repairs, effectively steering customers to authorized dealerships. According to the plaintiffs, Deere’ s practices limited competition in the repair market and increased repair costs for equipment owners.
The second action, Federal Trade Commission et al. v. Deere & Co., was filed in January 2025 by the FTC and the states of Illinois, Arizona, Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin. The FTC and the states alleged that Deere unlawfully maintained a monopoly over repair services for Deere agricultural equipment by withholding repair capabilities from farmers and independent repair providers in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act, Section 5 of the FTC Act, and state antitrust laws.
FTC settlement focuses on expanding repair access
After the parties engaged in discovery and subsequently obtained a stay to continue settlement discussions, Deere and the government plaintiffs filed a Joint Motion for Entry of a Stipulated Order for Permanent Injunction and Other Relief on July 8, 2026. The proposed order resolves all claims asserted by the FTC and participating states without Deere admitting liability.
At the center of the FTC settlement is a requirement that Deere provide equipment owners and independent repair providers access to repair resources equivalent to those made available to Deere dealers. Under the order, Deere must make those resources available on“ fair and reasonable terms” through licenses, subscriptions, or purchases.
The settlement’ s definition of repair resources is extensive. It includes access to diagnostic trouble codes, diagnostic testing, software programming and reprogramming capabilities, replacement of electronic control units, embedded software installation, equipment calibration tools, technical manuals, schematics, troubleshooting information, warranty information, recall notices, and Deere’ s Dealer Technical Assistance Center solutions. The order also requires access to capabilities necessary to return equipment to fully functional condition in accordance with factory specifications.
Importantly, the order extends beyond currently available tools. Deere must also provide“ future repair resources”— including successor products,
PAGE 18 upgrades, updates, and newly developed repair tools— once such resources have been deployed to more than 50 % of Deere dealer locations in the United States.
Dealer obligations and anti-retaliation provisions
The FTC settlement also places obligations on Deere’ s dealer network. Deere must instruct dealers to promote and support repair resources and to sell those resources to owners and independent repair providers regardless of whether they purchase repair services from the dealership. Dealers are further prohibited from discriminating against or retaliating against equipment owners or independent repair providers that perform repairs or purchase Deere’ s repair tools. This prohibition extends to the sale, financing, and servicing of Deere equipment, parts, and tools, subject to ordinary business considerations such as geographic location, creditworthiness, and legal compliance.
These provisions reflect the FTC’ s broader concern that meaningful repair access requires not only the availability of software tools but also the ability of customers and independent technicians to obtain those tools without interference from authorized dealers.
Compliance and oversight
The stipulated order contains substantial compliance measures. Deere must provide notice of the settlement to owners, independent repair providers, and dealers, post information regarding the settlement on its website, and submit periodic compliance reports to the FTC and participating states. Initially, Deere must report every 60 days until the rollout of the required repair resources is complete and then provide annual reports for an additional nine years. The order remains in effect for 10 years and grants regulators ongoing authority to monitor compliance and seek enforcement if Deere fails to meet its obligations.
In addition, Deere agreed to pay $ 1 million to the plaintiff states to cover costs and attorneys’ fees associated with the litigation.
FTC Bureau of Competition Director Daniel Guarnera has indicated that the agency intends to continue challenging anticompetitive restrictions that limit consumers’ right to repair, suggesting that the Deere