DOJ and FTC Signal New Direction on Competitor Collaborations: Implications for Government Contractors

In a series of recent developments, the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) and the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) have signaled a shift in how they will evaluate collaborations among competitors—an issue that could have significant implications for government contractors that rely on teaming agreements, joint ventures, and subcontracting relationships in federal procurement.

In December 2024, the DOJ and FTC formally withdrew the Antitrust Guidelines for Collaborations Among Competitors, which had been in place since 2000. In doing so, the agencies indicated that the guidelines no longer reflected current enforcement approaches and therefore no longer provided reliable direction to the business community. For government contractors, this change is particularly significant because competitor collaborations are a common feature of federal procurements. Contractors frequently enter into teaming agreements or joint ventures to meet capability requirements, qualify for set-aside opportunities, or submit competitive bids on complex procurements.

More recently, however, the DOJ and FTC have taken steps to fill that gap. On February 23, 2026, the agencies announced a joint public inquiry seeking input on potential new guidance governing collaborations among competitors. The inquiry emphasized the importance of providing clear “rules of the road” while recognizing that many collaborations can be procompetitive and beneficial in modern markets.

The withdrawal of Antitrust Guidelines for Collaborations Among Competitors has left contractors and other businesses without a clear framework for assessing whether collaborations, such as teaming agreements or joint ventures, would be viewed as procompetitive or potentially unlawful. In the federal procurement context, where competitors often coordinate aspects of bidding, including pricing or proposal strategy, or divide work responsibilities, that uncertainty creates heightened risk. These risks are heightened by the DOJ’s continued focus on procurement-related collusion through initiatives such as the Procurement Collusion Strike Force (“PCSF”), which has brought numerous enforcement actions targeting bid-rigging and related procurement conduct and has continued to expand its enforcement capabilities. Notably, the PCSF’s Data Analytics Project, launched in 2020, facilitates interagency collaboration to develop and apply data analytics tools to identify patterns of potential collusion in procurement data for further investigation, signaling a sustained and increasingly sophisticated enforcement posture.

In the absence of formal guidance, companies have increasingly relied on case law and general antitrust principles when structuring these types of collaboration agreements. This includes assessing whether a court will analyze a collaboration under the rule of reason (which looks at an agreement’s overall competitive effects) or whether the agreement will be treated as per se unlawful (involving certain categories of conduct such as price-fixing, bid-rigging, or market allocation).

In establishing new rules of the road, DOJ and FTC invited public comments from industry stakeholders, including contractors, trade associations, and legal practitioners. The public comment period expired on May 21, 2026, after a one-month extension to allow for more input from industry. With that extended deadline now passed, the agencies are expected to begin evaluating submissions and developing proposed guidance.

Key Takeaways for Government Contractors

• Expect new guidance—but not immediately.
  While the DOJ and FTC are actively working toward updated collaboration guidance, no timeline for issuance has been announced. Contractors should assume continued uncertainty in the near term.
• Exercise caution in competitor collaborations.
  The absence of formal guidance heightens the risk associated with teaming arrangements involving competitors, particularly where such arrangements influence pricing, bidding strategy, or the allocation of work on a government contract, or could otherwise be characterized as limiting independent competition in a procurement. 
• Monitor regulatory developments.
  Given the recent close of the comment period on May 21, 2026, further agency action may occur in the coming months.
• Reassess existing teaming practices.

Contractors should consider reviewing standard teaming agreement templates and internal practices to ensure alignment with current antitrust principles, particularly with respect to pricing discussions, exclusivity provisions, and allocation of responsibilities among competitors.

Bottom Line 

The DOJ and FTC have effectively created a transitional period in which longstanding guidance has been withdrawn, replacement guidance is under development, and enforcement remains active. For government contractors, this evolving landscape underscores the importance of carefully structuring teaming arrangements, avoiding conduct that could be viewed as restricting competition in a procurement, particularly in connection with pricing, bid preparation, and workshare decisions, and staying attuned to future regulatory developments.