Bill · S. 4434· Senate(119-S-4434)
CLEAN Mergers Act
- Introduced
- 4/29/2026
- Last activity
- 4/29/2026 — Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
- Sponsored by
- Cory Booker
- Cosponsors
- - 4 - 0
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The CLEAN Mergers Act aims to amend the Clayton Act regarding large business transactions. It requires parties involved in "threshold transactions" worth at least $10 billion to complete a divestiture or hold assets separate during agency review. The bill allows agencies and State Attorneys General to review past transactions to check for issues like political influence, ethical violations, or material misrepresentations. If certain negative conditions are found, the law mandates the divestiture of assets. It also establishes strict rules for preserving communications and provides for significant penalties for non-compliance.
Yes· 3 of 9
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?+7
The bill mandates strict data preservation and provides mechanisms to review potential political interference in transaction approvals.
Does this leave more decisions to the states?+6
The bill empowers State Attorneys General with an unconditional right of intervention in transaction proceedings.
Does this make it easier to run a small business?+5
By preventing massive consolidations, the bill helps maintain market space for smaller competitors.
The opposite
Would billionaires be better off under this?-7
Large corporations and their owners face significant new divestiture requirements, penalties, and personal liability risks.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Increased Accountability for Large Transactions: Parties involved in "threshold transactions" of at least $10,000,000,000 must complete divestitures if the transaction was consummated before the act's enactment, or hold assets separate to ensure competition during agency review if consummated after enactment (Section 2, subsection (b)(1)).
-
Protection of Competition through Review: Agencies and State Attorneys General can review "enforcement-lapse transactions" to identify issues such as political interference, material misrepresentations, or conflicts of interest that may have influenced a transaction's approval (Section 2, subsection (c)(1)).
-
Empowerment of State Officials: The Attorney General of any State is granted an unconditional right of intervention in proceedings related to declaratory judgments regarding threshold transactions or enforcement-lapse transactions (Section 2, subsections (b)(3) and (c)(4)).
-
Data Preservation for Transparency: The law requires acquiring persons to preserve all written or oral communications and electronic information related to transactions, which helps prevent the destruction of evidence (Section 2, subsection (e)(1)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Strict Requirements for Exemptions: To avoid divestiture, companies must prove through "clear and convincing evidence" that specific conditions—such as those regarding market share, price increases, or employment levels—did not occur (Section 2, subsections (b)(2) and (c)(3)).
-
Heavy Financial Penalties: Entities that fail to complete required divestitures face significant fines, which could include $100,000 per day, 5 percent of the total transaction value, or damages equal to three times the value of the commercial benefit derived from the assets (Section 2, subsection (f)).
-
Potential for Personal Liability: The bill allows for civil penalties of up to $100,000 per day to be imposed against chief executive officers and board members of entities resulting from a transaction (Section 2, subsection (f)(2)(B)).
-
Legal Burdens of Evidence Preservation: Companies and their agents are under strict mandates to preserve all communications and data, with failures potentially resulting in adverse inferences in court, sanctions for counsel and executives, or criminal referrals (Section 2, subsection (e)(2)).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Governance And Ideology
- Improves Government Transparency+7Increase States Rights+6
- Economy And Finance
- Improves Small Business Support+5Improves Consumer Protection+4Improves Economic Growth+3
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Good For Business Owners+4Good For Union Workers+3Good For Low Income Households+2Good For Middle Class Households+2Good For Billionaires-7
- 4/29/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
- 4 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in Senate
Mazie HironoDemocrat · Hawaii
Martin HeinrichDemocrat · New Mexico
Christopher MurphyDemocrat · Connecticut
Elizabeth WarrenDemocrat · Massachusetts