PPI - Radically Pragmatic
  • Donate
Skip to content
  • Home
  • About
    • About Us
    • Locations
    • Careers
  • People
  • Projects
  • Our Work
  • Events
  • Donate

Our Work

State Regulation of the Resale Ticket Market: Risks to Competition, Fans, and Antitrust Enforcement

  • February 23, 2026
  • Diana Moss
Download PDF

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The value of the U.S. live music market is expected to top almost $20 billion in 2026, with ticket sales accounting for 75% of revenues. Live events, which connect fans with beloved musical artists and sports teams through shared experiences, are some of the most exciting for consumers. Yet the Live NationTicketmaster monopoly continues to generate overwhelmingly negative public opinion in the U.S., as fan frustration with a lack of competition in primary ticketing services, sky-high ticket fees, and a dysfunctional primary ticket continues to mount.

This should come as no surprise. Live NationTicketmaster controls the entire live events supply chain. Live Nation commands 75% of the markets for concert promotion and exclusive contracts with venues, and Ticketmaster has an 80% share in ticketing.3 Long overdue attention to Live Nation-Ticketmaster’s anticompetitive conduct in ticketing is, therefore, a welcome development for millions of fans who have paid a high price for the company’s entrenched monopoly power.

This Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) report unpacks the policy tools that are part of federal and state efforts to address competition and consumer protection in ticketing. These developments have the potential to transform the live events ecosystem and will leave an indelible imprint — for better or worse — on consumers, artists, independent venues, and small businesses. For example, the monopolization case filed against Live NationTicketmaster by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and 40 states and the District of Columbia could, if successful, lead to a breakup of the company and spur competition in ticketing. This would increase choice, reduce ticket fees, and pressure companies to improve quality.

Another prong of federal-state activity in ticketing is a crop of proposed consumer protection laws designed to increase transparency in ticket pricing and reduce deceptive practices in the primary and secondary (i.e., “resale”) ticket markets. Yet another development is a handful of proposed state laws that seek to impose economic regulation on the resale market while leaving the monopolized primary ticket market to operate free of external controls. These laws would cap prices and fees for tickets resold in the competitive online marketplaces.

Caps on resale ticket prices and fees go well beyond the conventional boundaries of traditional consumer protection. The resale market balances supply and demand for tickets, compensates for inefficiencies in primary ticketing, and provides the only source of competition for millions of music and sports fans. PPI’s report flags the concern that such regulation will significantly disrupt, and even wipe out, the resale market — defeating the goal of promoting competition and protecting fans.

State regulation of the resale ticket market also risks a policy collision with antitrust enforcement. Antitrust is the most effective tool for fixing the Live Nation-Ticketmaster monopoly that is the source of problems in live event ticketing. PPI’s report unpacks the building blocks for understanding these issues and offers four major takeaways for antitrust enforcers and lawmakers.

  • An antitrust “breakup” of the entrenched Live Nation-Ticketmaster monopoly is essential for restoring competition in the primary ticket market. Any pre-trial settlement would be a failure of enforcement to rid an important market of an entrenched monopoly and to protect competition and consumers.
  • Policies that maintain a viable and robust resale ticket market are essential for protecting and providing choice for live events fans. With no functional resale market, ticket buyers have no place to go but back to Ticketmaster, where they pay monopoly ticket fees.
  • Numerous federal and state legislative proposals advance helpful consumer protection provisions for ticketing. These proposals also bootstrap antitrust enforcement by easing ticket supply constraints and promoting comparison shopping in the competitive online resale marketplaces.
  • State proposals to impose price controls on resale risk hobbling the resale market, creating a patchwork of different state regulations, and interfering with antitrust enforcement. States should model legislation after, or even defer to, federal proposals that avoid price controls and stick expressly to strengthening consumer protection in ticketing.

Read the full report.

 

Related Work

Press Release  |  February 2, 2026

PPI Urges FCC to Approve Amazon Leo’s Constellation Deployment Deadline Extension Request

  • Mary Guenther Diana Moss
In the News  |  January 29, 2026

Moss in Los Angeles Times: Why California’s fight over ticket fraud has become a proxy war against Ticketmaster and Live Nation

  • Diana Moss
Blog  |  January 7, 2026

Digital Competition Enforcement and the American Innovation and Choice Online Act (AICOA)

  • Diana Moss
Blog  |  December 16, 2025

The Demise of iRobot: How Antitrust Enforcers Missed the Elephant in the Room

  • Diana Moss
Op-Ed  |  December 11, 2025

Moss for Promarket: Canceling the Antitrust Show? Live Nation-Ticketmaster’s Latest Attempt To Keep Its Monopoly

  • Diana Moss
In the News  |  December 8, 2025

Moss in The Washington Post: Netflix to buy Warner Bros. Discovery in $83 billion deal

  • Diana Moss
  • Never miss an update:

  • Subscribe to our newsletter
PPI Logo
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Donate
  • Careers
  • © 2026 Progressive Policy Institute. All Rights Reserved.
  • |
  • Privacy Policy
  • |
  • Privacy Settings