website containing advertising content such as 'Pure Green Coffee harnesses the weight loss effects of the purest extract from green coffee beans' claiming 'as seen on' with logos of CBS News, ABC, CNN, MSNBC
Homepage of a fake news site set up to advertise Pure Green Coffee product.

The defendants made similar claims on websites they set up to look like legitimate news sites or blogs, but were in fact advertisements, and on other “fake news” sites run by affiliate marketers whom they paid to advertise the Pure Green Coffee product, according to the complaint. The fake news sites featured mastheads of fictitious news organizations such as Women’s Health Journal and Healthy Living Reviewed, as well as logos they appropriated from actual news organizations, like CNN and MSNBC.

“Not only did these defendants trick consumers with their phony weight loss claims, they also compounded the deception by advertising on pretend news sites, making it impossible for people to know whether they were seeing news or an ad,” said Jessica Rich, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection.

Image from Dr. Oz TV show about green coffee, with him quoted as saying 'The magic weight loss cure for every body type'
A fake news site offered a playable clip from Dr. Oz’s TV show featuring green coffee.

The FTC charged the defendants with false and unsupported advertising claims, including:

  • that consumers using Pure Green Coffee can lose 20 pounds in four weeks; 16 percent of body fat in twelve weeks; and 30 pounds and four-to-six inches of belly fat in three to five months.
  • that studies prove Pure Green Coffee use can result in average weight loss of 17 pounds in 12 weeks or 22 weeks, weight loss of 10.5 percent, and body fat loss of 16 percent without diet or exercise.
  • that certain websites linked to the defendants’ sites are objective news sites with articles written by objective news reporters and that the comments following the supposed articles reflected views of independent consumers.

The FTC also charged the defendants with deceptively failing to disclose that consumers who endorsed the supplement had received it for free and were paid to provide a video testimonial.

The complaint also names as defendants the companies used by Congleton, Pascual, and Walsh to market this operation:  NPB Advertising, Inc., also doing business as Pure Green Coffee; Nationwide Ventures, LLC; Olympus Advertising, Inc.; JMD Advertising, Inc.; and Signature Group, LLC.

Consumers should carefully evaluate advertising claims for weight-loss products. For more information, see the FTC’s guidance for consumers of products and services advertised for Weight Loss & Fitness.

The Commission vote authorizing the staff to file the complaint was 4-0-1, with  Commissioner McSweeny not participating. The complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Tampa Division on May 15, 2014.

The FTC is a member of the National Prevention Council, which provides coordination and leadership at the federal level regarding prevention, wellness, and health promotion practices. This case advances the National Prevention Strategy’s goal of increasing the number of Americans who are healthy at every stage of life. 

NOTE: The Commission files a complaint when it has “reason to believe” that the law has been or is being violated and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest. The case will be decided by the court.

The Federal Trade Commission works for consumers to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices and to provide information to help spot, stop, and avoid them. To file a complaint in English or Spanish, visit the FTC’s online Complaint Assistant or call 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357). The FTC enters complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database available to more than 2,000 civil and criminal law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad. The FTC’s website provides free information on a variety of consumer topics. Like the FTC on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, and subscribe to press releases for the latest FTC news and resources.

FTC Staff: Missouri and New Jersey Should Repeal Their Prohibitions on Direct-to-Consumer Auto Sales by Manufacturers

Federal Trade Commission staff submitted written comments to Missouri State Representative Michael J. Colona and New Jersey State Assemblyman Paul D. Moriarty in response to requests for comment on legislative proposals that would alter the ability of automobile manufacturers to sell their cars directly to consumers. The proposed Missouri bill would expand current prohibitions of such sales by franchisors to also include sales by any manufacturer, regardless of whether they use independent dealers. In New Jersey, several bills would create limited exceptions to state law that, as currently interpreted, requires motor vehicles to be sold only through independent auto dealers.

According to the comments by staff from the FTC’s Office of Policy Planning, Bureau of Competition, and Bureau of Economics, current laws in both jurisdictions “operate as a special protection for [independent motor vehicle dealers] – a protection that is likely harming both competition and consumers.” The comments note the staff’s strong opposition to state laws that mandate a single method of distributing automobiles to consumers.

In Missouri, proposed amendments to current law would expand the scope of the existing restrictions on direct sales. Under the bill, all new motor vehicles in Missouri would have to be sold through independent dealers. As the staff comment states, current law limits franchising auto manufacturers’ ability “to innovate in their methods of sale in ways that might be more cost-effective and responsive to consumer demand” and “is very likely harming both competition and consumers. By expanding the scope of the existing prohibition to include manufacturers that do not currently use, or even desire to sell through independent dealers, HB 1124 [the proposed amendments] would amplify the adverse effects of the current prohibition” and “discourage innovation.”

In contrast, each of the legislative proposals in New Jersey would permit some manufacturers, under limited circumstances, to sell cars directly to consumers, and so would likely increase competition relative to the current blanket ban on all other methods of selling cars. But in the staff’s view, the bills “do not go far enough. . . .” “New Jersey’s consumers would more fully benefit from a complete repeal of the prohibition on direct sales by all manufacturers, rather than any limited, selective set of exceptions,” the staff comment states, noting that “current New Jersey law . . . is very likely anticompetitive and harmful to consumers.”

The prohibitions on direct sales in Missouri and New Jersey particularly affect Tesla Motors, a relatively new entrant in the auto market that has been prevented from selling directly to consumers, the staff comment states. But their effects are likely more far-reaching.

The staff comments encourage the Missouri and New Jersey legislatures to consider abandoning existing law and to “permit manufacturers and consumers to reengage the normal competitive process that prevails in most other industries.” Such changes “would facilitate the development of new methods of distribution and possibly . . . the arrival of new motor vehicle manufacturers,” benefitting motor vehicle buyers of Missouri and New Jersey.

“FTC staff offer no opinion on whether automobile distribution through independent dealerships is superior or inferior to direct distribution by manufacturers. . . .[C]onsumers are the ones best situated to choose for themselves both the cars they want to buy and how they want to buy them,” the staff states.

The Commission vote to issue each of the staff comments was 5-0 . (FTC File Nos. V140010 and V140008; the staff contact is Patrick J. Roach, Office of Policy Planning, 202-326-2793).

The FTC’s Office of Policy Planning works with the Commission and its staff to develop long-range competition and consumer policy initiatives, consistent with the FTC’s unique mission to conduct research and engage in advocacy on issues that affect competition, consumers, and the U.S. economy. The Office of Policy Planning submits advocacy filings; conducts research and studies; organizes public workshops; issues reports; and advises staff on cases raising new or complex policy and legal issues. To reach the Office of Policy Planning, send an e-mail to [email protected]. Like the FTC on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, read our blogs, and subscribe to press releases for the latest FTC news and resources.

FTC Outlines Recommendations for Online Advertising In Testimony Before Senate Homeland Security Subcommittee

The Federal Trade Commission testified before Congress today on the agency’s ongoing efforts to protect consumers from emerging threats related to online advertising, as well as the Commission’s recommendations in this area.

Testifying on behalf of the Commission before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs’ Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, Maneesha Mithal, Associate Director of the FTC’s Division of Privacy and Identity Protection, outlined steps the agency is taking to address concerns related to online advertising through enforcement and consumer education.

The testimony highlights work by the Commission on three consumer protection issues affecting the online advertising industry: privacy, spyware and other malware, and data security.

In the area of privacy, the testimony notes the recommendations put forth in the Commission’s 2012 privacy report, which encourages businesses to provide consumers with simpler and more streamlined privacy choices about their data, through a robust universal choice mechanism for online behavioral advertising.

The testimony also addresses a number of privacy cases brought by the FTC against companies in the online advertising industry.  For example, the testimony describes the FTC’s 2012 settlement with Google, in which the company agreed to pay a $22.5 million civil penalty to resolve charges that it misrepresented to some consumers that it would not place tracking cookies or serve targeted ads to them.

The testimony also describes the FTC’s cases to combat spyware and other malware. These cases support three core principles: first, that a consumer’s computer belongs to him or her, and it must be the consumer’s choice whether to install software; second, that buried disclosures about material information necessary to correct an otherwise misleading impression are not sufficient in connection with software downloads; and third, that a consumer should be able to disable or uninstall any software they do not want on their computer.

The testimony also highlights the FTC’s extensive consumer education work aimed at helping consumers avoid and detect spyware and other malware, including its sponsorship of OnGuardOnline.gov.

On the topic of data security, the testimony underscores the Commission’s enforcement actions, noting that the agency has obtained settlements in 53 data security cases, including recent cases against the mobile app company Snapchat, as well as with Credit Karma, Fandango and home security camera maker TRENDnet.

The testimony recommends expanding efforts to educate both consumers and businesses, and also encourages industry self-regulation efforts aimed at protecting consumers from malicious online advertisements.

In addition, the testimony renews the Commission’s call for the enactment of a strong federal data security and breach notification law, noting that a national law would simplify compliance for businesses while ensuring that all consumers are protected. The testimony also notes that supplementing the Commission’s existing data security authority with the ability to seek civil penalties in appropriate circumstances would provide a deterrent to those engaging in unlawful conduct that puts consumers’ personal data at risk.

The Commission vote approving the testimony and its inclusion in the formal record was 5-0.     

The Federal Trade Commission works for consumers to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices and to provide information to help spot, stop, and avoid them. To file a complaint in English or Spanish, visit the FTC’s online Complaint Assistant or call 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357). The FTC enters complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database available to more than 2,000 civil and criminal law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad. The FTC’s website provides free information on a variety of consumer topics. Like the FTC on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, and subscribe to press releases for the latest FTC news and resources.