The Federal Trade Commission is reportedly evaluating Elon Musk's $44 billion acquisition of Twitter to see if it poses any antitrust concerns.
A decision about whether to proceed with an in-depth review of the acquisition will be made within the next month, sources told Bloomberg. The news comes one day after Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) raised alarms about the FTC being unfairly biased against Musk.
JIM JORDAN: FTC CHAIRWOMAN COULD BE INFLUENCED BY LEFT-WING GROUP ON TWITTER BID
"[The Open Markets Institute] appears to believe that the FTC will be receptive to its cavalier effort to influence a federal agency that is run by its former employee," Jordan wrote in a letter to FTC Chairwoman Lina Khan dated Wednesday. "It is true that the Biden FTC is moving to promote progressive values that undermine capitalism and threaten innovation."
Last month, the Open Markets Institute, a nonprofit group that advocates policies aimed at curtailing monopolies, requested the FTC block Musk's transaction deal. However, many experts don't believe the transaction will raise antitrust issues, Bloomberg reported.
Under federal law, Musk is obligated to notify the Justice Department and the FTC about the deal and hold off for at least a month so that officials can investigate any antitrust issues.
In tandem with its review of Musk's Twitter acquisition, the FTC is also conducting a separate inquiry into whether Musk should have informed the FTC when he amassed a 9% stake in the social media company, according to the outlet.
Musk did not file paperwork with the agency about the stake and appeared to rely on an exception for assets purchased for investment purposes, the outlet reported. The FTC typically doesn't pursue punitive action if it determines the paperwork failure was accidental.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
The Washington Examiner reached out to the FTC for comment.
Khan previously served as the legal director at the Open Markets Institute. In his letter to her on Wednesday, Jordan requested Khan release information about her interactions with the Open Markets Institute, expressing concerns her former employer may be "trying to leverage its close relationship with you to take action to further limit free speech online."