The Justice Department has revived a targeted process for some Hart-Scott-Rodino merger investigations, a procedural change that could give deal teams a narrower first path through one of antitrust review's most expensive stages.

The Antitrust Division announced on July 23, 2026, that it has returned to targeted Second Request investigations and published a revised model timing agreement. The agency says the approach is meant to reduce transaction costs while preserving its ability to investigate deals that may harm competition.

The short version: companies should not read this as a free pass for challenged mergers. The new process can prioritize selected documents, data, and meetings first, but DOJ can still require full Second Request compliance if broader information is needed.

What changed

Under the HSR Act, companies above certain transaction thresholds must notify the Justice Department and Federal Trade Commission before closing. If either agency needs more information, it can issue a Second Request, which often requires substantial document, data, and privilege-log production before a deal can move forward.

DOJ's revived approach lets the Antitrust Division and merging parties use a timing agreement to focus first on priority material that could resolve the agency's questions. The model agreement describes a priority production process, rolling productions, front-office engagement, and a decision point after DOJ reviews the prioritized material.

After that review, the Division may close the investigation, narrow or modify the Second Request, or continue with full compliance. That makes the change potentially useful for deals where the competition issue is specific enough to test early, but less helpful for transactions with broad market, data, or customer questions.

What companies should check first

Deal teams should start with the actual source of antitrust concern, not the press release headline. If the risk turns on a narrow product overlap, a limited customer group, or a specific data set, targeted review may create a practical opening. If the risk spans many markets or business lines, the full process may still be unavoidable.

Companies should also check whether they can produce reliable priority documents quickly. The model agreement emphasizes rolling productions, search methodology, privilege logs, custodian limits, and data readiness. A team that cannot explain where the relevant records are may lose the speed benefit before the review begins.

For investors, the main signal is timing uncertainty. A targeted review could shorten the path for some deals, but it also creates an early checkpoint where DOJ can decide the matter is not narrow after all. That means merger models should still allow for a longer antitrust review, especially in concentrated or politically visible industries.

What to watch next

The first real test will be how often DOJ offers targeted agreements and whether the process changes outcomes or only changes sequencing. Independent business coverage framed the move as part of a broader effort to lower regulatory burdens for dealmakers, but the agency says it will still require full compliance when broader information is necessary.

The practical rule is simple: targeted review may reduce the first pile of paperwork, not the underlying antitrust risk. Companies considering a reportable deal should treat the new model agreement as a planning document and get qualified antitrust advice before assuming it will speed a specific transaction.