; (3) amending the Clayton Act to include the term monopsony to clarify that an acquisition that tends to create a monopsony violates the Clayton Act; and (4) establishing simple, cost-effective decision rules that require the parties to certain acquisitions that either significantly increase consolidation or are extremely large bear the burden of establishing that the acquisition will not materially harm competition. 3. Unlawful acquisitions Section 7 of the Clayton Act ( 15 U.S.C. 18 ) is amended— (1) in the first and second undesignated paragraphs, by striking substantially each place that term appears and inserting materially ; (2) by inserting or a monopsony after monopoly each place that term appears; and (3) by adding at the end the following: In a case brought by the United States, the Federal Trade Commission, or a State attorney general, a court shall determine that the effect of an acquisition described in this section may be materially to lessen competition or create a monopoly or a monopsony if— (1) the acquisition would lead to a significant increase in market concentration in any line of commerce or in any activity affecting commerce in any section of the country; or (2) (A) the acquisition is not a transaction that is described in section 7A(c); and (B) (i) as a result of such acquisition, the acquiring person would hold an aggregate total amount of the voting securities and assets of the acquired person in excess of $5,000,000,000 (as adjusted and published for each fiscal year beginning after September 30, 2018, in the same manner as provided in section 8(a)(5) to reflect the percentage change in the gross national product for such fiscal year compared to the gross national product for the year ending September 30, 2017); or (ii) (I) the person acquiring or the person being acquired has assets, net annual sales, or a market capitalization greater than $100,000,000,000 (as so adjusted and published)