Skip to main content
Date
Rule
801.1(b)
Staff
Patrick Sharpe
File Number
9103014
Response/Comments
I concur

Question

(redacted)

March 26, 1991

Patrick Sharpe
Premerger Notification Office
Bureau of Competition
Federal Trade Commission
6th & Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Room 303
Washington, D.C. 20580


Dear Pat:


This letter confirms our conversation this morning concerning the FTCs interpretation of the phrase [h]aving the contractual power presently to designate 50% or more of the directors of a corporation which is part of the definition of control. Rule 801.1(b).


I asked you to assume a situation in which Entity A and Entity B have a joint contractual right to designate 50% of the board of directors of Entity C. I asked you to further assume that Entity B had been passive so that Entity A had in fact designate 50% of the directors of Entity C for a number of years. However, Entity B retained the right to jointly designate 50% of the board of Entity C. The issue presented is whether Entity A controls Entity C.


You confirmed my conclusion that Entity A did not control Entity C, reasoning that both Entity A and Entity B had the contractual power presently to designate 50 percent of the board. Accordingly, neither Entity A nor Entity B controls Entity C as a result of the contract.


Thank you for your cooperation on this matter.


Sincerely,


(redacted)


(redacted)

About Informal Interpretations

Informal interpretations provide guidance from previous staff interpretations on the applicability of the HSR rules to specific fact situations. You should not rely on them as a substitute for reading the Act and the Rules themselves. These materials do not, and are not intended to, constitute legal advice.

Learn more about Informal Interpretations.