Early decision making under Australia's merger regime shows that most notified transactions are receiving merger clearance, quickly. Where the approval process is being shown to slow down is when the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) is focusing its attention local market consolidation, serial acquisitions, remedies and transactions that would remove a close competitive constraint. 

The early fear was gridlock. It hasn’t happened. The overwhelming majority of transactions have cleared through a waiver or in Phase 1, with the ACCC comfortably meeting its review targets. Approximately 96% of completed notifications have been cleared in Phase 1, and only two notifications (both reviewed in Phase 2) have not been approved. Waiver applications are turning around in an average of 16 business days.

Of the 35 transactions currently under assessment by the ACCC, 32 are being reviewed in Phase 1 and three are being reviewed in Phase 2. Further, of the 259 notification applications this year, only nine required a Stage 2 assessment and none required a public benefit phase assessment. This reconciles with the premise that extended investigations are being reserved for a small subset of transactions.

There have been 406 waiver applications this year. Of those applications, approximately 5% were rejected, forcing those parties to notify or walk away. 

If there is one clear theme, it is heightened scrutiny of local and serial acquisitions. The sectors drawing attention are fragmented: vets, pubs, liquor and car dealerships. The ACCC will look beyond single transactions and consider the cumulative effect of repeat acquisitions in the same local market. 

That matters most for: 

• private equity buy-and-build platforms; 
• regional consolidation; 
• multi-site and franchise growth strategies; and 
• repeat acquirers chasing incremental scale. 

The analysis increasingly turns on local market dynamics, not headline deal value. For the first time, the ACCC has flagged that it will weigh a serial acquirer’s prior deals when assessing their next one. 

As more deals move through the system, the Phase 2 triggers are coming into focus: removing a close competitor, combining market leaders, high barriers to entry and market power becoming entrenched. 

Remember the bar is low. The ACCC only needs to be satisfied a deal “could” substantially lessen competition to send it to Phase 2, short of the “would” test used to block a deal. 

The regime’s first blocked deal was instructive. It concerned a supermarket lease (exactly the kind of interest rarely notified under the old informal process) and rested on a novel theory: that adding capacity would likely drive a differentiated local rival out, lessening competition. Expect more of this “creating, strengthening or entrenching market power” framing and note the ACCC is now publishing far more detailed reasons than under the old regime. 

The regime is still moving. On 10 September 2026, the Government passed what it called ‘targeted refinements’ to Schedule 4 of The Treasury Laws Amendment (Strengthening Accountability for Tax Adviser Misconduct and Other Measures) Bill 2026 (Bill). The Bill received Royal Assent on 15 September 2026, and the changes commenced on 16 September 2026. The Bill amends the merger control laws in the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) to adjust the legal consequences for parties that fail to notify the ACCC of transactions that meet the relevant thresholds, from void to voidable.

The ACCC is being deliberate about where it spends its attention; local consolidation, serial acquisitions and deals that strip out a real competitor. For most transactions the pathways are quick and predictable. For deals with a local overlap or roll-up flavour, the smart move is to engage early, plan for a longer pre-notification runway, and have a structural remedy ready before the ACCC asks.

To discuss how Australia’s merger regime may affect a proposed transaction, contact our Corporate & Commercial team.