Comments of Frederick C. Ashton, Jr.[1]

I. Introduction and Summary

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued a request for comment on the agency’s Draft Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2026–2030 on September 26, 2025.[2]

While these comments are not an exhaustive analysis of the draft Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2026–2030, I will focus my attention on several themes that merit consideration including the need for the FTC to recommit the agency to the consumer welfare standard and ensure the agency executes its mission without unduly burdening legitimate business activity.

II. Background

a. Government Performance and Results Act of 1993[3]

The Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA) requires federal agencies to submit to the Office of Management and Budget and to Congress a multi-year strategic plan for programs and activities. The statute mandates the plan contain:

(1) a comprehensive mission statement covering the major functions and operations of the agency;

(2) general goals and objectives, including outcome-related goals and objectives, for the major functions and operations of the agency;

(3) a description of how the goals and objectives are to be achieved, including a description of the operational processes, skills and technology, and the human, capital, information, and other resources required to meet those goals and objectives;

(4) a description of how the performance goals included in the plan required by section 1115(a) of title 31 shall be related to the general goals and objectives in the strategic plan;

(5) an identification of those key factors external to the agency and beyond its control that could significantly affect the achievement of the general goals and objectives; and

(6) a description of the program evaluations used in establishing or revising general goals and objectives, with a schedule for future program evaluations.

The legislative text directs the agencies to submit a plan that “cover[s] a period of not less than five years forward from the fiscal year in which it is submitted, and shall be updated and revised at least every three years.”

b. GPRA Modernization Act of 2010[4]

The GPRA Modernization Act of 2010 amended the strategic plan requirements outlined in the GPRA of 1993 and shortened the planning period from no fewer than five years to four years. The GPRA Modernization Act of 2010 no longer required an updated and revised plan every three years but tied the strategic plan directly to the presidential election cycle, requiring the submission “no later than the first Monday in February of any year following the year in which the term of the President commences….”

c. History of the Federal Trade Commission’s Strategic Plan

The FTC’s first strategic plan covered the period from 1997–2002.[5] The document provided an outline of the FTC’s strategic plan including a vision and mission statement; an overview of the FTC’s structure and legislative mandates; its goals, objectives, strategics, and performance measures; the plan to implement them; and several supplemental sections with additional background information. Several of the strategic plans included a message from the chair of the FTC. This basic structure was largely carried over in future iterations of the FTC’s strategic plan.

Occasionally, the FTC would publish addendums to strategic plans that typically updated performance metrics. The FTC published “FY 2012 Strategic Plan Addendum to Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2009–2014” and “Strategic Plan Addendum for Fiscal Years 2019–2022.” [6]

In 2025, however, the FTC updated its FY 2022–2026 Strategic Plan to reflect three executive orders issued by President Donald Trump.[7] The executive orders were entitled Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing (Jan. 20, 2025),[8] Initial Recissions of Harmful Executive Orders and Actions (Jan. 20, 2025),[9] and Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity (Jan. 21, 2025).[10] The agency noted that “The Commission has taken care to remove only those provisions that contravene the three executive orders while preserving the remainder.” The FTC, however, made one exception by removing the “preceding message from the former Chairwoman of the Commission.” It is noteworthy that the former chair, Lina Khan, was appointed by former President Joseph Biden.

III. Draft Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2026–2030

a. Draft Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2026–2030

The Draft Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2026–2030 (Draft Plan) maintains the basic outline as previous versions. It includes a message from the chair, vision and mission statements, background on the FTC, as well as three strategic goals, supporting objectives, and performance metrics.

b. Message from the Chair

The FTC’s strategic plan document typically contains a message from the chair outlining the agency’s strategic goals. Prior to the update to the Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2022–2026, former Chair Lina Khan discussed challenges facing by the agency, including the Supreme Court’s decision in AMG Capital Management, LLC v. FTC.[11]

The Draft Plan does not include a draft message from Chair Andrew Ferguson. Rather, there is a placeholder that reads the mission statement is “to be drafted later.” Waiting to provide a message from the chair until the final version of the strategic plan is consistent with past iterations including the Draft Plan for Fiscal Years 2022–2026[12] and the Draft Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2018–2022.[13]

There is evidence that Chair Andrew Ferguson will weaponize the FTC to advance the broader political agenda of the executive branch. The Wall Street Journal reported that “when [Ferguson] was campaigning internally for Trump’s nod as chair, Ferguson circulated a proposed agenda in which he pledged to ‘fight wokeness’ and investigate doctors and hospitals whom he said ‘deceptively pushed’ transgender care.”[14] This suggests that the FTC could select specific targets of investigations or enforcement actions for political purposes. Chair Andrew Ferguson should use his message to dispel concerns that the FTC will be used to pursue policy objectives outside its scope.

Politically targeted enforcement would disrupt business decision making. Rather than making investment decisions that are otherwise legal to increase shareholder value, businesses will be forced to consider how such choices will be perceived by the FTC. This would undoubtedly lead to inefficient outcomes including, but not limited to, increased costs, lower quality products, and less output. These inefficiencies would ultimately be borne by the consumer.

A way for Chair Ferguson to alleviate these concerns is by recommitting the agency to the consumer welfare standard as the guiding principle of competition and antitrust enforcement. The consumer welfare standard has been the backbone of antitrust and competition policy for nearly 50 years. Consumer welfare is measurable using economic analysis and empirical evidence that facilitates a reliable and objective application of law.[15]

c. Mission

Past strategic plans included a mission statement typically summarizing the FTC’s legislative mandates to prevent business practices that are anticompetitive, deceptive, or unfair to consumers. Language emphasizing the agency’s efforts to help better inform consumers is also often included.

In the immediate past version of the FTC’s Strategic Plan for FY 2022–2026, the agency notably replaced references of protecting “consumers and competition” with “the public.” This change exemplified the FTC’s abandonment of the long-standing consumer welfare standard under Chair Lina Khan. Moreover, the substitution served as an endorsement of a more populist approach to enforcement that elevated the interests of other groups above consumers, including workers and small businesses. This laid the groundwork for the agency to serve as a tool to achieve political goals beyond its remit.[16]

The Draft Plan does not fully reestablish the FTC’s decades-long commitment to protect consumers and competition. In fact, it doubles down on the populist approach of the immediate past plan. While the mission statement opens with a forceful pledge to “vigorously enforce the law” – mirroring a phrase consistently used by Chair Ferguson – it now frames the agency’s function as protecting “Americans.”[17] Changing the language from “the public” to “Americans” is a red herring and makes no material difference to the agency’s mission. Falling short of fully restoring the agency’s dedication to the consumer welfare standard, which protects consumers and competition, affords the agency to pursue other political objectives outside its intended scope.

Further, the FTC should recommit to conducting FTC enforcement activities in a manner that limits negative impacts on normal business activity. Previous strategic plans also included language about limiting negative impacts to business such as “without unduly burdening legitimate business activity” or “but not impede legitimate business activity.”[18] The FTC removed this language in FY 2022–2026 Strategic Plan, signaling to businesses that the FTC would take a much more aggressive approach to enforcement. Subsequent actions, including the three-year suspension of early termination,[19] the revised Section 5 policy statement that broaden the agency’s interpretation of its enforcement capabilities,[20] new Merger Guidelines,[21] updated rules governing the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act,[22] and the rescission of several policy statements that provided guidance for businesses without replacements,[23] confirmed that FTC enforcers were not concerned with how its enforcement approach affected legitimate business activities. This had a chilling effect on mergers and other business practices.

The Draft Plan reinstated the phrase “without unduly burdening legitimate business activity” in the mission statement, representing a significant reversal in the FTC’s approach to enforcement. Its inclusion reinforces previous comments made by Chair Andrew Ferguson who has routinely assured businesses that the agency would “get[] out of the way as quickly as possible” if there are no competitive concerns with mergers or other business practices. [24]

Recommitting to conducting FTC enforcement activities without “unduly burdening legitimate business activity” will encourage businesses to pursue competitively benign or procompetitive mergers and acquisitions or other business activities with the knowledge that such transactions would not be hindered by the agency. This will lead to more efficient and cost-effective outcomes that ultimately benefit consumers.

d. Strategic Goals

There are three strategic goals outlined in the Draft Plan, each with three objectives and a series of performance metrics. These strategic goals are, in large part, a continuation of previously stated agency goals.

i. Strategic Goal 1: Protect Americans from unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the marketplace

This goal reflects the FTC’s enforcement authority under Section 5 of the FTC Act, which prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce. The FTC described several areas of focus that largely reflect Trump Administration goals including “enforcing laws in ways that benefit domestic manufacturers and small businesses,” and “hold[ing] Big Tech accountable for unlawful conduct.”

These excerpts suggest that the FTC will use the agency’s enforcement authority to advantage certain types of businesses over others. In other words, the agency will engage in targeted enforcement to promote policy goals that may only tangentially fall within its purview. Taking enforcement actions to fit a broader policy narrative could undermine the agency’s credibility, effectiveness before the court, and harm consumers.[25]

Under Chair Ferguson, the FTC has already engaged in such enforcement actions. The FTC entered into a consent agreement with merging firms Omnicom Group Inc. and The Interpublic Group of Companies to remedy perceived political bias against conservatives. While this was not a Section 5 case involving unfair or deceptive acts or practices, it does highlight the agency’s willingness to use its various enforcement authorities to incorporate targeted enforcement to advance broader policy goals.[26]

The FTC should consider removing specific targets of enforcement from its Draft Plan. Furthermore, it should commit to remaining agnostic with respect to firm size.

ii. Strategic Goal 2: Protect Americans from unfair methods of competition, prevent illegal monopolies, and promote fair competition

One of the objectives supporting Strategic Goal 2 emphasized the importance of the Hart-Scott-Rodino premerger notification requirements and how the agency will “continue rigorous oversight to ensure compliance with Commission orders and with HSR reporting obligations.”

These reporting obligations are inconsistent with the FTC’s stated mission of enforcing the law “without unduly burdening legitimate business activity.” Under former Chair Khan, the FTC, along with the Department of Justice, overhauled the rules implementing the HSR Act for the first time in 45 years. According to the Hart-Scott-Rodino Annual Report for fiscal years 2024, just 3 percent of adjusted transactions resulted in a second request,[27] Yet the finalized rule imposed a per-filing average of 68 additional paperwork burden hours, adding a total of $139.3 million for all expected filings.[28] The updated HSR rules went into effect in February 2025.

The HSR premerger notification form does provide the FTC with the information necessary to identify potentially illegal mergers. Given that the updated HSR rules are in their infancy, the FTC should consider a new objective: Determine the effectiveness of the expanded HSR reporting form in identifying potentially illegal mergers.

iii. Strategic Goal 3: Protect Americans and maximize mission outcomes through operation excellence and efficiency

Strategic Goal 3 in the Draft Plan identifies opportunities to professionally develop employees and leverage new technologies, including AI, “to address changing agency needs and increasing data volumes.”

Business operations and mergers have become increasingly complex. Consequently, the agency will need to synthesize more data when conducting investigations. According to the Hart-Scott-Rodino Annual Report for Fiscal Year 2024, approximately one-fourth of transactions were valued at more than $1 billion. In 2015, just 15 percent exceeded $1 billion. Furthermore, that share was relatively steady between 2015–2020.[29]  Investing in such technologies will permit the agency to sufficiently review necessary business conduct and transactions.

IV. Conclusion

This response to the FTC’s request for comment with respect to the Draft Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2026–2030 finds that the agency has failed to fully recommit itself to the consumer welfare standard that has been the backbone of antitrust and competition policy and enforcement for nearly 50 years. Continuing to use antitrust and competition policy and enforcement to achieve political outcomes could ultimately harm consumers and leave them with higher prices and fewer choices.

The agency should also work to continuously evaluate the burden its rules and enforcement actions have on legitimate business activity and work to alleviate such burdens when possible.

[1] Fred Ashton is the Director of Competition Policy at the American Action Forum. These comments represent the views of Fred Ashton and not the views of the American Action Forum, which takes no formal positions as an organization.

[2] “FTC Invites Public Comment on Draft Strategic Plan (September 26, 2025),” https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2025/09/ftc-invites-public-comment-draft-strategic-plan

[3] “Government Performance and Results Act of 1993,” https://www.congress.gov/bill/103rd-congress/senate-bill/20/text

[4] “GPRA Modernization Act of 2010,” https://www.congress.gov/111/plaws/publ352/PLAW-111publ352.pdf

[5] “Strategic Plan 1997–2002,” https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/reports_annual/strategic-plan/spfy97fy02.pdf

[6] “FY 2012 Strategic Plan Addendum to Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2009–2014,” https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/reports_annual/strategic-plan/spfy09fy14add.pdf

[7] “FY 2022–2026 Strategic Plan, 2025 Update,” https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/fy-2022-2026-ftc-strategic-plan-2025-update.pdf

[8] “Ending Radical And Wasteful Government DEI Programs And Preferencing,” https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/ending-radical-and-wasteful-government-dei-programs-and-preferencing/

[9] “Initial Rescissions of Harmful Executive Orders and Actions,” https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/initial-rescissions-of-harmful-executive-orders-and-actions/

[10] “Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity,” https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/ending-illegal-discrimination-and-restoring-merit-based-opportunity/

[11] “AMG Capital Management, LLC, et al. v. Federal Trade Commission,” https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/19-508_l6gn.pdf; The Supreme Court held that the FTC could not use Section 13(b) of the Federal Trade Commission Act “to seek, and a court to award, equitable monetary relief such as restitution or disgorgement.”

[12] “Draft FTC Strategic Plan for FY 2022–2026,” https://downloads.regulations.gov/FTC-2021-0061-0001/content.pdf

[13] “Draft Strategic Plan FY 2018–2022,” https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/attachments/press-releases/ftc-releases-draft-strategic-plan-fiscal-years-2018-2022/draftstratplanfy18-22.pdf

[14] “How Trump’s FTC Chairman Is Bringing a MAGA Approach to Antitrust Enforcement,” https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/how-trumps-ftc-chairman-is-bringing-a-maga-approach-to-antitrust-enforcement-66b286d5?gaa_at=eafs&gaa_n=ASWzDAiEPE072E0uw-oeJ4YpPeTKAwBoU2TDL5ckPUgG7IPpeVVd5fCUuFg_ZDUiLBc%3D&gaa_ts=68e912d0&gaa_sig=iYMsHKj3mVwFkqZ2s9cCpe1p3RmWRxFZgKV_mFEMSWrwOk9wYI3oB8jCtWq6weG7gxj877L_JqKpRIVhBiHVqQ%3D%3D

[15] “Why the Consumer Welfare Standard Is the Backbone of Antitrust Policy,” https://www.americanactionforum.org/insight/why-the-consumer-welfare-standard-is-the-backbone-of-antitrust-policy/

[16] “Why the Consumer Welfare Standard Is the Backbone of Antitrust Policy,” https://www.americanactionforum.org/insight/why-the-consumer-welfare-standard-is-the-backbone-of-antitrust-policy/

[17] “CNBC Excerpts: FTC Chair Andrew Ferguson Speaks with CNBC’s Sara Eisen on ‘Squawk on the Street’ Today,” https://www.cnbc.com/2025/04/24/cnbc-excerpts-ftc-chair-andrew-ferguson-speaks-with-cnbcs-sara-eisen-on-squawk-on-the-street-today.html#:~:text=ANDREW%20FERGUSON:%20I%20am%20different,way%20as%20quickly%20as%20possible.

[18] Previous strategic plans, https://www.americanactionforum.org/insight/excessively-burdensome-regulation-negatively-impacts-competition/

[19] “Early Termination’s Termination: The First Full-Year Look from FTC and DOJ,” https://www.americanactionforum.org/insight/early-terminations-termination-the-first-full-year-look-from-ftc-and-doj/

[20] “FTC Expands Interpretation of Its Authority to Challenge Unfair Methods of Competition,” https://www.americanactionforum.org/insight/ftc-expands-interpretation-of-its-authority-to-challenge-unfair-methods-of-competition/

[21] “FTC and DOJ Publish New Merger (Mis)guidelines,” https://www.americanactionforum.org/insight/ftc-and-doj-publish-new-merger-misguidelines/

[22] “FTC Finalizes a Smaller Merger Tax, but a Tax Nonetheless,” https://www.americanactionforum.org/insight/ftc-finalizes-a-smaller-merger-tax-but-a-tax-nonetheless/

[23] “DOJ Revs Up Scrutiny of Information Exchanges,” https://www.americanactionforum.org/insight/doj-revs-up-scrutiny-of-information-exchanges/

[24] “CNBC Excerpts: FTC Chair Andrew Ferguson Speaks with CNBC’s Sara Eisen on ‘Squawk on the Street’ Today,” https://www.cnbc.com/2025/04/24/cnbc-excerpts-ftc-chair-andrew-ferguson-speaks-with-cnbcs-sara-eisen-on-squawk-on-the-street-today.html#:~:text=ANDREW%20FERGUSON:%20I%20am%20different,way%20as%20quickly%20as%20possible.

[25] “The FTC’s populist push is jeopardizing its credibility,” https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/3831531-the-ftcs-populist-push-is-jeopardizing-its-credibility/

[26] “The FTC’s DEI for Conservatives,” https://www.americanactionforum.org/insight/the-ftcs-dei-for-conservatives/

[27] “Hart-Scott-Rodino Annual Report Fiscal Year 2024,” https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/FY24-HSR-ANNUAL-REPORT-FOR-TRANSMITTAL-TO-CONGRESS.pdf

[28] “FTC Finalizes a Smaller Merger Tax, but a Tax Nonetheless,” https://www.americanactionforum.org/insight/ftc-finalizes-a-smaller-merger-tax-but-a-tax-nonetheless/

[29] “HSR Report Showed Increased M&A Activity in 2024,” https://www.americanactionforum.org/insight/hsr-report-showed-increased-ma-activity-in-2024/