According to Bloomberg, The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) is not expected to vote on the final version of a new rule that would ban noncompete clauses in employment contracts until April 2024. The rule defines a “non-compete clause” as “a contractual term between an employer and a worker that prevents the worker from seeking or accepting employment with a person, or operating a business, after the conclusion of the worker’s employment with the employer.”

As we previously reported, the proposed rule would ban employers from imposing noncompete agreements on their employees. The rule would also require employers to rescind all preexisting noncompete agreements and to notify all employees who had been subject to a noncompete agreement of the recission. Although the proposed rule would not prohibit other kinds of employment restrictions, such as nondisclosure agreements, certain restrictions that are overbroad could be subject to the new rule. For example, a non-disclosure agreement between an employer and an employee that is written so broadly that it effectively precludes the employee from working in the same field would be considered a “de facto” noncompete clause.

The proposed rule is based upon a preliminary finding that noncompete agreements constitute an unfair method of competition and, therefore, violate Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, which prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices affecting commerce. When announcing the proposed rule in January, the Chair of the FTC, Lina M. Khan, noted that “[t]he freedom to change jobs is core to economic liberty and to a competitive, thriving economy.” The FTC estimates that the new rule would increase wages by nearly $300 billion per year and would expand career opportunities for approximately 30 million Americans.

After the proposed rule was announced, the FTC received 26,813 comments. Although the rule garnered support from labor and advocacy groups, other industry groups vehemently oppose the rule. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce called the proposed rule “blatantly unlawful,” arguing that it goes beyond the FTC’s statutory authority. As we previously reported, there are serious questions about the FTC’s authority to regulate noncompete agreements under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, especially following the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency, which struck down an environmental regulation enacted by the Environmental Protection Agency  (“EPA”) on the basis that the EPA did not have “clear congressional authority” to issue a rule concerning an issue of “great political significance” that would affect “a significant portion of the American economy.”

Assuming the FTC votes to issue the final rule, whether in April or otherwise, the rule will face legal challenges, which likely will result in the rule being enjoined before it takes effect. Therefore, in the interim, employers should stay the course and not make any immediate changes to their noncompete practices. Employers may also consider in appropriate circumstances transitioning away from noncompete agreements and, instead, focusing on strong non-solicitation agreements, confidentiality covenants, and requirements for advance notice of resignation, none of which are affected by the FTC’s new rule prohibiting noncompete agreements. Now is a good time to take a wholistic review of restrictive covenant practices, in particular as state laws are quickly evolving.

Epstein Becker & Green will continue to track developments regarding this rule and will remain ready to advise employers who rely on restrictive covenants to protect their legitimate business interests on how to navigate potentially shifting tides in the coming year.

Back to Trade Secrets & Employee Mobility Blog

Search This Blog

Blog Editors


Related Services



Jump to Page


Sign up to receive an email notification when new Trade Secrets & Employee Mobility posts are published:

Privacy Preference Center

When you visit any website, it may store or retrieve information on your browser, mostly in the form of cookies. This information might be about you, your preferences or your device and is mostly used to make the site work as you expect it to. The information does not usually directly identify you, but it can give you a more personalized web experience. Because we respect your right to privacy, you can choose not to allow some types of cookies. Click on the different category headings to find out more and change our default settings. However, blocking some types of cookies may impact your experience of the site and the services we are able to offer.

Strictly Necessary Cookies

These cookies are necessary for the website to function and cannot be switched off in our systems. They are usually only set in response to actions made by you which amount to a request for services, such as setting your privacy preferences, logging in or filling in forms. You can set your browser to block or alert you about these cookies, but some parts of the site will not then work. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable information.

Performance Cookies

These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic sources so we can measure and improve the performance of our site. They help us to know which pages are the most and least popular and see how visitors move around the site. All information these cookies collect is aggregated and therefore anonymous. If you do not allow these cookies we will not know when you have visited our site, and will not be able to monitor its performance.