Lina Khan, chair of the U.S. Federal Trade Commission, and Jonathan Kanter, assistant attorney general for the Justice Department’s antitrust division, participate in a discussion on antitrust reforms at the Brookings Institution in Washington on Oct. 4, 2023. Khan assumed the role of FTC chair in June 2021 after being appointed by U.S. President Joe Biden and confirmed by the Senate.
Drew Angerer | Getty Images
Google had been in talks to acquire marketing software maker HubSpot earlier this year, but no deal took place. The company then made a run at cybersecurity startup Wiz. But that didn’t happen either.
Google took a different tactic in closing its one notable transaction of late. Following a model pursued by Amazon and Microsoft to lure experts in artificial intelligence, Google announced last month it was hiring the founders of generative AI startup Character.AI. Rather than buying Character outright and shutting it down — the standard acquihire playbook — Google kept the startup alive and entered into a licensing deal for its technology.
This is the new world of tech M&A. Under the Biden administration, and more specifically Federal Trade Commission head Lina Khan, the biggest companies have been thwarted from pursuing large deals. In some cases, they’ve even walked away from smaller deals. Amazon abandoned its $1.7 billion purchase of iRobot in January after the FTC and European regulators raised concerns.
Since peaking at $1.5 trillion in 2021, tech transaction volume has plummeted, dropping to $544 billion last year, according to Dealogic. So far in 2024, that number sits at $465 billion.
Within tech, private equity buyers are the ones keeping the market afloat. In July, BlackRock agreed to buy data provider Preqin for $3.2 billion, two months after Permira announced it was buying website-building platform Squarespace in a deal valued at almost $7 billion. Thoma Bravo, a leading tech buyout firm, said in July it was selling Instructure to KKR for $4.8 billion.
Don’t expect much to change for the rest of this year. With the presidential election coming in November, the regulatory environment could be poised for a shake-up, potentially leading to the removal of deal-making barriers.
However, neither party offers much clarity for what the future would bring. Sen. JD Vance, Donald Trump’s running mate on the Republican ticket, has praised Khan’s stricter rules on mergers, and he told CNBC last week that “there should be an antitrust solution” to some of the behaviors of large tech platforms.
“If Trump wins, I think that the regulatory environment will still be fairly challenging, and under a challenging regulatory environment, that just limits big deals,” said Andrew Luh, a partner at law firm Gunderson Dettmer who represents startups in mergers and acquisitions.
The Biden administration’s crackdown on Big Tech has gone well beyond squashing M&A.
Alphabet is in the midst of its second antitrust trial, following charges from the Justice Department that the company acted as a monopoly in search and advertising. The DOJ suedApple on antitrust grounds in March. The FTC has cases pending against Meta and Amazon.
Couple that with a similarly rigid environment in Europe, and no deal appears safe. In December, Adobe walked away from its $20 billion agreement to purchase design software startup Figma, and paid a $1 billion breakup fee. In a statement, the companies said, “there is no clear path to receive necessary regulatory approvals from the European Commission and the UK Competition and Markets Authority.”
In July, Figma said it had completed a tender offer valuing the design software startup at $12.5 billion. Figma is viewed as a strong IPO candidate when that market eventually reopens. But alongside a plummeting M&A market, initial public offerings are also in an extended drought as companies continue to adapt to drastically reduced valuations wrought by the economic slowdown starting in 2022.
A Figma spokesperson declined to comment on the company’s plans.
Dana Rao, who at the time was Adobe’s general counsel, announced his departure earlier this month after 12 years at the company. Rao said in a December interview that Adobe leadership felt justified in pursuing Figma after the failure of its competing product design program. But regulators were taking a different view.
“We’ve had a lot of interaction with the regulators, and they’ve been very focused on the newer doctrines of antitrust law that say that future competition is a critical part of the antitrust analysis,” he said.
Jonathan Kanter, head of the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division, said in a statement after Adobe backed down that the move “ensures that designers, creators, and consumers continue to get the benefit of the rivalry between the two companies going forward.”
‘Very, very disciplined’
There are still deals taking place, outside the watchful eye of regulators.
In those cases, management was less concerned about regulators and much more focused on how shareholders would respond due to the growing obsession with profitability, following the 2022 downturn.
US company Hewlett Packard Enterprise President and Chief Officer Executive Antonio Neri gives a conference at the Mobile World Congress (MWC), the telecom industry’s biggest annual gathering, in Barcelona on February 27, 2024.
Pau Barrena | AFP | Getty Images
HPE CEO Antonio Neri told CNBC that Juniper would add to non-GAAP earnings in year one.
“We have been very, very disciplined on returning invested capital, meaning every dollar spent has to deliver value to our shareholders,” Neri said in an interview. “And that’s why, in the case of Juniper, for example, we committed to a series of synergies that then more than pay for the cost of capital to make this acquisition.”
Neri told analysts in January that the two companies do business in some of the same markets, but in different verticals, and said that he didn’t anticipate protracted battles with regulators. In August, the U.K.’s Competition and Markets Authority approved the tie-up.
Sergio Letelier, HPE’s head of corporate development, said that when he and his team members advise Neri on a potential deal, they always discuss how regulators might treat it. While some transactions are taking longer to close than they would have previously, “the fundamentals of what is a problematic deal vs. what is not a problematic deal hasn’t changed,” Letelier said.
At Salesforce, CEO Marc Benioff said that Own should bolster free cash flow in the second year after the deal closed. It’s Benioff’s first billion-dollar-plus acquisition since 2021, when the cloud software vendor paid $27 billion for Slack, its largest purchase ever. The DOJ’s Antitrust Division asked for additional information on that deal before clearing it.
In an interview last week, Benioff called U.S. regulators “somewhat dysfunctional” but applauded Europe for recognizing where competition really is being harmed. He specifically pointed to a recent finding by the European Commission, the executive body of the European Union, that Microsoft had breached antitrust rules by tying Teams, its Slack competitor, to its core Office productivity applications.
“They’re the ones who are actually functional and who are doing serious work,” Benioff said, referring to the EU and U.K. “I think that it’s a big story that we’re following the Europeans in this regulatory environment.”
Since the Slack purchase, Salesforce has pursued only smaller deals, particularly after facing off with activist investors who pressured the company to put a renewed focus on profitability. Salesforce landed AI talent from buying Airkit and a Sales Cloud software add-on from Spiff.
“We’ve done more than 60 acquisitions,” Benioff said. “We’ve tried and failed a lot in M&A, but we have also succeeded in quite a few of them, especially the big ones.” Before Slack, Salesforce acquired Tableau Software and MuleSoft.
Hard to be confident
At Cisco, one of the first questions executives ask when evaluating a potential deal is how certain they are it will close, said Derek Idemoto, the networking hardware company’s head of corporate development.
“The question is, How much risk are you willing to take on the regulatory side, given how hard things are at this time and how litigious things could be,” said Idemoto, who’s worked on more than 100 deals in his nearly 17 years at the company.
Idemoto said that’s made Cisco more selective these days. Before the company announced its $27 billion purchase of data analytics software company Splunk last September, he said he viewed the risk as absolutely worth taking. Splunk sat comfortably outside Cisco’s core of networking equipment.
“Certainly it’s an offensive play for us,” Idemoto said.
The deal sailed through, even closing in March, six months ahead of schedule.
“Having a high confidence level when you sign something — that’s the Cisco way,” Idemoto said.
That level of confidence would be difficult for the megacap companies as long as the FTC and DOJ are aggressively watching them. Alphabet’s last big deal was its $5.4 billion purchase of cybersecurity company Mandiant in 2022. Microsoft closed its massive $75 billion purchase of Activision in October, but it took 20 months and a protracted fight with U.S. and European regulators. Amazon hasn’t had a billion-dollar-plus deal since closing the $3.9 billion acquisition of One Medical in early 2023.
Last month, Amazon announced it was hiring a quarter of staffers from Covariant, which builds AI models for robots. It was the company’s second AI deal in the acquihire vein, following a similar agreement with Adept in June. Even that deal attracted an informal FTC inquiry.
Amazon didn’t provide a specific comment for this story, but said acquisitions are still part of its growth strategy and “are a critical and healthy part of an innovation economy.” Microsoft and Google declined to comment.
HPE’s Letelier said that any tech company considering its acquisition strategy will have a difficult time forecasting for the future because it’s not clear what changes Vice President Harris might make if she wins in November or what Trump would do if he returns to the White House.
Trump as president blocked some deals on national security grounds, following recommendations from the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States. Regulators under President Joe Biden, meanwhile, have filed a record number of merger enforcement actions, Bloomberg reported.
“We’re at a crossroads here, and we don’t know which side of the fork the policy is going to go,” Letelier said.
U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer hold a press conference, following a meeting with Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng, on the day of U.S.-China talks on trade, economic and national security issues, in Madrid, Spain, September 15, 2025.
Louiza Vradi | Reuters
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Tuesday that President Donald Trump was willing to let TikTok go dark, and it was “what turned the tide” in the deal framework with China.
“President Trump made it clear that he would have been willing to let Tiktok go dark, that we were not going to give up national security in favor of the deal,” Bessent told CNBC’s “Squawk Box.”
TikTok parent company ByteDance is still looking at a Sept. 17 deadline to divest the app’s U.S. operations or potentially be shut down in the country.
The Trump administration hasn’t yet formally extended the deadline, though U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said Monday that more time may be needed for the deal to be finalized and signed.
Bessent said Tuesday that the commercial terms of the deal between ByteDance and the new investors had been done “in essence” since March or April.
After Trump’s massive tariff announcement on April 2, the Chinese put the deal on hold, he said.
Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping are expected to speak Friday to finalize the deal.
“We were able to reach a series of agreements, mostly for things we will not be doing in the future that have no effect on our national security,” Bessent said Tuesday.
Read more CNBC tech news
This is breaking news. Please refresh for updates.
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg tries on Orion AR glasses at the Meta Connect annual event at the company’s headquarters in Menlo Park, California, U.S., September 25, 2024. REUTERS/Manuel Orbegozo
Manuel Orbegozo | Reuters
Meta spent billions of dollars unsuccessfully trying to make virtual reality catch on with consumers. As it shifts its metaverse bet toward smart glasses, investors will be watching to see how the public responds.
The social media company is set to unveil its most advanced smart glasses yet on Wednesday at its Connect annual event. The glasses, internally codenamed Hypernova, feature a small display that can be controlled via hand gestures through a wristband that utilizes neural technology, CNBC reported in August.
A promotional video of the device reportedly appeared on Meta’s YouTube page on Monday but was later removed.
The device, expected to cost $800, builds upon Meta’s partnership with EssilorLuxottica, which spawned the AI-powered Ray-Ban Meta smart glasses in 2023 and the Oakley Meta HSTN smart glasses unveiled in June. Those glasses contain cameras, speakers and microphones, allowing users to command the Meta AI voice assistant to take a photo, shoot video or play music.
Wall Street has been concerned about the spending by Reality Labs, the company’s division in charge of developing consumer hardware products like the Ray-Ban Meta glasses and the Quest VR headsets. Meta revealed in July that its Reality Labs division recorded an operating loss of $4.53 billion during the second quarter, and has totaled nearly $70 billion in losses since late 2020.
Investors understand that Meta’s Reality Labs spending won’t significantly pay off for years, but they also “want to see progress” that indicates they will “see potential returns on investment,” said Justin Post, a Bank of America Securities internet research analyst. For now, smart glasses seem like a more sound investment than VR headsets, which are still niche and could take years to blossom, he said.
“I’ve definitely seen the company’s focus shift from VR headsets to glasses,” Post said. “At this point, the glasses are going to be much more impactful and more mass market.”
Meta declined to comment.
In Hypernova, Meta is selling smart glasses with a display to consumers for the first time. Though that display is expected to be small and limited in what it shows to users, the release of Hypernova represents a middle ground between the Ray-Ban Meta glasses and the experimental Orion augmented reality glasses that Meta showed off during last year’s Connect event.
Meta’s Orion AR glasses are displayed during a viewing in Menlo Park, California, U.S., Sept. 26, 2024.
Manuel Orbegozo | Reuters
The Orion AR glasses, working in tandem with a wireless computing “puck,” can project 3D visuals onto the physical world that people can interact with using a wristband. But while the Orion AR glasses can produce dazzling visuals, it’s still experimental and costly to make, said Anshel Sag, a principal analyst at Moor Insights & Strategy.
“Delivering something like Orion at scale will take time, which is why they are still a prototype,” Sag said. “I think a single display is a move in the right direction and would help build an ecosystem of apps.”
Connect presents Meta with an opportunity to build off the unexpected success of the Ray-Ban Meta glasses, said Leo Gebbie, a CCS Insight analyst and director. EssilorLuxottica said in July, during the company’s most recent earnings report, that Ray-Ban Meta smart glasses sales more than tripled year over year.
“It really feels like a chance to break through with a really new product category,” Gebbie said.
Analysts will also be watching for any signs that Meta’s recent artificial intelligence-related strategy shifts, which kicked off in June when the company invested $14.3 billion into Scale AI, can help its hardware efforts. The glasses could be the right hardware form factor for AI features, Post said.
“If they get the integration right with devices, it really could be a better portal for AI than even phones,” he said.
But although Meta has the money and technical talent to build its smart glasses, it needs to cultivate an ecosystem of developers who will build compelling apps and software that captivate consumers, Sag said.
The risk for Meta is that consumers ultimately reject the Hypernova and potentially the broader market of smart glasses with displays, Gebbie said. At $800, the glasses are expected to cost more than twice as much as the Ray-Ban Meta glasses, which start at $299. Already, Meta is setting low internal expectations for sales of the Hypernova glasses, CNBC reported in August, but the company will want the unveiling to at least generate some buzz.
Meta’s ambition is for smart glasses to become the next major personal computing platform. For now, Apple and Google remain on top with the iOS and the Android mobile operating systems, respectively.
Apple declined to comment. Google didn’t respond to a request for comment.
It’s unclear if Meta’s glasses will ever usurp the smartphone’s standing with consumers, but there’s enough of a threat that both Apple and Google are working on their own competitive products. Apple is reportedly working on its own glasses project, and Google in May announced a $150 million partnership with Warby Parker to build smart glasses
“The fact that everyone is now developing glasses suggests that Meta’s Reality Labs concept was well conceived, and they’re out in front at this point on glasses,” said Post. “The question for the competition is, can they leverage their mobile operating systems to get people to buy their glasses?”
Tesla CEO Elon Musk attends the Saudi-U.S. Investment Forum, in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, May 13, 2025.
Hamad I Mohammed | Reuters
Tesla’s shares have finally turned positive for the year.
After a dismal first quarter, which was the worst for the stock in any period since 2022, and a brutal start to April, following President Donald Trump’s announcement of sweeping new tariffs, Wall Street has again rallied around the electric vehicle maker.
The stock rose 3.6% on Monday to $410.26, topping its closing price of 2024 by over $6. It’s up 85% since bottoming for the year at $221.86 on April 4. A new filing revealed that CEO Elon Musk purchased about $1 billion worth of shares in the company through his family foundation.
It’s the second straight year Tesla has bounced back after a down first quarter. Last year, the shares fell 29% in the first three months before ending up 63% for 2024.
In recent weeks, analysts have praised the EV maker’s proposed pay plan for Musk, which could amount to a $1 trillion windfall for the world’s richest person over the next decade. The company has also gotten a boost from its new MegaBlocks battery energy storage systems that Tesla ships preassembled to businesses looking to lower their power costs or make greater use of electricity from renewable resources.
Even with the rebound, Tesla is the second-worst performer this year among tech’s megacaps, ahead of only Apple, which is down about 5% in 2025. Tesla is still in the midst of a multi-quarter sales slump due to an aging lineup of EVs and increased competition from lower-cost competitors in China, namely BYD.
Tesla has seen a consumer backlash, in part because of Musk’s political activities, including spending nearly $300 million to propel President Trump back to the White House and his work with the Trump administration to slash the federal workforce.
Tesla leadership has been working to shift investors’ attention to other topics such as robotaxis and humanoid robots.
However, the company has yet to deliver vehicles that are safe to use without a human onboard and ready to take control if needed. And while Musk is touting Tesla’s Optimus robots, which he says will be able to do everything from factory work to babysitting, a product is still a long way from hitting the market.