Summary of Key Points
Trump has nominated Kandeb, who has long criticized tech giants, to head the Antitrust Bureau. However, this appointment does not signify a tightening of antitrust regulations in the United States. The core principle of the Trump administration is to reduce regulation, and there is a tug-of-war between the “hardline antitrust faction” and the “pro-business faction” within the administration (with the pro-business faction currently having the upper hand). Although Kandeb holds hawkish views, his appointment still requires Senate confirmation, a process that could be lengthy, and his actual enforcement powers will be constrained by the overall government policy. The trend of reduced regulation will continue during Trump’s remaining two years in office; even if Democrats take over in 2028, there is no likelihood of a sudden tightening of antitrust policies.
I. The New Nominee: A Critic of Tech Giants, but Not a Destroyer?
Who is Kandeb? He currently serves as the General Counsel for the FCC and was the author of the antitrust chapter for the conservative think tank “Project 2025.” He has long been critical of tech giants:
- Advocating for stricter enforcement of Section 230 of the Communications Act: This provision exempts tech companies from liability for content posted by users. Kandeb believes this allows tech companies to act in a duplicitous manner, claiming to promote an open internet while simultaneously censoring speech.
- Questioning the independence of the FTC: Antitrust enforcement in the U.S. is conducted by both the Department of Justice and the FTC, with the FTC being an independent agency (the president cannot simply fire its officials). Kandeb argues that the FTC should not be solely responsible for antitrust oversight and even questions its necessity.
- The Challenges Ahead: He will inherit a number of complex cases, including appeals related to Google’s search monopoly, lawsuits against Apple’s smartphone dominance, and the pending merger between Paramount and Warner Bros.
However, Kandeb’s appointment is subject to Senate confirmation, and with the Republicans holding a narrow majority, the process could be delayed until the end of 2026, making it uncertain whether he will actually take office.
II. Why Does Nominating a “Hawk” Not Mean Tighter Regulation?
The core policy of the Trump administration remains to reduce regulation:
- Lessons from the Previous Commissioner: The previous commissioner, Slayter, was a hardliner who sought to split Live Nation’s ticketing business but eventually compromised. The company was required to make behavioral changes (such as avoiding exclusive agreements) rather than being split. Slayter resigned within a year due to conflicts with higher-ups over the HPE-ZebraNet merger, indicating that the pro-business faction has more influence.
- Executive Orders for Regulatory Relaxation: Trump issued two executive orders in 2025 directing federal agencies to reduce regulatory burdens and review antitrust laws. The Department of Justice and the FTC have also jointly written to various departments, pointing out that excessive regulation in the tech industry actually favors large companies (for example, Biden’s net neutrality rules may have made it harder for smaller firms to compete with giants).
- Decline in Merger Investigations: There has been a significant decrease in federal merger investigations under Trump compared to the Biden administration. The Trump administration prefers to encourage companies to make behavioral adjustments rather than pursuing mergers and acquisitions as a means of regulation.
III. The True Approach of the Trump Administration’s Antitrust Policy: Relaxation with Selective Interventions
The administration does not completely abandon antitrust enforcement; instead, it targets specific cases selectively:
- Approach to Large Companies: They believe that excessive regulation hinders innovation, so they tend to settle rather than aggressively pursue prosecutions against tech giants. For example, in the HPE-ZebraNet merger case, the Department of Justice initially filed a lawsuit but later reached a settlement with the companies, despite Slayter’s opposition—sources suggest that high-level political considerations may have influenced this decision.
- Political Intervention Over Technical Analysis: Former FTC Chair Kovachich noted that political factors now play a more significant role in antitrust decisions than technical analysis. Even if experts disagree, high-level decisions often go forward as planned.
- Targeting Certain Companies: While regulation is being relaxed, the administration will take action against tech companies that suppress conservative speech (Kandeb has previously assisted in enforcing such orders).
IV. Future Regulatory Trends: Relaxation for the Short Term, Little Change in the Long Run
- Remaining Two Years of Trump’s Term: Regardless of Kandeb’s appointment, the trend of reduced regulation will continue. Trump wants to enhance America’s competitiveness by encouraging innovation among tech companies and does not intend to impose strict regulations that could stifle their growth.
- After the 2028 Transition: Even if Democrats take power, there is no immediate change in antitrust policies. As Ma Yushu points out, decision-making authority lies with Congress and existing policy frameworks. The increased influence of business and tech sectors is a result of broader societal trends, not a fundamental shift in policy.
Conclusion
Kandeb’s nomination may seem like a tough stance against tech giants, but it reflects the internal balance of power within the Trump administration. While the administration has chosen a hawkish candidate, its overall approach remains one of reduced regulation. Ordinary users need not worry about major mergers and acquisitions; however, they may see increased scrutiny of platform content policies (e.g., stricter enforcement of Section 230). For tech companies, the next two years are likely to remain relatively favorable.