Connect with us

Published

on

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.

Apple isn't an evil company, but they do sometimes benefit from Chinese slave labor: JD Vance

On the Democratic side, billionaire donors Barry Diller and Reid Hoffman have voiced concerns about Khan keeping her job if Vice President Kamala Harris wins.

“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 sued Apple 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.

Hewlett Packard Enterprise agreed in January to acquire networking hardware company Juniper for $14 billion. And this month, Salesforce said it was buying startup Own for $1.9 billion.

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.

WATCH: How Big Tech is quietly acquiring AI startups without actually buying the companies

How Big Tech is quietly acquiring AI startups without actually buying the companies

Continue Reading

Technology

Week in review: Stocks rise, Meta gets real on metaverse, and Salesforce bounces

Published

on

By

Week in review: Stocks rise, Meta gets real on metaverse, and Salesforce bounces

Continue Reading

Technology

‘Terrifying’: Why U.S. senator in top intel post wants more spying on Chinese companies

Published

on

By

'Terrifying': Why U.S. senator in top intel post wants more spying on Chinese companies

Sen. Mark Warner on a Chinese tech threat that will be bigger than Huawei

Go back a decade and most Americans had never heard of Huawei. Today, the Chinese telecom giant is a symbol of how quickly China can dominate a strategic technology sector and in the process create new national security and market threats for U.S. government and industry.

Democratic Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, is now worried about another Chinese company that he predicts will eclipse Huawei in both scale and consequence: BGI. It is not building cell towers or smartphones for the 5G era. It is collecting DNA.

“If Huawei was big, BGI will be even bigger,” Warner said at the CNBC CFO Council Summit in Washington, D.C. on Wednesday.

BGI is one of the largest genomics companies in the world. It operates DNA sequencing laboratories in China and abroad. It processes genetic data for hospitals, pharmaceutical firms and researchers across dozens of countries, according to a recent report by the National Security Commission on Emerging Biotechnology.

The company began as a Beijing-based research entity, the Beijing Genomics Institute, tied closely to China’s national genome projects. It later expanded into a global commercial powerhouse, selling DNA sequencing, prenatal testing, cancer screening, and large-scale population genetic analysis, according to an NBC News report.

Through subsidiaries, BGI says it operates in the U.S. Europe, and Japan. In several countries, it helped built national genetic databases and pandemic testing systems.

A man visits the booth of BGI at the Healthy Life Chain area of the third China International Supply Chain Expo CISCE in Beijing, capital of China, July 16, 2025.

Xinhua News Agency | Xinhua News Agency | Getty Images

U.S. intelligence officials believe that global footprint gives BGI access to one the largest collections of genetic data on Earth. Lawmakers have warned that genetic data is not just medical information. At scale, it becomes a strategic asset spurring a “DNA arms race,” according to a Washington Post report. DNA profiles can reveal ancestry, physical traits, disease risk, and family relationships, and when linked with artificial intelligence, the data can also be used for surveillance, tracking and long-term biological research tied to national security, according to the Washington Post’s reporting.

At the CNBC event this week, Warner continued to press for more focus on BGI. “They are hoovering up DNA data,” Warner said. “This level of experimentation on humans and intellectual property theft, we all should be concerned about it.”

Congressional investigators have previously warned that BGI maintains close ties to the Chinese Communist Party and Chinese military, according to a report from the House Select Committee on the CCP. They argue that China makes little distinction between commercial data and state security needs.

The ‘super soldier’ fear

One of the biggest fears tied to BGI and China’s broader biotech push is the possibility of a genetically enhanced soldier. U.S. officials have publicly claimed that China has explored human performance enhancement and military biotechnology. U.S. defense analysts say China’s research spans population DNA collection, military databases, and AI-driven human performance modeling, according to a Wall Street Journal op-ed written by U.S. Director of the Central Intelligence Agency John Ratcliffe in 2020, when he was Director of National Intelligence during President Trump’s first term.

Warner directly referenced those concerns this week.

“It’s terrifying,” Warner said.

Troops make preparations before a military parade in Beijing, capital of China, Sept. 3, 2025.

Xinhua News Agency | Xinhua News Agency | Getty Images

Warner described China as a great nation and great competitor, and as a former telecom executive (he was among the founders of Nextel), he said what Huawei was able to execute on — producing good products at inexpensive prices before the U.S. and Western competitors were prepared — is a cautionary tale.

The BGI story looks uncomfortably familiar to Warner.

“Go back in time eight or nine years, and most people had never heard of Huawei,” he said.

Huawei rose by combining massive state support, global market access and aggressive pricing, not only outcompeting Western firms on scale and cost, but positioning itself inside the world’s telecom infrastructure before governments understood the security implications. Huawei was first placed on a U.S. trade blacklist in 2019, which banned U.S. firms from selling some technology to the Chinese tech giant over national security concerns. Chip restrictions on Huawei have since become even stricter.

But Warner said by the time the U.S. moved to restrict Huawei, “[we started to] lose a little.”

Much of the 5G backbone had already been shaped by Chinese technology.

During a separate interview with Javers at the CNBC CFO Council Summit, the Republican Chairman of the House committee on the Chinese Communist Party, Michigan congressman John Moolenaar, said “We’ve seen how they run the play of excess capacity, price manipulation, driving people out of business in different areas; they’re going to continue to run that play,” he said. “We want to be friendly with China, but China is not our friend. They are our foremost adversary,” he added.

The Soviet Union was a military and ideological competitor, but China, in tech domain after domain, Warner says — from telecom and 5G to AI, quantum computing and biotech — is a different kind of competitor.

Warner now sees BGI following a similar model in biotechnology. Like Huawei, BGI scaled rapidly with state support. The Washington, D.C.-based think tank Foundation of Defense of Democracies called upon lawmakers of both parties earlier this year to restrict BGI’s access to U.S. institutions.

Congress has been trying to pass various versions of the BIOSECURE Act, which would limit the ability of Chinese biotechs to operate in the U.S. Some U.S. hospitals and research institutions with ties to Chinese genomics firms are under federal pressure, according to the Associated Press, though some medical professionals within the U.S. say they risk losing key research support for core medical goals. BGI told the AP that the bill is “a false flag targeting companies under the premise of national security. We strictly follow rules and laws, and we have no access to Americans’ personal data in any of our work,” it said.

U.S. intel has moved too slowly, and disrupted key spying alliances

Warner said the U.S. intelligence apparatus has moved too slowly to recognize the biotech threat. He says that intelligence agencies focus too much on foreign governments and militaries, with less attention placed on commercial technology sectors. But in a world where technology supremacy is national security, Warner says more of our intelligence efforts need to reflect this shift.

Only in the past two to three years, he says, has the U.S. seriously expanded spying into AI, semiconductors, and biotechnology. Warner says we need a more “advanced approach” in this area, and he gave as one recent example when China’s largest chipmaker SMIC stunned U.S. officials by producing a six-nanometer chip despite sweeping U.S. export controls. The breakthrough showed that Washington had underestimated both China’s technical qualities and ability to work around restrictions. “We got caught off guard with the SMIC six-nanometer chip,” Warner said.

Warner is also worried that tracking China’s tech rise requires a type of deep cooperation with U.S. allies that the Trump administration has squandered, such as the global intelligence-sharing network called the “Five Eyes” alliance.

Those relationships are now under strain, he said, and key partners including the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and France have gone public in saying they are reluctant to share intel with the U.S. “They feel like we may be politicizing the intel product and that is not good news for America,” Warner said.

Underlying his concerns about the technology competition with China in areas including AI and biotech is the U.S. ceding the global lead in standards setting. For decades, the U.S. shaped the rules for wireless networks, satellites, and internet infrastructure. That dominance help Americans lead global markets, Warner said, but now China is aggressively positioning itself as the international standards setter.

Warner described the U.S. role in international bodies as one of the “secret sauces” in the era of America’s dominance of the global economy and technology, allowing the U.S. to leverage innovations occurring around the globe, “even if it didn’t arise in America.”

Across technology domains, influencing standards and protocols is critical to not only maintaining a competitive edge but also establishing ethical boundaries. “Will it be us or the Chinese?” Warner said. “The Chinese come in with clearly a less humanist approach. It’s been effective in lots of domains. We see it on standards-setting bodies. China floods the zone with lots of engineers, almost buying off the votes. We’ve got to reengage for American business and government,” he said.

Continue Reading

Technology

Biggest mistakes crypto investors make with estate planning

Published

on

By

Biggest mistakes crypto investors make with estate planning

Roughly 1 in 7 people are leaving unclaimed property on the table, according to the National Association of Unclaimed Property Administrators. While the recent heavy selling in bitcoin and ether is rightly getting all the short-term attention, this estate planning issue is a longer-term one that’s likely to be exacerbated as crypto adoption and ownership increase.

Many people neglect to account for cryptocurrency in their estate plans, or they don’t let their heirs know how to access their crypto holdings. With surveys in recent years from Gallup and Pew Research estimating that 14% to 17% of U.S. adults have owned cryptocurrency, losing access to those funds is a growing concern.

“Leaving property or mutual funds behind in a will is pretty cut and dried, but with more and more assets placed in cryptocurrency, a large share of inherited assets are in danger of forfeiture,” said Azriel Baer, partner in the estate planning and administration group at law firm Farrell Fritz.

This issue could be mitigated, in part, by crypto ETFs, which are gaining popularity with investors since the first batch of spot bitcoin ETFs were approved by the SEC in 2024, such as the iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT), followed a few months later by ethereum spot price ETFs, such as the Fidelity Ethereum Fund ETF (FETH). These ETFs allow investors access to the crypto asset class without actually owning crypto outright, helping reduce the chances of actual crypto getting lost.

Nevertheless, estate planning mistakes among crypto owners are common and can be avoided. Here are some of the biggest issues cryptocurrency owners need to tackle sooner rather than later.

Wills, if they exist, often don’t include digital assets language

Only 24% of Americans have a will that describes how they want their money and estate managed after their death, according to a survey from Caring.com. Even people who have wills in place have not updated them for many years, with nearly one in four Americans saying they haven’t touched their wills since their original was drafted, according to the survey.

This can be problematic for many reasons. An old will may no longer reflect people’s current wishes. In a crypto-specific context, anyone who hasn’t updated their estate plan in the past several years may not have language to provide legal authority for the trustee or executor to gain access to digital assets.

“It’s very common for people not to update their estate planning documents for 10, 20 years or sometimes longer. If that’s the case, you’re behind,” said Patrick D. Owens, shareholder at Buchalter and a member of the law firm’s tax, benefits and estate planning practice group.

Absent language about digital assets, your heirs might have to go to court to get the authority for the executor or administrator of the estate to gain access to the crypto assets. Most likely they’ll get access, “but it’s a hassle,” Owens said. “Obviously, it means time and money going into court.”

Even with a will, crypto assets can get stuck in court

A standard will is appropriate for many people, but many attorneys recommend clients also utilize a revocable living trust as part of their estate plan. Drafting a will is less expensive, but a revocable living trust offers more privacy and can help limit the time and expense of the probate process after death.

Baer advises clients to transfer their crypto to a revocable living trust so the trustee has immediate access upon the owner’s death. It could be six to eight months, or more, before a will is settled in probate and in the meantime, heirs wouldn’t have access to the assets. If the price of the crypto was going down rapidly, for example, they would have to wait to sell it if the estate was caught up in probate. Putting crypto assets into a revocable trust to avoid probate can prevent a lot of headaches, he said. 

Generally, a revocable trust is paired with a pour-over will so that assets not included in the trust at the time of a person’s death are transferred to the trust and distributed accordingly. 

Not sharing basic crypto information can cost millions

You don’t have to tell heirs you’re worth a fortune in bitcoin before you pass away, but you should make sure they know how to access your crypto after you’re gone. 

Baer worked on an estate where tens of millions of dollars in crypto were lost to the heirs because they didn’t know the decedent’s private keys, which function as digital passwords to grant access to cryptocurrency funds and prove ownership of blockchain assets.

Someone should know how to access the assets, whether through written instructions in a safe box, a safe at home, or directions kept with a lawyer or with one of the various crypto inheritance services that help ensure crypto assets are passed on to your family members, Baer said. Don’t put these private keys or other sensitive information in a will, because wills become public through the probate process, he added.

Many designated fiduciaries can’t handle crypto 

The person you chose to handle your other assets may not be the right person to deal with the crypto portion of your estate.

Not everyone understands crypto, the associated volatility or how to transact with digital currency, meaning lots of money can inadvertently be lost. The recent volatility in the price of bitcoin is a reminder that if you name someone who needs weeks to get up to speed on how to transact with bitcoin, the financial losses could be meaningful, Baer said. “Uncle Bob may be a great person, but he may have more challenges transacting with an asset class he’s totally not familiar with,” he added.

Sometimes, even institutional trustees might not be able to take on the responsibility for crypto. Owens had a client pass away with half a million dollars in bitcoin and ether. The institutional trustee who oversaw the client’s account refused to take on the responsibility for the crypto and a special trustee was named. Luckily, the client had a nephew who took on the role, but finding a suitable replacement can often be costly from a time and money perspective, Owens said. 

Failure to plan for crypto estate taxes

With the massive explosion in the values around cryptocurrency, many people have large crypto holdings, which could be subject to significant taxes, whether that’s income taxes or estate taxes, and failure to plan could be detrimental to their families, said Jonathan Forster, shareholder at law firm Weinstock Manion.

There could, for example, be estate taxes due, depending on the size of the estate. The federal estate tax exemption for 2025 is $13.99 million per individual. Some states also have a state-level estate tax.

Knowing the impact crypto ownership might have on your estate is an important consideration while you are alive. Forster has clients whose crypto holdings are worth more than $50 million. They wanted an efficient way to make gifts for the benefit of their children to get some money out of their estate. They created a limited liability corporation, transferred the crypto into the LLC and gifted an interest in the LLC to an irrevocable trust for the benefit of minor children with an independent trustee, Forster said. 

Many crypto investors fail to keep track of cost basis, which can be problematic for many reasons, including if you’re considering gifting digital assets during your lifetime. If you want to gift the assets while you’re alive, you need to have the basis so the recipient can properly account for the crypto if it’s eventually sold, Baer said. “It can be onerous to keep track of basis, but it’s important,” he said.

Continue Reading

Trending