A State Antitrust Law Intake Memo You Can Copy Today

What This Template Is For

California's Compete Act (A.B. 1776) was signed on Sept. 30 and takes effect Jan. 1. It highlights a trend where state attorneys general and legislatures are taking action while federal activity seems quieter. For your team, the question isn't just about reading one statute. It's about consistently handling each new state antitrust law that comes your way.

This post provides a reusable State Antitrust Law Intake Memo. Fill it out once for the Compete Act, then reuse it for every state law that follows. It helps determine who owns the issue, which business units are affected, and what changes need to be made before the effective date.

One caution: The public facts we're working from are limited. The memo leaves the statute's substantive provisions as fields you complete from the enrolled bill text. Don't skip that step or rely on secondary summaries.

Prerequisites

Before you start, gather these:

• The enrolled bill text of A.B. 1776 and any official legislative analysis.
• Your operating footprint: the states where you sell, hire, hold assets, or have significant customers or competitors.
• Your current antitrust materials: your Standards of Business Conduct sections on competitor contact, your trade association guidance, your deal review process, and any Hart-Scott-Rodino Act checklist.
• Your existing training and attestation records to see what employees have already been told.
• A named owner in legal and a named contact in each affected business unit.

If you don't know your multi-state footprint at the business-unit level, build that first. The rest of the memo depends on it.

The Template

Copy everything below into your matter management system or a shared document.

STATE ANTITRUST LAW INTAKE MEMO

1. Basic Facts

• Law name and citation: ______
• Jurisdiction: ______
• Date signed: ______
• Effective date: ______
• Source document reviewed (attach): ______
• Memo author / date / legal owner: ______

2. What the Law Does

• Plain-language summary in three sentences or fewer: ______
• Conduct it addresses (check all that apply): ☐ agreements between competitors ☐ monopolization or single-firm conduct ☐ mergers or notification ☐ pricing or information sharing ☐ labor markets ☐ other: ______
• Who enforces it (state attorney general, private plaintiffs, agency, other): ______
• Remedies and penalties as written in the text: ______

3. How It Differs from Federal Law

• Overlap with the Sherman Act, Clayton Act, Federal Trade Commission Act, or Hart-Scott-Rodino Act: ______
• Where the state law is broader, narrower, or simply different: ______
• Open questions needing outside counsel review: ______

4. Exposure Assessment

5. Program Changes Required

• ☐ Update Standards of Business Conduct language
• ☐ Update competitor-contact and trade association guidance
• ☐ Update deal review or notification checklists
• ☐ Revise training content and audience list
• ☐ Update Speak-Up Program intake categories so related concerns route correctly
• ☐ Review Record Retention Policy and Document Preservation triggers
• ☐ Other: ______

6. Timeline

• Gap analysis complete by: ______
• Policy changes approved by: ______
• Training delivered by: ______ (must precede effective date)
• Attestation and Certification collected by: ______

7. Escalation and Sign-Off

• Escalate to general counsel or board committee if: ______
• Approved by: ______ Date: ______

How to Customize It

Section 2 is your accuracy gate. Each sentence about what the law does should trace to the statute's text. Leave a field blank rather than guess. A blank gets caught in review. A wrong summary gets trained into hundreds of employees.

Section 3 does the real strategic work. When states act independently, the risk for multi-state companies is inconsistency, not any single rule. Use this section to decide whether you'll adopt the strictest standard company-wide or carve out state-specific rules. A single high standard is simpler to train and audit. State-specific rules are more precise but harder to keep current. Pick one approach deliberately and document why.

Section 4 should reflect where your people actually work. Include remote employees and sales teams that serve customers in the state, not just offices. Ask each business unit lead to confirm their row in writing.

Section 5 is a checklist, not a mandate. Strike items that don't apply, but record why. Regulators and plaintiffs tend to ask what you considered, not just what you changed.

Add a state attorney general line. Because state attorneys general are increasingly active, add a field to Section 2 noting whether the enforcement office has published guidance, opened inquiries, or signaled priorities. Update it quarterly.

Validation Steps

Run these checks before you call the memo final:

1. Source check. Have a second lawyer compare Section 2 against the enrolled bill text, line by line.
2. Footprint check. Ask each business unit lead whether the exposure table matches reality. One missed unit is the most common gap.
3. Date check. Count backward from the effective date. Confirm training and policy approval can realistically finish before Jan. 1, not just by it.
4. Plain-language check. Give Section 2 to someone outside legal. If they can't explain it back, rewrite it.
5. Reuse check. After completing the memo for the Compete Act, hand a blank copy to a colleague and have them fill it for a different state law. If they get stuck, fix the template.
6. Follow-up calendar. Set a recurring reminder to revisit the memo after any guidance, enforcement action, or amendment.

A consistent intake process won't predict every state's next move. But when the next law arrives, your team will know who owns it, what to read, and what to change.