Non-Compete Release — FTC Vacatur and State Enforcement

Who this applies to

Non-compete enforceability varies dramatically by state, but in most US jurisdictions you can negotiate a release of your non-compete as part of severance — the value depends entirely on whether the clause was enforceable to begin with. The federal regulatory picture is resolved. The FTC's April 2024 Non-Compete Clause Rule (89 Fed. Reg. 38342) was vacated by the Northern District of Texas in Ryan LLC v. FTC (N.D. Tex. Aug. 20, 2024). The FTC formally filed to accede to the vacatur in September 2025, and the rule was removed from the Code of Federal Regulations effective February 12, 2026. Non-competes are now governed entirely by state law.

What changes for you

Use this decision tree before negotiating. If your non-compete is governed by California, Minnesota, North Dakota, or Oklahoma law — the clause is almost certainly already unenforceable. California Business and Professions Code § 16600 declares every non-compete void, and SB 699 (adding § 16600.5, effective January 1, 2024) extended that prohibition to agreements signed outside California and created a private right of action. Minnesota SF 3035 (effective July 1, 2023) bans new post-employment non-competes outright. North Dakota Century Code § 9-08-06 similarly voids non-competes except in narrow business-sale contexts. Oklahoma Stat. tit. 15, § 219A renders most non-compete provisions void, permitting only direct-customer non-solicitation. In any of these states, demand the release as a clarifying term at no cost. If your non-compete is governed by Massachusetts law — it may be enforceable, but only if the agreement includes a garden leave clause paying at least 50% of your highest annualized base salary throughout the restricted period, or other mutually agreed consideration (M.G.L. c. 149 § 24L). Maximum duration is twelve months. If your agreement lacks that consideration, it is unenforceable as written. If your non-compete is governed by a generally-enforcing state — Texas, Florida, North Carolina, Georgia, and similar jurisdictions — the release has real economic value. Enforcement suits routinely cost employers $50,000 to $200,000 in legal fees before trial. For individual contributors, the release is often worth one to four weeks of additional severance. For senior executives or employees with key client relationships, the figure can reach 25–100% of annual base salary. Even when a full release is not achievable, negotiate scope reduction — geography, duration, and customer carve-outs.

Decision tree

1. If You work in California, Minnesota, North Dakota, or Oklahoma

   Then → Your post-employment non-compete is largely void by state statute (e.g., Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 16600). Negotiation focuses on customer non-solicitation or trade-secret carve-outs, not the non-compete itself.

   Else: Standard state enforceability analysis applies; consider geographic scope, duration, legitimate business interest, and consideration paid.

2. If You work in Massachusetts AND were not given garden leave or other mutually-agreed consideration

   Then → The non-compete is unenforceable under Mass. Gen. Laws c. 149 § 24L. Don't pay a premium in severance for release of an already-unenforceable covenant.

   Else: Massachusetts non-compete may be enforceable if garden-leave or equivalent consideration was provided at the time of signing.

3. If Your non-compete restricts geographic scope and time beyond what's "reasonable" for the role

   Then → Most states will either reform (blue-pencil) or refuse to enforce overbroad non-competes. Negotiate a narrower release in exchange for the company narrowing the underlying covenant.

   Else: Standard non-compete enforceability analysis — release value depends on the employer's actual willingness to litigate.

Calculate your numbers

Inputs default to federal assumptions; adjust to your specifics.

Action steps

• Identify which state's law governs your non-compete — check the agreement's choice-of-law clause, but note that California (§ 16600.5) and Minnesota apply their bans regardless of what state the agreement nominates.
• If you are in California, Minnesota, North Dakota, or Oklahoma, the clause is likely void. Request the release in writing as a clarifying term, not as a concession requiring additional payment.
• If you are in Massachusetts, check whether your agreement includes a garden leave clause paying at least 50% of your highest base salary (M.G.L. c. 149 § 24L). If it does not, the non-compete may be unenforceable.
• In an enforcing state, quantify the restriction: how many months remain, which employers or customers it covers, and what roles it blocks. A narrow clause has low value; a broad clause covering your industry for two years has significant value to waive.
• Negotiate beyond the full release: even if the employer will not waive the clause entirely, push for geography reduction, duration shortening, a narrowed customer list, and explicit carve-outs for companies you have already identified as targets.
• Get any waiver or modification in a signed written addendum to the separation agreement — oral promises not to enforce are unenforceable.

FAQ

Is my non-compete enforceable now that the FTC rule is gone?

Enforceability depends entirely on state law. The FTC's Non-Compete Clause Rule was vacated by a federal court in August 2024 and formally removed from the Code of Federal Regulations on February 12, 2026. There is no federal ban. California (§ 16600), Minnesota (SF 3035, eff. July 1, 2023), North Dakota (§ 9-08-06), and Oklahoma (tit. 15, § 219A) ban most non-competes by statute. Most other states treat well-drafted non-competes as presumptively valid.

How much is a non-compete release worth in a severance negotiation?

In a state that enforces non-competes, the release is worth the employer's avoided enforcement cost plus the value the restriction would have destroyed for you. Enforcement suits routinely cost employers $50,000–$200,000 before trial. For senior executives with broad, industry-wide restrictions, released non-competes have been valued at 25–100% of annual base salary; for individual contributors with narrow clauses, one to four weeks of additional severance is a reasonable starting ask.

Can I get a partial modification if the employer refuses to waive the clause entirely?

Yes. Negotiate to reduce the geographic scope to the specific region where you worked, shorten the duration, narrow the covered activities to your exact role, or carve out specific employers you are already targeting. Each reduction in scope limits the employer's ability to enforce. Get any modification in a signed written addendum — verbal promises not to enforce are not binding.

Does Massachusetts require the employer to pay me during a non-compete period?

Yes, under M.G.L. c. 149 § 24L, a Massachusetts non-compete is enforceable only if the agreement includes a garden leave clause paying at least 50% of your highest annualized base salary during the restricted period, or other mutually agreed upon consideration. The employer cannot unilaterally stop making garden leave payments. If your agreement lacks this provision, it may be unenforceable as written.

My agreement has a California choice-of-law clause but I worked in another state — does § 16600 still apply?

Possibly. SB 699 (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 16600.5, effective January 1, 2024) explicitly extends California's non-compete ban to agreements regardless of where or when they were signed. If you are a California resident or enforcement is attempted in California, § 16600.5 gives you a private right of action and a court applying California law would void the clause. If enforcement is threatened in a non-California state, that state's courts apply their own choice-of-law analysis.

What leverage do I have as a senior executive in a state that enforces non-competes?

Senior executives have the most leverage because their non-competes are typically broadest and most aggressively enforced — which means the release has the most value to negotiate. Price the release based on duration, industry scope, and your next role's compensation impact, then compare against the employer's litigation cost exposure. The employer's interest in avoiding a disruptive suit is your primary source of leverage.

What's the current federal status of non-competes after the FTC rule?

The FTC's 2024 non-compete rule (89 Fed. Reg. 38342) was vacated nationwide by Ryan LLC v. FTC, No. 3:24-CV-00986-E (N.D. Tex. Aug 20, 2024) and formally removed from the CFR on February 12, 2026. There is currently no federal ban; state law governs non-compete enforceability. The FTC has appealed in some related matters but no federal rule is in effect as of 2026.

How much should I ask for in exchange for releasing a non-compete?

It depends on the enforceability and scope. In states where non-competes are void by statute (CA, MN, ND, OK), a release is essentially a no-cost concession — don't pay extra severance for it. In states where the covenant is likely enforceable (TX, FL, NY for executives), industry practice is to negotiate 25%-100% of base salary as consideration for a 6-12 month release, depending on role seniority. A documented restrictive covenant's release value is usually less than the salary it would have prevented you from earning during the restricted period — but it depends on the employer's appetite to litigate.

Sources