---
title: "COMPETE Act Is Bad for California, but It Could Have Been Worse, Says ITIF"
summary: |-
  The COMPETE Act expands the California attorney general’s power to prosecute companies for unilateral conduct, increasing the risk that the state will treat the result of vigorous competition as an antitrust violation.
date: "2026-09-30"
content_type: "Press Releases"
canonical_url: "https://itif.org/publications/2026/09/30/compete-act-bad-for-california-but-could-have-been-worse/"
---

# COMPETE Act Is Bad for California, but It Could Have Been Worse, Says ITIF

WASHINGTON—In response to California [Gov. Gavin Newsom signing](https://www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/SIGN-msg-AB-1776.pdf) the Competition and Opportunity in Markets for a Prosperous, Equitable and Transparent Economy (COMPETE) Act into law, the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF) released the following statement from [Jack Nicastro](https://itif.org/person/jack-nicastro/), antitrust policy analyst:

> *The COMPETE Act dramatically expands the California attorney general’s power to prosecute companies for unilateral conduct, increasing the risk that the state will treat the result of vigorous competition as an antitrust violation, harming consumers and discouraging innovation.*

> *Attorney General Rob Bonta’s successful **[lawsuit](https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-bonta-celebrates-historic-verdict-live-nationticketmaster-trial)** against Live Nation and Ticketmaster shows that California already has the tools to challenge allegedly anticompetitive unilateral conduct under federal antitrust law. The COMPETE Act instead opens the door to prosecuting thriving California businesses under a broader state standard, potentially punishing competition on the merits.*

> *To its credit, the final version of the COMPETE Act recognizes that companies can legitimately obtain and maintain market power through superior products, services, or business acumen. It also drops two particularly problematic provisions from earlier versions: a private right of action and a broad ban on ‘unreasonably restraining trade,’ both of which could have invited frivolous lawsuits and increased financial burdens on businesses.*

> *The bottom line is that California should encourage companies to compete and innovate—not create new uncertainty over whether success itself could trigger antitrust prosecution.*

**Contact:** Sydney Mack, [smack@itif.org](mailto:smack@itif.org)

---
*Source: Information Technology & Innovation Foundation (ITIF)*
*URL: https://itif.org/publications/2026/09/30/compete-act-bad-for-california-but-could-have-been-worse/*