IN SB 219
died on adjournmentUniform Antitrust Pre-merger Notification Act.
Indiana · 2026 Regular Session (2nd Regular Session, 124th General Assembly) · upper
Subscribe in a feed reader. The feed covers recorded actions from the last 30 days; Bill Commons may record an action after it happened at the legislature.
Quick answers
Did IN SB 219 pass?
No. IN SB 219 died when the 2026 Regular Session (2nd Regular Session, 124th General Assembly) adjourned without final action on it. Bills that die this way are sometimes reintroduced in a later session. Latest recorded action (2026-01-29): First reading: referred to Committee on Judiciary
What is IN SB 219 about?
Incorporates into Indiana's law governing businesses and other associations the Uniform Antitrust Pre-Merger Notification Act (Act), as approved and recommended for enactment in all states by the Uniform Law Commission. Specifies that the Act does not limit or replace certain reporting requirements of a health care entity. Provides that not later than one day after filing a pre-merger notification under the federal Hart-Scott-Rodino Act, a person shall file a complete electronic copy of the form required under that act with the attorney general if: (1) the person's principal place of business is in Indiana; or (2) the person conducts a specified level of sales in Indiana with respect to the goods or services involved in the proposed merger transaction. Requires the attorney general to provide a secure means to receive and store materials submitted. Provides that: (1) a form or additional documentary material under the federal act; and (2) other specified information related to the proposed merger transaction; are confidential for purposes of Indiana's public records act and may not be disclosed or made public by the attorney general. Provides an exception to this confidentiality requirement if: (1) the attorney general's disclosure is made pursuant to a protective order issued by an agency, court, or judicial officer in an administrative proceeding or judicial action; and (2) the proposed merger transaction is relevant to the proceeding or action. Authorizes the attorney general to: (1) share information with; and (2) disclose a form or additional documentary material under the federal act to; the attorney general of another state that has enacted the Uniform Antitrust Pre-Merger Notification Act or a substantively equivalent act. Requires the attorney general to receive assurance from the attorney general of another state that information shared with the other state will remain confidential. Requires the attorney general to destroy or return all documents submitted with a specified period of time. Requires the attorney general to send a written notice to a person that violates the bill's filing requirement. Allows the attorney general to impose a civil penalty if the violation is not remedied within three days of the notice.
Who sponsors IN SB 219?
Chris Jeter, Greg Taylor, Eric Koch and 1 others are the primary sponsors of IN SB 219, joined by 1 cosponsor.
Description
Incorporates into Indiana's law governing businesses and other associations the Uniform Antitrust Pre-Merger Notification Act (Act), as approved and recommended for enactment in all states by the Uniform Law Commission. Specifies that the Act does not limit or replace certain reporting requirements of a health care entity. Provides that not later than one day after filing a pre-merger notification under the federal Hart-Scott-Rodino Act, a person shall file a complete electronic copy of the form required under that act with the attorney general if: (1) the person's principal place of business is in Indiana; or (2) the person conducts a specified level of sales in Indiana with respect to the goods or services involved in the proposed merger transaction. Requires the attorney general to provide a secure means to receive and store materials submitted. Provides that: (1) a form or additional documentary material under the federal act; and (2) other specified information related to the proposed merger transaction; are confidential for purposes of Indiana's public records act and may not be disclosed or made public by the attorney general. Provides an exception to this confidentiality requirement if: (1) the attorney general's disclosure is made pursuant to a protective order issued by an agency, court, or judicial officer in an administrative proceeding or judicial action; and (2) the proposed merger transaction is relevant to the proceeding or action. Authorizes the attorney general to: (1) share information with; and (2) disclose a form or additional documentary material under the federal act to; the attorney general of another state that has enacted the Uniform Antitrust Pre-Merger Notification Act or a substantively equivalent act. Requires the attorney general to receive assurance from the attorney general of another state that information shared with the other state will remain confidential. Requires the attorney general to destroy or return all documents submitted with a specified period of time. Requires the attorney general to send a written notice to a person that violates the bill's filing requirement. Allows the attorney general to impose a civil penalty if the violation is not remedied within three days of the notice.
- Introduced
- —
- Latest action
- 2026-01-29 — First reading: referred to Committee on Judiciary
- Bill type
- bill
- Last updated
- —
Subjects
Sponsors
- Chris Jetersponsor
- Greg Taylorauthor
- Eric Kochauthor
- Ed Charbonneauauthor
- Edward DeLaneycosponsor
Committees
Not provided by source.
Action timeline
Newest first
2026-01-29
First reading: referred to Committee on Judiciary
reading-1,referral-committee
2026-01-28
Referred to the House
referral
2026-01-28
Representative McGuire removed as sponsor
2026-01-27
House sponsor: Representative McGuire
2026-01-27
Cosponsor: Representative DeLaney
2026-01-27
House sponsor: Representative Jeter
2026-01-27
Third reading: passed; Roll Call 108: yeas 45, nays 0
passage,reading-3,reading-3
2026-01-26
Amendment #1 (Charbonneau) prevailed; voice vote
amendment-passage
2026-01-26
Second reading: amended, ordered engrossed
reading-2
2026-01-22
Senator Taylor G added as third author
2026-01-22
Committee report: amend do pass, adopted
committee-passage
2026-01-22
Senator Koch added as second author
2026-01-08
First reading: referred to Committee on Judiciary
reading-1,referral-committee
2026-01-08
Authored by Senator Charbonneau
Versions
Documents
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
Votes
SB 219 - Charbonneau - 3rd Reading
2026-01-27 · pass · 45-0
Member-level votes (49)
- Alexander: yes
- Clark: yes
- Jackson, L: yes
- Rogers: yes
- Alting: yes
- Crider: yes
- Johnson: yes
- Schmitt: yes
- Baldwin: yes
- Deery: yes
- Koch: yes
- Spencer: yes
- Bohacek: yes
- Dernulc: yes
- Leising: yes
- Taylor: yes
- Bray: yes
- Donato: yes
- Maxwell: yes
- Tomes: yes
- Brown: yes
- Doriot: yes
- Mishler: yes
- Walker G: yes
- Buchanan: yes
- Freeman: yes
- Niemeyer: yes
- Walker K: yes
- Buck: yes
- Gaskill: yes
- Niezgodski: yes
- Yoder: yes
- Busch: yes
- Glick: yes
- Pol: yes
- Young: yes
- Byrne: yes
- Goode: yes
- Qaddoura: yes
- Carrasco: yes
- Holdman: yes
- Raatz: yes
- Charbonneau: yes
- Hunley: yes
- Randolph: yes
- Becker: excused
- Ford J.D.: excused
- Garten: excused
- Bassler: not voting
Related bills
No related bills recorded for this bill.
Official source
Attribution
Data from openstates_bulk_csv, retrieved 2026-07-24T05:22:09.317128Z
Inspect retained evidence for changes recorded after evidence tracking began:
Session-wide evidence can include changes to other bills:
Use this data
Every field on this page is available from the free public API — no key or licence required. Fetch this bill as JSON: GET /api/v1/bills?jurisdiction=IN&identifier=SB 219. See the API docs or the MCP server for AI assistants.
Known limitations
- Sponsor party and chamber affiliation are not yet captured by this API.
- Committee referrals are not yet captured.
- Some documents have no extracted text yet, so version comparison may be limited.
See the methodology page for data sources and limitations.