The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has finalized a rule for a noncompete agreement ban across the United States, aiming to enhance worker mobility, boost innovation, and stimulate the creation of new businesses.

FTC Chair Lina M. Khan stated that noncompete clauses suppress wages, hinder new ideas, and diminish economic dynamism. She highlighted that banning these agreements could lead to over 8,500 new startups annually. The new rule is expected to spur a 2.7% annual increase in new business formation, leading to significant economic benefits including an average annual earnings increase of $524 per worker and up to $194 billion in reduced healthcare costs over a decade. Additionally, it could result in 17,000 to 29,000 more patents each year.

Noncompetes are criticized for restricting workers from changing jobs or starting their businesses, often forcing them to remain in unsatisfactory positions or face significant hardships. Currently, about 30 million American workers, or nearly 20%, are bound by such agreements.

With the new rule, most existing noncompetes will become unenforceable. However, noncompetes for senior executives (less than 0.75% of workers) may still be enforced, although new noncompetes for any employees will be prohibited. Employers must notify workers, except senior executives, that their noncompetes will no longer be enforced.

The FTC’s proposed rule in January 2023 received over 26,000 public comments, the majority supporting the ban. These comments influenced the final rule, which deems noncompetes an unfair competition method and a violation of Section 5 of the FTC Act.

The FTC concluded that noncompetes hinder labor market efficiency and innovation, contributing to higher market concentration and increased consumer prices. The Commission suggested alternatives like trade secret laws and non-disclosure agreements to protect employer interests without restricting worker mobility.

The final rule allows existing noncompetes for senior executives to remain but prevents new ones. It also removes the requirement for employers to formally rescind existing noncompetes, simplifying compliance by merely notifying affected employees. The rule includes model notification language for employers.

FTC Ruling on Noncompete Agreement Ban and Pro-Ban Viewpoint

The FTC’s final Noncompete Rule enforces a comprehensive ban on new noncompete agreements for all workers, including senior executives. The rule identifies such agreements as an unfair competition method, violating Section 5, and making it illegal for employers to implement them.

For existing noncompete agreements, the rule distinguishes between senior executives and other workers. Existing noncompetes for senior executives may still be enforced, but for all other workers, these agreements will become unenforceable once the rule takes effect. Senior executives, defined as those earning more than $151,164 annually and holding policy-making positions, represent less than 1% of the workforce.

The FTC anticipates several benefits from banning noncompetes.

Reduced Healthcare Costs

An estimated $74-194 billion in savings on physician services over the next decade.

Increased New Business Formation

A 2.7% annual rise in new firm creation, adding approximately 8,500 new businesses each year.

Enhanced Innovation

An average of 17,000-29,000 additional patents annually, starting with an increase of 3,000-5,000 in the first year and reaching 30,000-53,000 by the tenth year, reflecting an 11-19% yearly growth over a decade.

Higher Worker Earnings

A projected $400-$488 billion boost in wages over the next decade, with an average annual increase of $524 per worker.

Contra-Ban Viewpoint

The new rule is set to take effect 120 days after its publication in the Federal Register, but its future is uncertain due to expected legal challenges from pro-business groups.

These groups argue that noncompete agreements are essential for protecting proprietary information and intellectual property. While the rule allows other protections like nondisclosure and confidentiality agreements, the groups question the FTC’s authority to impose a comprehensive, retroactive ban.

Despite several bipartisan bills introduced to reform noncompete agreements, such as the Workforce Mobility Act, Congress has not explicitly granted the FTC the power to ban them. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the country’s largest pro-business lobbying organization, has announced plans to sue to block the rule. Chamber President and CEO Suzanne Clark criticized the FTC’s decision as a significant overreach that would harm the competitiveness of American businesses and warned of its potential negative impacts on employers, workers, and the economy.

Dissenting commissioners agree that noncompetes shouldn’t be universally endorsed but argue that the FTC lacks the congressional mandate to enforce this rule. Commissioner Andrew Ferguson stated that any regulatory action must be based on explicit congressional authority, which he believes is absent in this case, rendering the rule unlawful.

The impending lawsuit reflects ongoing tensions between the business sector and President Biden’s administration, which has introduced measures to address corporate practices such as price gouging and anticompetitive behavior. When the FTC proposed the rule in January 2023, it projected an annual earnings increase of nearly $300 billion. FTC Chair Lina Khan noted that about 25,000 of the 26,000 public comments received were in favor, with significant support from healthcare workers.

These policy debates are occurring in the context of the 2024 presidential election, where Biden seeks to differentiate himself from the likely Republican candidate, former President Trump. National polls indicate a close race, with Biden working to improve public perception of his economic management. A CBS News poll showed only 38% of voters rated the economy positively under Biden, compared to 65% under Trump. Although inflation has decreased from its peak in June 2022, high prices remain a concern for many voters, with only 17% believing Biden’s policies will reduce costs, compared to 44% who trust Trump’s approach.

Alternatives for Enforceability of Noncompete Agreements

Here are several excellent alternatives to consider for protecting your business interests:

Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs)

NDAs are designed to protect confidential information such as trade secrets and client lists. A well-drafted NDA can be highly effective in safeguarding your proprietary information.

Non-Solicitation Agreements

These agreements prevent employees from soliciting your clients or other employees for a specific period after leaving your company. This helps to ensure that they do not take your business with them when they depart.

Clawback Provisions

These clauses allow you to recover costs associated with training or education if an employee leaves within a certain timeframe. This can deter employees from leaving shortly after you have invested significantly in their development.

While these alternatives can be effective, they might not offer the same level of protection as non-compete agreements. Therefore, it is crucial to consult with an employment lawyer to determine the best approach for your specific situation.

Legal Consulting Pro can play a pivotal role in this regard. As a leader in Legal Process Outsourcing, Legal Consulting Pro provides a comprehensive suite of contract drafting services tailored to the needs of both emerging businesses and well-established enterprises. Their expertise ensures that your agreements are robust and effective in protecting your business interests. By partnering with Legal Consulting Pro, you can secure professional guidance and support to navigate the complexities of employment law and safeguard your company’s assets with our comprehensive contract lifecycle management services.