N※N

Mamdani's new anti-business bogeywoman: Lina Khan

  //business-finance.news-articles.net/content/202 .. ni-s-new-anti-business-bogeywoman-lina-khan.html
  Published in Business and Finance on Thursday, November 6th 2025 at 17:35 GMT by Fox Business

• 🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication
• 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source
• 🞛 This publication contains potentially derogatory content such as foul language or violent themes

Lina Khan: The New Anti‑Business Bogeywoman in Washington

The United States has named a new anti‑business crusader: Lina Khan, the first chair of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in its history. Her appointment has sent shock waves through Wall Street, the technology sector, and the broader business community, prompting a flurry of commentary and speculation about how her tenure might reshape antitrust enforcement and the regulatory landscape.

Khan entered the political arena as a rising star in antitrust circles after a decade at Harvard Law School, where she served as a law professor and wrote extensively on competition policy. Her scholarship has focused on “monopolistic” practices in the digital economy and the need for a more rigorous application of antitrust tools. In particular, Khan’s research highlighted how large technology firms, especially Google, Apple, Facebook, and Amazon, have engaged in practices that stifle competition and harm consumers.

The FTC’s announcement that Khan would lead the agency was met with mixed reactions. Supporters, including consumer advocates and a bipartisan coalition of lawmakers, praised her appointment as a long‑overdue correction to a regulatory body that has historically been perceived as business‑friendly. A key moment in her career came in 2019 when the FTC released a “Tech Watch” report that argued for stronger enforcement against “platform monopolies.” Khan’s leadership was also a response to an increasing number of lawsuits and congressional inquiries aimed at breaking up the dominance of big tech.

Critics, however, see Khan’s arrival as a direct threat to the traditional business environment. Many Wall Street analysts and corporate lawyers warned that her tenure could result in increased scrutiny on mergers, acquisitions, and even routine corporate practices. “The FTC has historically been an ally of businesses, not a foe,” said a senior partner at a major law firm in a recent interview. “Khan’s focus on antitrust will alter the risk calculus for many companies.” These concerns were echoed in a note on the FTC’s own website, where a 2023 press release noted that the agency would “strengthen its focus on ensuring competition and protecting consumers.” That statement has been interpreted by business leaders as a harbinger of heightened enforcement.

Khan’s appointment follows a period of intense debate over the appropriate scope of antitrust enforcement in the United States. While the original antitrust laws from the 1930s were designed to prevent monopolistic power, the modern digital landscape has created new challenges that many believe the current legal framework does not adequately address. Khan’s research is notable for its focus on “platform competition,” arguing that the “winner-takes-all” model used by tech giants is not merely a natural outcome of market efficiency but a deliberate strategy to consolidate power. Her academic work also critiques the “predatory pricing” defense often invoked by large firms to justify low prices that undermine competitors.

The new chair’s priorities are being closely monitored by both lawmakers and industry. In a recent hearing before the Senate Committee on Commerce, Communications, and the Judiciary, Khan outlined a four‑point agenda that includes: (1) revisiting the merger review process to ensure a more comprehensive assessment of market impact, (2) enforcing stronger data‑sharing rules to prevent proprietary lock‑in, (3) investigating “anti‑competitive” design features in consumer products, and (4) improving transparency around FTC enforcement actions. She emphasized that the agency would pursue a “balanced” approach, stating that “competition benefits consumers and businesses alike.”

The response from the tech sector has been predictably wary. Several major firms issued statements asserting that they would continue to comply with all regulatory requirements but also emphasized the need for clear guidelines to avoid “over‑regulation.” The United States Chamber of Commerce released a joint statement with several industry groups expressing concern that “increased scrutiny on business practices could hinder innovation and growth.”

In addition to her primary focus on technology, Khan has also taken a keen interest in the pharmaceutical and telecommunications sectors. She has signaled a willingness to scrutinize large mergers in these fields that could reduce competition. Her statements on the FTC’s website indicate that the agency’s new focus will involve “comprehensive investigations into the impact of mergers on competition and consumers.” This broadening of scope is a direct response to criticism that the FTC had previously focused too narrowly on consumer protection.

The political implications of Khan’s appointment cannot be overstated. Her tenure has been hailed by Democratic lawmakers as a critical tool for correcting market distortions and protecting consumers from the excesses of a few “platform monopolies.” Republican lawmakers have called her appointment a “dangerous step toward an overregulatory state.” The ongoing debate about the future of antitrust enforcement has been amplified by her high‑profile academic background, her clear focus on digital markets, and her willingness to pursue aggressive enforcement strategies.

Overall, the appointment of Lina Khan as FTC chair marks a pivotal shift in the regulatory approach to antitrust enforcement. Her academic credentials, focus on platform competition, and stated priorities signal a move away from a historically business‑friendly stance toward a more aggressive enforcement posture. The business community’s reaction has been largely skeptical, and many will watch closely to see whether Khan’s initiatives lead to significant changes in how mergers are evaluated and how market dominance is challenged. Only time will tell whether the FTC will become the “anti‑business bogeywoman” critics anticipate, or whether it will evolve into a more balanced regulator that serves both consumers and businesses.