On Sept. 18th, 2025, the Federal Trade Commission and seven U.S. states sued Ticketmaster and its parent company, Live Nation. The FTC alleges that Ticketmaster engaged in illegal ticket-reselling tactics and deceived artists and consumers about prices and ticket limits.
“It’s very misleading when a floor ticket says it’s $300, but the total checkout ends up being $420 [because of hidden fees],” said Carlos Itriago, a recent graduate at Florida International University. “I just wish it were more transparent.”
The case comes amid growing bipartisan scrutiny of corporate consolidation, as regulators challenge dominant firms across the economy. The outcome could reshape how millions of concertgoers buy tickets online.
FTC Allegations
The complaint claims that Ticketmaster deceived artists and consumers by engaging in bait-and-switch pricing: showing a lower price to attract customers, then switching to a higher price at checkout.
Although Ticketmaster implemented security measures, ticket brokers can circumvent these measures by creating thousands of Ticketmaster accounts to purchase event tickets. A practice Ticketmaster is aware of, with one senior Ticketmaster executive admitting the company “turn[s] a blind eye as a matter of policy.”
The FTC alleges Ticketmaster deceives American consumers by “advertising list prices for tickets that were substantially lower than the actual cost consumers paid after fees and markups were added.” Ticketmaster’s “hidden fees” are those that don’t appear until the very end of the checkout process. According to the agency, these hidden fees could amount to 44% of a given ticket’s cost, totaling over $16.4 billion from 2019 to 2024.
Because of these actions, the FTC argues that Ticketmaster violated the FTC Act’s prohibition on deceptive acts or practices in the marketplace, as well as the BOTS Act.
Ticketmaster History and Long-Standing Dominance
This is not the first time the federal government has charged Ticketmaster. In 2024, the Department of Justice sued Ticketmaster, accusing it of running an illegal monopoly across the concert industry.
Live Nation and Ticketmaster were once independent companies. However, in 2010, that changed when they merged into a single entity, with DOJ approval. “Regulators could have blocked the Ticketmaster-Live Nation [merger] outright,” said Kevin Erickson, director of the Future Music Coalition, a non-profit organization that advocates for artists and addresses music-technology issues. “Instead, they imposed consent decrees that didn’t work … This was part of a weak anti-monopoly policy across the economy.” Consent decrees are legally binding agreements between parties that settle a dispute and mandate specific actions to ensure compliance, a practice the DOJ commonly uses.
In 2019, Justice Department officials found that Live Nation violated the consent decree of the 2010 merger. The decree was amended and extended through 2025; however, the Justice Department filed the lawsuit against Live Nation for violating the extended consent decree.
Impact on Students and Consumers
The FTC and DOJ cases could impose financial penalties and require Live Nation’s breakup, thereby making prices more competitive and transparent for consumers. Ticketmaster controls over 80% of all major concert venues. While the FTC in this case is seeking only financial penalties, the DOJ case aims to break up Live Nation and Ticketmaster. If the Justice Department is successful, they argue there would be more competition in the concert industry, lower prices for fans and easier pathways for artists to access venues.
Itriago consistently faces high ticket prices and hidden fees. “The hidden fees are expensive … I would buy a ticket thinking it is $150, but right as I am about to check out, it’s 200 dollars,” he said. “I was pretty surprised by [the hidden fees]. I buy mostly rap concerts, and they are pretty expensive.”
According to Erickson, in more competitive markets, prices are lower for consumers. “Independent venues and events that use innovative primary ticketing alternatives tend to have lower fees, as well as innovative fan-friendly features like waitlists and fan-to-fan face value resale technology,” he claimed. “They just can’t break into the larger capacity rooms and amphitheaters because Live Nation will retaliate against venues that don’t use Ticketmaster.”
What Comes Next
The lawsuit has already caused Ticketmaster to change its company policies. “Even before going to trial, this case has already spurred Live Nation to stop offering software to bypass ticket limits,” Erickson said. “This is already a big step that could make it easier for fans to get tickets at the price the artist intends.”
Consumers, like Itriago, are eager for cheaper tickets but are concerned if the lawsuit will achieve positive results. “I feel [the lawsuit] will do more good than harm, but I also believe it will be a double-edged sword, since if they are too harsh with the punishments on the concert industry, I believe it will make it harder to access big events.”
As of now, the case is ongoing. Live Nation has implemented several changes, including banning users with multiple accounts from purchasing tickets, removing duplicate accounts and requiring reseller accounts to use a unique taxpayer ID.
“Live Nation can squeeze venues and promoters out of the market; the same venues and promoters that elevate local scenes and regional musical movements, that take creative risks and center community voices,” Erickson said. “Music is about so much more than celebrity, commerce, and entertainment, and monopolization is holding back music’s potential for social relevance.”
