In 2024, the Minnesota Legislature expanded the Deceptive Trade Practices Act (DTPA) to include a new category of actionable conduct: “unfair methods of competition.” This addition—found in Minn. Stat. § 325D.44, subdivision 1, clause 13—gives Minnesota business owners a broader legal tool to challenge competitor misconduct that previously fell through the cracks.
Here’s what the change means for your business and how it fits into Minnesota’s evolving competition law landscape.
What Changed in 2024: The New “Unfair Methods of Competition” Clause
Before the 2024 amendment, the DTPA listed twelve specific types of deceptive trade practices—things like trademark infringement, false advertising, and bait-and-switch tactics. If a competitor’s conduct didn’t fit neatly into one of those twelve categories, the DTPA offered limited recourse.
Clause 13 changes that. It makes actionable any conduct that constitutes an “unfair method of competition”—a deliberately broad standard borrowed from Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act.
This language is intentionally expansive. It captures competitive misconduct that may not involve deception in the traditional sense but is nonetheless unfair—practices that are unethical, oppressive, or cause substantial harm to other businesses without a legitimate competitive justification.
What “Unfair Methods of Competition” Means for Your Business
The term “unfair methods of competition” is broader than “deceptive” practices. Under FTC precedent—which Minnesota courts are likely to consider when interpreting the new clause—conduct may be “unfair” if it:
- Causes substantial injury to competitors or consumers
- Is not outweighed by countervailing benefits to competition or consumers
- Is not something competitors could reasonably have avoided
For business owners, this means certain types of aggressive competitor conduct that previously lacked a clear legal remedy may now be actionable. Examples include:
- Systematic employee poaching designed to cripple a competitor rather than fill legitimate hiring needs
- Predatory pricing strategies intended to drive a competitor out of the market
- Tortious interference with business relationships conducted through otherwise lawful—but unfair—means
- Misuse of confidential business information obtained through former employees or business relationships
- Market manipulation tactics that don’t rise to the level of antitrust violations but substantially harm competitors
Remedies Available Under the Updated DTPA
The DTPA’s remedy structure is important to understand:
- Injunctive relief. A court can order the competitor to stop the unfair conduct. For ongoing competitive harm, this can be the most valuable remedy—stopping the bleeding rather than just compensating for past losses.
- Attorney fees for willful violations. Under Minn. Stat. § 325D.45, the court may award attorney fees to the prevailing party if the opposing party’s conduct was willful. This applies when the competitor knew or should have known that its conduct was unfair.
- No direct monetary damages under the DTPA alone. The DTPA primarily provides injunctive relief, not damages. However, the same underlying conduct often supports companion claims that do provide damages. The DTPA claim adds the injunction and potential fee-shifting on top.
Pairing the DTPA With Other Claims
The real power of the updated DTPA often lies in combining it with other causes of action:
| Companion Claim | What It Adds |
|---|---|
| Trade Secret Misappropriation (§ 325C) | Damages + exemplary damages if willful |
| Antitrust (§ 325D.57) | Treble damages + mandatory attorney fees |
| Tortious Interference | Compensatory and punitive damages |
| PAG Statute (§ 8.31) | Additional fee-shifting (if public benefit shown) |
This layered approach—injunction through the DTPA, damages through companion claims—often provides the most complete remedy for business owners facing unfair competitor conduct.
The Intersection With Trade Secrets and Employee Agreements
The 2024 DTPA amendment takes on particular significance in the context of Minnesota’s evolving employment law landscape.
Since Minnesota banned most non-compete agreements in July 2023 (Minn. Stat. § 181.988), businesses have had fewer contractual tools to prevent competitors from systematically targeting their workforce and extracting proprietary knowledge. The new “unfair methods of competition” clause helps fill that gap.
Consider this scenario:
A competitor hires three of your key employees in quick succession. The non-compete ban means those employees were free to leave. But if the competitor specifically targeted them to obtain your trade secrets, client lists, or proprietary processes—using the employees as a vehicle for misappropriating confidential information—that conduct may constitute an “unfair method of competition” under the updated DTPA, in addition to potential trade secret misappropriation claims.
The DTPA’s injunctive remedy is particularly valuable in these situations. A damages award compensates for past harm, but an injunction can prevent the competitor from continuing to benefit from unfairly obtained competitive advantages.
Why This Matters Now
Because clause 13 is new, there is limited case law interpreting its scope. This creates both uncertainty and opportunity:
- Courts will look to FTC Act precedent for guidance on what constitutes “unfair methods of competition,” providing a body of established interpretation
- Early cases will shape the law. Business owners who bring well-supported claims under the new provision will help establish its scope and application in Minnesota
- The broad language suggests legislative intent to reach conduct that existing statutes did not adequately address
What Business Owners Should Do Now
The 2024 DTPA amendment is relevant from both an offensive and defensive perspective:
Protecting Your Business
- Know the statute exists. If a competitor is engaging in conduct that feels unfair but doesn’t fit traditional legal categories, the updated DTPA may provide a remedy.
- Document competitive misconduct. If you suspect a competitor is engaged in unfair methods of competition, preserve evidence of the conduct and its impact on your business.
- Act promptly. Injunctive relief is most effective when sought before competitive harm becomes irreversible.
Ensuring Your Own Compliance
- Audit your competitive practices. Review how your company recruits employees, prices products, and interacts with competitors. Practices that may have been merely aggressive before 2024 may now create liability.
- Train your team. Make sure executives and managers understand the boundaries between competitive vigor and unfair methods of competition.
- Review trade association activities. Information sharing among competitors—even informal discussions at industry events—can create antitrust and DTPA exposure.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does the 2024 DTPA amendment create a new cause of action for damages?
Not directly. The DTPA primarily provides injunctive relief. However, attorney fees may be awarded for willful violations, and the same conduct that violates the DTPA often supports companion claims (trade secret misappropriation, antitrust, tortious interference) that do provide damages.
How is “unfair methods of competition” different from “deceptive trade practices”?
Deceptive trade practices involve misleading conduct—false advertising, trademark infringement, and similar acts. “Unfair methods of competition” is broader. Conduct can be unfair without being deceptive—for example, predatory pricing or systematic employee poaching may not involve any false statements but may still constitute unfair competition.
Will Minnesota courts follow FTC Act precedent?
The Legislature’s use of FTC Act language (“unfair methods of competition”) suggests that FTC and federal court precedent will be persuasive, though Minnesota courts will ultimately develop their own interpretation of the statute.
What’s the statute of limitations for DTPA claims?
The general statute of limitations for DTPA claims is governed by the six-year residual statute of limitations under Minn. Stat. § 541.05, though the specific facts of each case may affect this analysis.
Can I bring a DTPA claim against a business in another state?
If the unfair competitive conduct affects Minnesota commerce and your Minnesota business, you may be able to bring a DTPA claim in Minnesota courts. Jurisdictional analysis depends on the specific facts, including where the conduct occurred and where its effects were felt.
Get Ahead of the Change
The 2024 DTPA amendment broadened the legal landscape for competition claims in Minnesota. Whether you need to protect your business from a competitor’s unfair practices or ensure your own practices comply with the updated law, understanding these changes is an important first step.
Schedule a consultation to discuss your situation.