Comment from Michele Mason (President & CEO at the American Society of Association Executives)

The American Society of Association Executives (“ASAE”) is the premier source of learning, knowledge, and future-oriented research for the association and nonprofit profession, representing more than 48,000 association executives who lead organizations that convene meetings, train the workforce, and drive the economy in communities across the United States. These associations frequently serve as structured venues for procompetitive, efficiency-enhancing activity. They convene diverse stakeholders, disseminate best practices, develop educational and compliance resources, and—critically for antitrust policy—offer established frameworks through which firms and professionals can collaborate to address shared technical and operational challenges in ways that expand output, improve quality, and accelerate innovation. As both courts and longstanding practice recognize, association activities, such as information sharing, research, and standard-setting, serve legitimate, efficiency-enhancing purposes and do not, by themselves, indicate anticompetitive conduct. Importantly, collaborations conducted through associations often present lower antitrust risk than informal interactions. Associations operate within established governance frameworks and employ robust safeguards, including voluntary participation, non-binding outputs, structured processes, and active antitrust oversight. Formal compliance measures, such as agenda review, monitored meetings, and clear information-sharing protocols, further help ensure adherence to the law. As described in greater detail in the attached comment, ASAE urges the Agencies to explicitly recognize these advantages in any updated guidance and to affirm the value of association-based collaboration as a structured, compliant model. We also encourage a flexible, principles-based approach that reflects the diversity of modern collaboration across industries and maintaining a balanced framework consistent with prior guidance, one that recognizes both the utility of “safety zones” and the importance of case-by-case analysis. Such an approach should provide needed certainty while encouraging responsible, procompetitive collaboration that benefits consumers and the broader economy.