US lawmakers press FTC on EA buy-out over worker risks

US lawmakers have called on the Federal Trade Commission to take an expansive and rigorous look at the proposed roughly $55 billion acquisition of Electronic Arts by a consortium led by the Saudi Arabian Public Investment Fund, urging scrutiny of its potential impact on workers, studios and competition across the video-game sector. Leaders of the Congressional Labor Caucus and a broader group of House Democrats warned that the deal could prompt deeper layoffs, closures of development studios and practices that suppress wages or stifle creative freedom, particularly given trends within the industry and Electronic Arts’ own workforce changes.

The letter to FTC Chair Andrew Ferguson, signed by more than 40 Democrats, underscores mounting apprehension among lawmakers that regulatory review must extend beyond traditional antitrust concerns to include labour market effects — a shift underlined by the agency’s new merger guidelines emphasizing disruption to job markets. The lawmakers contend that the scale and structure of the leveraged buy-out raise material questions about the future of tens of thousands of roles tied to EA and its major studios.

Electronic Arts, a major player in global gaming with headquarters in Redwood City, California, has already undergone waves of workforce reductions and studio shutdowns amid performance pressures and strategic pivots. According to industry data, EA cut about 300 jobs in April 2025 during a restructuring that affected several internal units, while further reductions at Codemasters and closures of emerging development teams followed later in the year. Those moves, critics argue, highlight vulnerabilities in job security within large publishers and intensify concerns about how ownership changes could exacerbate workforce instability.

The acquisition, which would mark one of the largest leveraged buy-outs in corporate history, still awaits regulatory clearances and shareholder approval, with proponents arguing it will unlock new investment and strategic opportunities for the company’s long-term growth. Backers include the Public Investment Fund, Silicon Valley private equity Silver Lake and an investment vehicle linked to Jared Kushner. Together they aim to take the company private, removing it from public markets and ostensibly insulating it from short-term earnings pressures.

Lawmakers’ letter, spearheaded by Labour Caucus co-chairs including Steven Horsford, Debbie Dingell, Mark Pocan and Donald Norcross, portrays a sector grappling with layoffs, declining median wages and consolidation that erodes competitive pressure to reward talent. They stress that the industry’s health depends not only on robust creative output but on stable, well-remunerated employment across development houses and technical teams — a point they argue merits intense regulatory focus as part of the Federal Trade Commission’s evaluation.

Concerns extend beyond workforce dynamics to potential anticompetitive consequences of concentrated ownership of major intellectual properties. Lawmakers argue that if a handful of large entities control dominant franchises and publishing channels, indie developers and smaller studios may find it harder to compete for talent and market share, potentially shrinking innovation in a sector that thrives on diverse creative voices.

The delegation also highlighted broader geopolitical questions tied to the Public Investment Fund’s role, pointing to the sovereign wealth fund’s mission and its alignment with global investment strategies. Some critics have suggested that funding sources could play a role in shaping business decisions post-acquisition in ways that do not align with market competition or cultural norms central to creative industries, though such assertions remain part of wider debates about foreign investment in strategic sectors.

The Federal Trade Commission now faces the task of adjudicating these multifaceted concerns under its expanded guideline framework, which reflects a heightened emphasis on protecting labour markets and ensuring competitive outcomes in technology and entertainment sectors. FTC regulators will weigh whether the proposed transaction, given its size and structure, would diminish competitive incentives or harm workers — even as industry leaders make the case that such deals can catalyse reinvestment and innovation.

Opponents of the transaction have drawn parallels with other high-profile technology mergers, noting that large consolidations have sometimes preceded significant job losses despite initial assurances of growth and stability. They argue that lessons from prior industry shifts underscore the importance of regulatory vigilance, particularly where market concentration and global capital intersect.