Paramount Warner Bros merger hits new antitrust roadblock

95

TL;DR:

Oregon is seeking a 60-day delay to Paramount Skydance’s $110 billion Warner Bros. Discovery acquisition, arguing Paramount has not shared lobbying-related records needed for its antitrust review. The DOJ has already cleared the deal, but state-level scrutiny could still slow or complicate the merger.

Article:

Oregon’s attorney general plans to ask a court to delay Paramount Skydance’s $110 billion acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery for 60 days, arguing the company has not handed over records tied to its lobbying push for regulatory approval. The move matters because it could slow one of the biggest media mergers in years, even after the U.S. Department of Justice cleared the deal in June.

Attorney General Dan Rayfield said Oregon will seek a Multnomah County court order requiring Paramount to produce documents and hold off closing while the state reviews them. Paramount had told Oregon it would not close the deal before July 16, according to Reuters.

“We’re not going to let Paramount Skydance play hide the ball so they can rush through their massive merger,” Rayfield said, adding that Oregonians have a stake in the deal through “our film industry, in our economy, in the choices they’ll have as consumers.”

The dispute centres on records linked to “Project Warrior,” Paramount’s internal code name for its regulatory-clearance effort, and documents about lobbying the Trump administration. Oregon is also examining whether Paramount had any role in the DOJ’s statement closing its antitrust investigation.

The DOJ said its eight-month review examined more than two million documents from over 80 custodians and found the Paramount-Warner Bros merger was “not likely to result in harm to competition or American consumers” across streaming, linear TV and theatrical film markets.

Paramount rejects Oregon’s position, saying the requested information has “nothing to do” with state antitrust compliance and is not a legitimate reason to delay what it calls a lawful, pro-competitive transaction.

The next risk is state-level litigation. Reuters has reported that California, New York and other U.S. states are also probing the deal, keeping regulatory pressure alive despite federal clearance.