Establishing secure connection…Loading editor…Preparing document…

Hart Scott Rodino Questionnaire

This template is fully customizable. Edit the text, fill out the fields, and send it for signature. Give it a try!

Hart-Scott-Rodino Questionnaire

Target Company

TO:

FROM:

DATE:

RE:

Following is a listing of certain information we require in order to assess the competitive consequences of the proposed acquisition, and, if appropriate, to begin preparation of any required Hart-Scott-Rodino filing. In answering the following questions, please clearly specify whether the information provided relates to the Target Company, or to both the Target Company and the Acquiror. This information is outlined below.

1. Identify any product/geographic overlaps. It is our understanding that both the Target Company and Acquiror sell to large customers such as Alpha, Bravo and Charlie similar products throughout the United States. Please identify the SIC codes in which the revenues from the sale of those products or services are reported and provide the SIC revenue data for 199_ and for the most recent fiscal year.

SIC codes:

Revenue data:

2. Market definition. Identify any other products that can be used to perform the same functions as the overlap products. (For example, could any alternative or related product be considered a competitive equivalent of the product?) Would customers be likely to switch to these products in response to a 5% increase in price? Please be specific.

Response:

3. Structure of the relevant market(s). It is our understanding that the following firms design, manufacture and market products similar to those offered by the Target Company and Acquiror:

Product #1 / Product #2 market share estimates:

One Industries: / One:

Two: / Two:

Three Corp: / Three Corp:

Four Partners: / Four Partners:

Five Ltd: / Five Ltd:

Please confirm or revise as appropriate the market share estimates above.

Additional firms able to begin producing within one year without significant sunk costs:

4. Competitive effects.

a. Unilateral effects

1. Is the transaction likely to give the merged firm the ability to raise prices unilaterally? Yes No

2. Are the merging firms particularly close competitors? Yes No

3. What would customers be likely to do in response to an attempted price increase by the merged entity?

4. How easy would it be for other firms to reposition their products to defeat a price increase by the merged firm? Easy Difficult

5. Have there been any monopolization or other antitrust complaints against either of the parties in this line of business? Yes No

b. Coordinated Effects

1. Will the transaction likely make it easier for the merged firms to coordinate pricing and output with other firms in the market? Yes No

2. Is the market conducive to such coordination? Yes No

3. Are the products homogeneous or differentiated? Homogeneous Differentiated

4. Are transaction prices hidden or open? Hidden Open

5. How easy would it be for smaller firms to expand their output in response to a price increase by the leading firms?

6. Is there any history of collusion in this line of business? (For example, have there been any government antitrust investigations or enforcement actions or any private suits alleging antitrust violations?) Yes No

c. Innovation

1. Is our understanding that the technology is relatively mature and stable correct? Yes No

2. Are the parties to the transaction unique in any way with respect to innovation? Yes No

5. Entry.

1. Has there been a recent history of actual or attempted entry into the market? Yes No

2. What is the recent history of exit from the market?

3. Is our understanding that demand for the products is increasing correct? Yes No

4. Is there excess capacity in the industry (or, conversely, supply shortages or capacity constraints)? Yes No

5. What post-transaction changes, if any, will be made in the operations and marketing of the companies?

6. Who are the most likely potential entrants?

7. How long would it take, and what would be the cost to enter into the market at a minimum efficient scale?

6. Reasons for transaction. What are the business reasons for the proposed transaction? Please be specific and reference any written or electronic documents which exist describing these business reasons:

7. Efficiencies.

1. Do the parties expect to realize any significant efficiencies (such as economies of scale, plant specialization, lower transportation costs, etc.) or other benefits from the transaction? Yes No

2. Is it likely that any such cost savings will be passed on to customers in the form of lower prices or better products? Yes No

8. Customers.

1. How are customers likely to react to the proposed transaction?

2. For each relevant line of business, list the ten largest customers of each of the merging firms, and for each such customer, provide an estimate of their annual purchases.

9. Documents. Provide copies of the following documents:

a. A purchase agreement or letter of intent, if any presently exists;

b. The most recent 10-K and annual report; the most recent proxy statement; all 10-Qs and 8-Ks filed since the last 10-K; and any Schedule 14D-1 or registration statement filed with the SEC in connection with the proposed transaction;

c. Any documents prepared in connection with the proposed transaction that: (1) describe the business being acquired (such as bankers' books or offering memoranda); or (2) discuss (i) markets, market structure, competition, or the likely competitive effects of the transaction, (ii) the business reasons for the transaction, (iii) the cost savings and other efficiencies expected to be realized, and (iv) plans for integrating the two firms;

d. The most recent business and marketing plans for the relevant lines of business for both companies;

e. Any recent market studies of the relevant lines of business;

f. The most recent year-end income statements and balance sheets for the relevant lines of business;

g. Sample product brochures and advertising and marketing materials for the relevant products;

h. Recent analyst reports, press releases and news clippings on the company or the transaction;

i. The most recent HSR filing made by the companies, if any.

After you have considered the above information requests, perhaps we should discuss the most efficient manner (e.g., telephone conversation, written response) for us to obtain the needed information. Please call if you have any questions regarding the foregoing.

Signature of Preparer:

Date:

Enter text✕

What the Hart Scott Rodino Questionnaire Is and when it applies

The Hart Scott Rodino Questionnaire is the standardized information package used to support premerger notification filings under the Hart–Scott–Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act. It collects corporate identifiers, ownership details, transaction terms, and business descriptions that the Federal Trade Commission and Department of Justice use to assess competitive effects. Parties to covered transactions prepare and exchange these questionnaires with counsel and the filing party to verify the accuracy of the information submitted in the HSR filing and to respond to any agency requests during the statutory waiting period.

Why accurate completion matters for compliance and timing

Completing the Hart Scott Rodino Questionnaire accurately reduces the risk of incomplete HSR filings, avoids delays in the statutory waiting period, and helps resolve agency follow-up requests promptly. Accurate responses protect deal timelines and reduce the likelihood of enforcement attention that could lead to extended review or remedial measures.

Why accurate completion matters for compliance and timing

Who prepares, reviews, and signs the questionnaire

Coordination among legal, finance, and external advisors ensures timely, consistent answers and supports a smooth HSR filing and review process.

  • In-house counsel and M&A teams who prepare the factual and legal responses and coordinate supporting exhibits.
  • Corporate finance and accounting who provide transaction value, ownership percentages, and subsidiary schedules.
  • External antitrust counsel and deal advisors who review accuracy and advise on disclosure risks and timing.

Core sections included in a professional Hart Scott Rodino Questionnaire

A complete questionnaire groups data into standardized sections: party identities and addresses, ultimate parent entities, transaction structure and consideration, asset or voting thresholds, product and geographic descriptions, and schedules listing subsidiaries and related entities. Each section is structured to map directly to HSR filing items and common agency follow-up topics.

Party Identity

Full legal names and addresses of acquiring and acquired parties, including state of incorporation and taxpayer identification where requested.

Ultimate Parents

Names and ownership chains for ultimate parent companies and identifying any foreign parents or intermediate holding entities.

Transaction Terms

Aggregate consideration, payment structure, contingent payments, and any escrow or holdback arrangements relevant to filing thresholds.

Threshold Calculations

Revenue, asset, or voting interest computations that show whether the transaction meets HSR size-of-transaction and size-of-person thresholds.

Business Descriptions

Product lines, NAICS codes, and geographic markets for each party to clarify overlap and competitive effects.

Schedules

Detailed subsidiary lists, intercompany holdings, and other exhibits that support threshold and identity statements.

Essential fields you must include

Transacting Parties: Names, legal form, addresses
Ultimate Parent: Top-level owner, country
Transaction Value: Total consideration amount
Ownership Percent: Post-transaction stakes
Business Lines: Primary products/services
Supporting Schedules: Subsidiary lists

Step-by-step completion checklist

Follow these sequential steps to prepare, verify, and submit the questionnaire with the HSR filing.

  • 01
    Collect Data: Gather corporate and financial details from each party.
  • 02
    Calculate Thresholds: Confirm size-of-transaction and size-of-person metrics.
  • 03
    Assemble Schedules: Compile subsidiary and product lists for attachments.
  • 04
    Legal Review: Have antitrust counsel review and approve all answers.

Where to send the completed questionnaire and related filings

Questionnaires accompany the HSR premerger notification and are retained by parties and counsel; the HSR filing itself is submitted to the filing portal specified by the enforcing agencies.

  • Internal Exchange: Share completed questionnaires among acquiring and acquired counsel.
  • Counsel Retention: Keep signed copies with deal files for the statutory period.
  • Agency Submission: Submit HSR filing via the agencies' official filing channels.
  • Responding to Requests: Supply updated questionnaires or supplemental information promptly.

Configuring an online workflow for questionnaire completion

Set up a digital workflow that assigns sections, collects attachments, and enforces required fields to reduce errors and speed internal review cycles.

Field Configuration
Required Fields Mark identity and value fields as mandatory
Attachments Require PDF schedules before submission
Authentication Use email or stronger signer verification
Versioning Enable audit trail and change history

Digital submission: platform and file format considerations

Ensure the chosen platform preserves metadata, provides tamper-evident signed copies, and maintains retention controls required by compliance teams.

  • File Formats: PDF and DOCX are commonly accepted
  • Authentication: Email, SMS, or stronger methods
  • Integrations: CRMs and document systems supported

Timing considerations and filing sequence

Timing affects when parties may close and how agencies exercise their waiting periods; coordinate questionnaire completion with the formal HSR filing to avoid procedural gaps.

Pre-Filing Preparation:

Complete questionnaire before submitting the formal HSR filing.

Filing Trigger:

Filing occurs when the agency receives the required package.

Waiting Period:

Observe the statutory waiting period before closing.

Supplemental Updates:

Promptly update if material facts change.

Agency Deadlines:

Respond to follow-up requests by stated due dates

Common pitfalls and avoidable errors

  • Incomplete subsidiary schedules that omit intermediate holding companies lead to frequent agency follow-up and delay.
  • Incorrect calculation of transaction value or ownership percentage can change filing obligations and trigger corrective filings.
  • Using inconsistent entity names or abbreviations between schedules and filing forms causes clerical rejections and requests for clarification.
  • Late internal reviews that compress the waiting period risk closing before agency clearance and possible enforcement consequences.

Consequences of inaccurate or missing questionnaire information

Civil Penalties: Possible fines and corrective filings
Delay to Closing: Extended agency review and approvals
Divestiture Risk: Potential remedial measures required
Enforcement Costs: Legal and compliance expenses
Reputational Harm: Increased scrutiny from stakeholders
Operational Disruption: Renegotiation or transaction delay

eSignature platform comparison for managing the Hart Scott Rodino Questionnaire

Compare common vendor criteria that matter for secure collection of questionnaire data and signatures. signNow appears first for reference; verify feature availability by plan before purchasing.

signNow DocuSign Adobe Sign PandaDoc HelloSign
Starting Price $8/user/mo $15/user/mo $14/user/mo $19/user/mo $15/user/mo
Free Trial 7-day free trial Varies Varies Varies Varies
Bulk Send Yes Yes Yes Yes Varies
Audit Trail Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
HIPAA Compliant Yes Yes Yes Varies Varies
Envelope Cap No cap 100 envelopes/user/year Varies Varies Varies

Real-world examples of digital questionnaire workflows

These brief examples show how organizations used electronic workflows and signature tools to support regulatory filings and internal review.

Optica Ventures LLC

The interface is simple and easy-to-use for our team; more importantly, it is just as easy for our customers.

  • Quick collection reduced turnaround on signature pages.
  • With consistent templates and audit trails, the deal team shortened internal reviews and maintained a complete compliance record for regulators and counsel.

BIS

We felt most comfortable with a SOC 2–certified eSignature provider focused on ESIGN and UETA compliance.

  • The built-in audit trail supported rapid attorney review.
  • As a result, the company streamlined collection of signed questionnaires, reduced paper handling, and preserved complete records for potential agency inquiries.

Frequently asked questions about the Hart Scott Rodino Questionnaire

Answers below cover common submission, timing, signing, and recordkeeping questions encountered when preparing HSR-related questionnaires.


Need help? Contact support

be ready to get more
Join over 28 million airSlate SignNow users