Last month, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) launched an inquiry into sports agent compliance with the Sports Agent Responsibility and Trust Act (SPARTA), a federal law aimed at protecting student athletes from deceptive agency practices. As part of that inquiry, the FTC is seeking information from 20 unnamed universities related to whether sports agents who work with their student athletes are currently complying with certain SPARTA requirements.
These information requests signal a renewed FTC SPARTA enforcement priority, a decades-old law, which comes as student athletes continue to make strides in rights related to name, image, and likeness (NIL) deals, direct pay, and revenue sharing.
Overview of the Sports Agent Responsibility and Trust Act (SPARTA)
Originally enacted in 2004, SPARTA prohibits certain conduct by sports agents when they enter into contracts with a student athlete, defined broadly as "an individual who engages in, is eligible to engage in, or may be eligible in the future to engage in, any intercollegiate sport." Specifically, SPARTA prohibits agents from "giving any false or misleading information or making a false promise or representation" or "providing anything of value" to a student athlete to recruit student athletes to enter into agency contracts.
Agents must also make certain written disclosures to student athletes in conjunction with entering into contracts with them and must disclose any contracts to their university within 72 hours of signing or before an athlete's next competition (whichever comes first).
SPARTA's Role in the Evolving Regulatory Environment
The FTC has primary enforcement authority over SPARTA, a violation of which is treated as "an unfair or deceptive act or practice" as defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act. SPARTA has rarely resulted in public inquiries or enforcement actions over the past 20 years. However, the regulatory environment surrounding student athlete and agent relations has changed dramatically since SPARTA's enactment.
Now that student athletes are, for example, permitted to enter into NIL deals, they more frequently enter into agency contracts even before they reach professional eligibility. This leads to increased risk that young athletes are subject to misleading or deceptive agency practices—particularly in the case of high-profile Division I athletes, who now regularly enter into six-figure endorsement contracts. The FTC's new inquiry signals a renewed priority in safeguarding student athletes in this complex and ever-changing regulatory environment.
Beyond the FTC, Congress has recently contemplated expanding SPARTA safeguards. Last year, both the House of Representatives and the Senate introduced bills that seek to establish a uniform federal NIL law: the Student Compensation and Opportunity through Rights and Endorsements Act (SCORE Act) in the House, and the Student Athlete Fairness and Enforcement Act (SAFE Act) in the Senate. If passed, both the SCORE Act and SAFE Act would amend SPARTA to add increased protections for student athletes. For example, under either bill, the amended SPARTA would add a 5% cap on student athlete-agent fees in endorsement contracts. It is still unclear whether either bill will receive congressional support, but both suggest that regulating student athlete-agent relationships will continue to be on the minds of lawmakers and government agencies.
The FTC Inquiry and Considerations for Universities and Sports Agents
As part of its inquiry, the FTC sent letters to 20 universities—all with Division I sports programs—to request information about whether sports agents are providing those universities SPARTA-required disclosures. For example, the FTC letters seek the following information, by March 23, 2026, for each student athlete who has entered into an agency contract:
- Date(s) when the athlete agents notified the schools that the student athlete had entered into a contract
- The name and contact information of the agent
- Whether the schools have received complaints or reports about an agent's relationship with a student athlete
The FTC's inquiry has implications for universities and sports agencies alike. To prepare for potential information requests, universities should establish internal mechanisms to identify and track agent relationships with student athletes, to the extent those mechanisms do not already exist.
Universities should also provide student athletes with a straightforward means to make complaints about athlete agents or their practices. On the other hand, sports agencies should review their current compliance with SPARTA, and when entering into contracts going forward, should be sure to make the required disclosures to universities in a timely manner.
Sports agencies should also ensure that they are in compliance with state-level sports agent regulations, including the Uniform Athlete Agent Act, which establishes registration and licensing requirements in the majority of states.
Venable's Sports Law Group will continue to monitor developments related to the FTC's inquiry and sports agent regulation going forward. Please reach out to the authors or members of this group if you need legal support.