Antitrust enforcement is emerging as a critical mechanism to deflate the expanding bubble in the artificial intelligence sector, which increasingly distorts the global economy. Experts argue that scrutinizing crossholdings and cloud-for-equity arrangements among dominant AI players could prevent a systemic market downturn triggered by interconnected financial risks.
What Happened
The US Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) January 2025 6(b) Staff Report on AI Partnerships and Investments outlined concerns about cloud-for-equity deals, where hyperscalers like Microsoft, Amazon, and Google invest in AI startups and then count the startups’ cloud expenditures as their own revenue. This circular financial relationship inflates earnings through mark-to-market accounting of unrealized equity gains. The FTC is actively investigating Microsoft’s AI and cloud business arrangements, focusing on the significant stake Microsoft holds in OpenAI—approximately 27 percent of OpenAI Group PBC valued at $135 billion. This scrutiny follows revelations of corporate governance interventions by Microsoft executives and contractual terms giving Microsoft preferential access to OpenAI’s technology and revenue streams.
Key Facts
The FTC’s 6(b) Staff Report highlights how crossholdings and cloud-for-equity deals create market consolidation that hampers independent competition. Microsoft’s stake in OpenAI and its preferential access extend through 2030–2032, including revenue sharing and IP licensing. Amazon’s investment in Anthropic contributed an unrealized gain of $16.8 billion in Q1 2026, while Alphabet reported roughly $28.7 billion in unrealized gains tied to AI investments. The AI-related capital expenditures accounted for over 90 percent of U.S. GDP growth in early 2025, with seven major tech firms comprising around 35 percent of the S&P 500 index. The FTC’s report and ongoing investigations recommend untangling these arrangements to restore market competitiveness.
What This Means
Antitrust enforcement in AI is poised to reshape the competitive landscape by requiring companies to dismantle intertwined ownership structures and restrictive cloud contracts that currently dampen independent innovation. Ending these crossholdings will create a more level playing field where AI firms can compete without conflicts of interest or dependency on dominant cloud providers. This could lead to broader innovation diversity, giving consumers, businesses, and governments access to a variety of AI technologies rather than consolidated offerings controlled by a few large corporations.
Additionally, rigorous regulatory oversight may prevent risks from speculative valuations and mega-mergers—such as the $420 billion Dominion Energy and NextEra deal premised on unchecked AI growth—from cascading into broader financial instability, including utility costs borne by consumers. Requiring clear separation between regulated utilities and high-risk AI-related ventures would protect households from price shocks linked to inflated AI market expectations.
Background
Financial loops underpinning the AI bubble include cloud-for-credit exchanges, where major cloud providers invest in AI labs and then count the labs’ cloud usage as their revenue, and mark-to-market accounting rules that allow firms to record unrealized gains from equity stakes as income. These mechanisms have propelled AI startup valuations and tech stock surges, creating sector-wide financial entanglement. Past regulatory frameworks, especially the 2023 U.S. Merger Guidelines’ Guideline 11 addressing minority and partial acquisitions, provide a legal foundation for challenging such market concentration and controlling conflicts of interest through prohibitions on interlocking directorates.
What Remains Unclear
The enforcement outcomes from the FTC’s investigations into Microsoft’s AI investments and the precise regulatory measures required to address cloud-for-equity arrangements remain unsettled. Whether enforcement actions will mandate divestitures, structural separations, or other remedies is pending, as is the timeline for regulatory decisions. Future legal challenges or amendments to merger guideline interpretations could also influence how these cases proceed.
What Comes Next
The FTC’s ongoing review of AI industry partnerships is guiding potential enforcement actions, informed by recent internal disclosures from the OpenAI-Musk trial and market analyses. Upcoming regulatory deadlines and possible legislative responses could crystallize the standards for AI sector competition. Meanwhile, monitoring the Dominion-NextEra merger and similar transactions will be key in assessing how antitrust frameworks adapt to AI-driven economic shifts.
Sources
This article is based on reporting and publicly available information from the following sources:
Read more AI Regulation stories on Goka World News.