Introduction

Executive Order “Combating Unfair Practices in the Live Entertainment Market” was signed by President Donald J. Trump on March 31, 2025. This order aims to address what it describes as “unscrupulous middlemen” and “rent-seeking behaviors” in the ticketing industry that result in fans paying exorbitant prices for concert tickets. The order identifies ticket scalpers who use bots and other means to acquire large quantities of face-value tickets and then resell them at significant markups as a key concern. It directs several federal agencies, including the Department of Justice, Federal Trade Commission, and Treasury Department, to utilize existing legal authorities to combat these practices. The order specifically references the Better Online Tickets Sales Act and calls for increased enforcement, potential new regulations for price transparency, and ensuring tax compliance by ticket scalpers. Federal agencies are required to submit a report on implementation progress within 180 days, including recommendations for additional regulations or legislation.

Key Questions for Citizens

1. Regulatory Balance: How should we balance free market principles against consumer protection in entertainment markets, and what role should government play in regulating ticket pricing and distribution?
2. Technological Solutions: Given the sophisticated technology employed by scalpers (such as bots), what technological or regulatory countermeasures might effectively address these issues without creating unintended consequences for legitimate secondary markets?
3. Stakeholder Equity: How do we ensure that any solutions benefit not just consumers but also artists, venues, and legitimate businesses in the ticketing ecosystem while addressing the identified issues?
4. Enforcement Feasibility: Given the global and digital nature of secondary ticket markets, what practical challenges might federal agencies face in effectively enforcing existing laws and any new regulations?
5. Long-term Industry Structure: Could addressing these immediate concerns lead to more fundamental changes in how entertainment tickets are priced, distributed, and resold in America?

Analytical Framework

Language Analysis

The executive order employs specific rhetoric that frames the issue through particular value judgments and assumptions. The language establishes a clear narrative with heroes (artists and fans), villains (“unscrupulous middlemen” and “ticket scalpers”), and victims (consumers who are “price-gouged” and “deprived”).

Notable terminology choices include:

• “Blighted” – suggests decay or deterioration of something once wholesome
• “Unscrupulous” – explicitly attributes moral failing rather than just economic self-interest
• “Egregious fees” – presupposes fees are objectively unreasonable rather than market-determined
• “Minimal value” – assumes an objective standard for determining value in the transaction
• “Price-gouging” – carries legal implications in many jurisdictions and moral connotations
• “Rent-seeking” – economic term suggesting extraction of value without creating new wealth

The order’s framing devices establish several normative assumptions:

1. That access to live entertainment is something government should ensure is “as accessible as possible”
2. That current ticket price increases represent “market distortions” rather than natural market behavior
3. That secondary market activities “must not be allowed to persist” rather than being reformed or regulated

This language reflects an interventionist approach to market regulation, positioning government as protector of both consumers and artists against exploitative intermediaries.

Evidence Assessment

The executive order makes several claims that warrant evidence assessment:

1. Claim: Ticket scalpers are acquiring “large quantities” of face-value tickets. While ticket-buying bots are a documented phenomenon, the order provides no specific data on what proportion of tickets are acquired this way versus legitimate purchases. Industry studies have shown mixed findings on this question.
2. Claim: Fans have paid “as much as 70 times face value” for tickets. The order cites “some reports” without specific attribution. While extreme markup examples do exist in high-demand events, comprehensive data on average markups across the industry would provide more context on how representative these extreme cases are.
3. Claim: “All profits go solely to the scalper and the ticketing agency” in resale scenarios. This simplifies the complex revenue flows in the ticketing ecosystem. Artists typically receive compensation from initial ticket sales regardless of subsequent resales, though they don’t benefit from secondary market markups directly.

The order lacks citations to specific studies, research, or expert consensus that would substantiate its characterization of the scope and impact of the described problems. While concerns about ticket scalping and bot purchases are widely acknowledged in the industry, the magnitude of their impact on overall ticket accessibility and the live entertainment ecosystem requires more robust evidence than provided.

Legal and Policy Context

This executive order operates within a complex legal and regulatory framework:

1. Existing Federal Authority: The order primarily directs enforcement of existing laws rather than creating new authorities. It specifically references:
   • The Better Online Tickets Sales Act (BOTS Act) of 2016, which prohibits the use of software to circumvent security measures on ticketing websites
   • General competition and consumer protection laws under FTC jurisdiction
   • Tax compliance under the Internal Revenue Code
2. Federal-State Relationship: The order explicitly encourages collaboration between the FTC and state Attorneys General, recognizing that consumer protection in ticketing markets has traditionally involved both federal and state enforcement actions. This cooperative federalism approach acknowledges the limitations of purely federal solutions.
3. Regulatory vs. Legislative Approaches: The order directs agencies to consider new regulations within existing statutory authority while also requesting recommendations for potential legislation, suggesting recognition that the executive branch’s authority alone may be insufficient to address all identified issues.
4. Legal Precedents: The order builds upon previous federal actions in this space, including:
   • FTC enforcement actions against ticket brokers for BOTS Act violations
   • DOJ antitrust scrutiny of dominant ticketing platforms
   • Treasury Department interest in compliance issues in cash-intensive businesses

A key implementation challenge will be determining what actions fall within agencies’ existing statutory authority versus what requires new legislation. Courts have sometimes limited aggressive regulatory interpretations of consumer protection statutes, which may constrain agencies’ ability to address all the order’s concerns without Congressional action.

Stakeholder Impact Analysis

The executive order’s implementation would affect numerous stakeholders in the live entertainment ecosystem:

Primary Stakeholders Directly Addressed:

• Consumers/Fans: Intended beneficiaries through potentially lower prices and better access to face-value tickets
• Artists: Framed as aligned with fans’ interests in accessible shows, though economic impacts would vary
• Ticket Scalpers/Resellers: Direct targets of increased enforcement and potential regulations
• Primary Ticketing Platforms: Subject to potential antitrust scrutiny and transparency requirements

Stakeholders Not Explicitly Mentioned But Affected:

• Venues: May face operational adjustments to comply with new transparency requirements
• Concert Promoters: Could experience changes in revenue models and risk structures
• Legitimate Secondary Market Platforms: May face compliance costs distinguishing them from “unscrupulous” actors
• Technology Companies: Those providing anti-bot services may benefit; those supporting resale markets may face challenges

Potential Unintended Consequences:

1. Market Rigidity: Aggressive enforcement could reduce price flexibility that sometimes benefits last-minute buyers or helps events sell out
2. Implementation Costs: Compliance requirements might increase operational costs for legitimate businesses in the ticketing ecosystem
3. Innovation Impacts: Uncertainty about enforcement could chill technological innovation in ticketing systems
4. Distributional Effects: Benefits may not be equally distributed across all consumer segments or entertainment genres

The order focuses on price and access without addressing other factors affecting ticket availability such as venue capacity constraints, artist touring decisions, or initial pricing strategies. This narrow focus might limit the order’s effectiveness in achieving its stated goals if these other factors remain unaddressed.

Conclusion

Executive Order “Combating Unfair Practices in the Live Entertainment Market” represents a significant federal intervention into the ticketing industry, framing the issue primarily as one of consumer protection and market fairness. The analysis reveals that while the order identifies legitimate concerns about bot purchases and extreme price markups, it relies more on normative judgments about fair market behavior than on specific evidence about the scale and impact of these practices.

The most significant implications stem from the order’s reliance on existing regulatory authorities while suggesting possible new rules or legislation. This approach acknowledges the limitations of executive action alone while providing immediate direction to federal agencies. The success of this approach will depend largely on how aggressively agencies interpret their enforcement authority and whether courts sustain those interpretations.

Critical questions emerge about whether addressing secondary market behaviors will significantly improve ticket accessibility without also addressing fundamental supply-demand imbalances in live entertainment or the initial pricing strategies employed by artists, promoters, and venues. While increased enforcement against bot usage and price transparency requirements may provide incremental benefits, more structural changes may require legislative action or industry self-regulation beyond what this executive order can directly accomplish.

Further public discussion is needed regarding the appropriate balance between market mechanisms and regulatory interventions in cultural sectors, the effectiveness of technological solutions to scalping, and the complex tradeoffs between price controls and market efficiency in experiences that many view as cultural rather than purely economic goods.

---

Written by Claude Prompt v1
Image by ChatGPT