FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 11/2/2022 | Document No. 605076 | PAGE Page 1 of 17 * PUBLIC *; 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PUBLIC 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

COMMISSIONERS: Lina M. Khan, Chair 

Rebecca Kelly Slaughter 

Christine S. Wilson 

Alvaro M. Bedoya 

In the Matter of: 

Docket No. 9408 Intuit Inc., a corporation. 

RESPONDENT INTUIT’S 

SUPPLEMENTAL FILING CONCERNING ORAL ARGUMENT 

Intuit submits this supplemental filing in response to two questions posed by the 

Commissioners during oral argument. 

First, Commissioner Wilson asked whether the three television advertisements shown by 

Complaint Counsel during the hearing—specifically, the Tax Year 2014 “Boston Tea Party,” 

Tax Year 2018 “Lawyer,” and Tax Year 2021 “Auctioneer” advertisements—aired on television. 

The versions submitted by Complaint Counsel through the declaration of Diana Shiller, taken 

from third-party websites, are shown with a lower video quality than the actual ads that ran. The 

versions of those three advertisements submitted along with this filing aired on television in Tax 

Years 2014, 2018, and 2021, respectively. See RX 200, 201, 202. Each (including the Boston 

Tea Party ad) included disclosures that they pertained only to a single product, TurboTax Free 

Edition (or what it was called at that time), and that there were qualifications to use that product. 

See RX 203, 204, 205. Pursuant to Intuit’s settlement with the attorneys general of all 50 states 

and the District of Columbia, none of these ads can or will run again. 

1 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 11/2/2022 | Document No. 605076 | PAGE Page 2 of 17 * PUBLIC *; 

 

PUBLIC 

Second, Commissioner Bedoya asked Complaint Counsel what relief would be 

appropriate if the Commission granted “partial” summary decision based on the Boston Tea 

Party advertisement that aired in Tax Year 2014 and the two other ads that were shown. 

Although Intuit was not asked that question, it believes the Commission would benefit from 

considering Intuit’s response. As an initial matter, the Tax Year 2014 Boston Tea Party 

advertisement was run before the allegations in the Complaint begin, which involve only ads 

“since at least 2016.” Compl. ¶¶ 9, 21. For that matter, the advertisement was not even part of 

the FTC’s three-year-long investigation, which requested only television ads from after June 

2016 that used the word free. See Gringer Decl. ¶¶ 9-10. It is contrary to the FTC’s rules to 

grant relief based on a seven-year-old ad that is outside the time period made part of these 

proceedings. See 16 C.F.R. § 3.11(b)(2) (“The Commission’s complaint shall contain ... [a] 

clear and concise factual statement sufficient to inform each respondent with reasonable 

definiteness of the type of acts or practices alleged to be in violation of the law[.]”). At the very 

least, Intuit should be provided the opportunity to offer expert testimony and develop evidence 

regarding consumer impressions pertaining to that seven-year-old advertisement. The evidence 

Intuit submitted with regard to all of the other advertisements identified in the summary decision 

motion “must be considered,” Thompson Med. Co., 1984 FTC LEXIS 6, at *324-325 (holding 

that because Thompson offered extrinsic evidence, the Commission was “obliged to consider 

it”), and necessarily precludes summary decision. 

Further, Intuit is still uncertain which advertisements are alleged to be deceptive even 

during the relevant time period. Complaint Counsel failed to provide a complete response to 

Intuit’s first Interrogatory, which sought to learn each advertisement Complaint Counsel contend 

is deceptive. Chief Judge Chappell granted Intuit’s motion to compel this information moments 

after the hearing concluded, and we await Complaint Counsel’s identification of the ads at issue. 

2 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 11/2/2022 | Document No. 605076 | PAGE Page 3 of 17 * PUBLIC *; 

 

 

 

 

PUBLIC 

Chief Judge Chappell’s ruling was not the only recent development highlighting the 

unfairness of not allowing Intuit its day in Court: Despite months of requests that they do so, 

Complaint Counsel waited until the Friday before oral argument to produce the data underlying 

the surveys conducted by their putative expert, Nathan Novemsky. It turns out that data shows 

that a substantial number of consumers understood, apart from any advertisements that Intuit ran, 

both that TurboTax Free Edition is available only for consumers who qualify and the nature of 

those qualifications, and therefore could not have been deceived by Intuit’s advertisements. The 

Commission should consider that evidence (and a complete factual record) before deciding 

whether Intuit’s advertisements were deceptive. 

To the extent that “partial” summary decision remains under consideration—and to be 

very clear, it should not—the Part 3 rules do not allow for the grant of summary decision on 

something less than a full claim along the lines of Commissioner Bedoya’s question about 

Intuit’s television advertisements. If, contrary to the rules, the Commission were to split 

Complaint Counsel’s single claim and decide now that the Boston Tea Party ad and any other 

advertisement (or category of advertisement) was deceptive, the appropriate step would not be to 

enter an order but instead hold a hearing to determine the appropriate scope of relief, if any. See 

16 C.F.R. § 3.24(a)(2), (5). Intuit updated its television advertisement disclosures significantly 

since Tax Year 2014 to convey Free Edition’s qualifications more prominently to consumers, 

including by changing the disclosure’s color and font to make the text easier to read. See Intuit’s 

Statement of Material Facts as to Which There Exists a Genuine Issue for Trial (SOF) ¶ 29. 

And, as already noted, the settlement with the attorneys general of all 50 states and the District of 

Columbia prohibits Intuit from publishing any of the prior free television advertisements going 

forward, rendering any prospective relief inappropriate because there is no “cognizable danger” 

of those ads recurring. Intuit’s SOF ¶¶ 125-129. 

3 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 11/2/2022 | Document No. 605076 | PAGE Page 4 of 17 * PUBLIC *; 

 

 

PUBLIC 

Dated: November 2, 2022 Respectfully submitted, 

WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE 

AND DORR LLP 

/s/ David Z. Gringer 

Jonathan E. Paikin David Z. Gringer 

Jennifer Milici 7 World Trade Center 

Derek A. Woodman 250 Greenwich St. 

Reade Jacob New York, NY 10007 

1875 Pennsylvania Ave NW Telephone: (212) 230-8800 

Washington, DC 20006 Facsimile: (212) 230-8888 

Telephone: (202) 663-6000 David.Gringer@wilmerhale.com 

Facsimile: (202) 663-6363 

Jonathan.Paikin@wilmerhale.com 

Jennifer.Milici@wilmerhale.com 

Derek.Woodman@wilmerhale.com 

Reade.Jacob@wilmerhale.com 

Attorneys for Respondent Intuit Inc. 

4 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 11/2/2022 | Document No. 605076 | PAGE Page 5 of 17 * PUBLIC *; 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PUBLIC 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

COMMISSIONERS: Lina M. Khan, Chair 

Rebecca Kelly Slaughter 

Christine S. Wilson 

Alvaro M. Bedoya 

In the Matter of: 

Docket No. 9408 Intuit Inc., a corporation. 

DECLARATION OF DAVID GRINGER IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENT’S 

SUPPLEMENTAL FILING CONCERNING ORAL ARGUMENT 

I, David Z. Gringer, declare as follows: 

1. I am a partner at Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP. I represent the 

respondent, Intuit Inc., in the above-captioned proceeding. 

2. I submit this declaration in support of Respondent Intuit’s Supplemental Filing 

Concerning Oral Argument, filed herewith on November 2, 2022. 

3. A true and correct copy of the “Boston Tea Party” advertisement that aired on 

television in Tax Year 2014 has been filed along with this declaration as RX 200. 

4. A true and correct copy of the “Lawyer” advertisement that aired on television 

during Tax Year 2018 has been filed along with this declaration as RX 201. 

5. A true and correct copy of the “Auctioneer” advertisement that aired on television 

during Tax Year 2021 has been filed along with this declaration as RX 202. 

6. Attached hereto as RX 203 is a true and correct screenshot of the disclosure 

shown during the Tax Year 2014 “Boston Tea Party” advertisement. 

1 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 11/2/2022 | Document No. 605076 | PAGE Page 6 of 17 * PUBLIC *; 

 

 

 

PUBLIC 

7. Attached hereto as RX 204 is a true and correct screenshot of the disclosure 

shown during the Tax Year 2018 “Lawyer” advertisement. 

8. Attached hereto as RX 205 is a true and correct screenshot of the disclosure 

shown during the Tax Year 2021 “Auctioneer” advertisement. 

9. The June 28, 2019 Civil Investigative Demand issued by the FTC to Intuit 

requested that Intuit produce and provide information concerning only certain advertisements 

from after June 24, 2016 that included the term “free.” 

10. The May 18, 2020 Civil Investigative Demand issued by the FTC to Intuit 

requested that Intuit produce and provide information concerning only those television ads from 

after June 24, 2016 that used the word “free.” 

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. 

Executed on this 2nd day of November, 2022, in New York, NY. 

By: /s/ David Z. Gringer 

David Z. Gringer 

2 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 11/2/2022 | Document No. 605076 | PAGE Page 7 of 17 * PUBLIC *; PUBLIC

RX 200 

“Boston Tea Party” advertisement 

that aired on television in 

Tax Year 2014 

(Electronic Filename: RX 200 - 2015 TY14 

Boston Tea Party 60.mp4) 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 11/2/2022 | Document No. 605076 | PAGE Page 8 of 17 * PUBLIC *; PUBLIC

RX 201 

“Lawyer” advertisement 

that aired on television during 

Tax Year 2018 

(Electronic Filename: RX 201 -

QTTX12273H_Free_Lawyer_HD_30_1920x1080. 

mp4) 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 11/2/2022 | Document No. 605076 | PAGE Page 9 of 17 * PUBLIC *; PUBLIC

RX 202 

“Auctioneer” advertisement 

that aired on television during 

Tax Year 2021 

(Electronic Filename: RX 202 - 5278628.MP4) 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 11/2/2022 | Document No. 605076 | PAGE Page 10 of 17 * PUBLIC *; PUBLIC

RX 203 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 11/2/2022 | Document No. 605076 | PAGE Page 11 of 17 * PUBLIC *; PUBLIC

Absolutezero 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 11/2/2022 | Document No. 605076 | PAGE Page 12 of 17 * PUBLIC *; PUBLIC

RX 204 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 11/2/2022 | Document No. 605076 | PAGE Page 13 of 17 * PUBLIC *; 

• • 

PUBLIC

lnTUIT 

✓ turbotaxfree 

Free, free free free. 

Free Edition product only. For simple U.S. returns. Offer subject to change. See details at turbotax.com . 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 11/2/2022 | Document No. 605076 | PAGE Page 14 of 17 * PUBLIC *; PUBLIC

RX 205 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 11/2/2022 | Document No. 605076 | PAGE Page 15 of 17 * PUBLIC *; PUBLIC
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 11/2/2022 | Document No. 605076 | PAGE Page 16 of 17 * PUBLIC *; 

 

 

PUBLIC 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on November 2, 2022, I caused the foregoing document to be filed 

electronically using the FTC’s E-Filing system, which will send notification of such filing to: 

April Tabor 

Office of the Secretary 

Federal Trade Commission 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Suite CC-5610 

Washington, DC 20580 

ElectronicFilings@ftc.gov 

The Honorable D. Michael Chappell 

600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Rm. H-110 

Washington, DC 20580 

I further certify that on November 2, 2022, I caused the foregoing document to be served 

via email to: 

Roberto Anguizola 

Federal Trade Commission 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20580 

Email: ranguizola@ftc.gov 

Tel: (202) 326-3284 

James Evans 

Federal Trade Commission 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20580 

Email: jevans1@ftc.gov 

Tel: (202) 326-2026 

Christine Todaro 

Federal Trade Commission 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20580 

Email: ctodaro@ftc.gov 

Tel: (202) 326-3711 

Jody Goodman 

Federal Trade Commission 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20580 

Email: jgoodman1@ftc.gov 

Tel: (202) 326-3096 

Rebecca Plett 

Federal Trade Commission 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20580 

Email: rplett@ftc.gov 

Tel: (202) 326-3664 

Sara Tonnesen 

Federal Trade Commission 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20580 

Email: stonnesen@ftc.gov 

Tel: (202) 326-2879 

Thomas Harris 

Federal Trade Commission 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20580 

Email: tharris1@ftc.gov 

Tel: (202) 326-3620 

Colleen Robbins 

Federal Trade Commission 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20580 

Email: crobbins@ftc.gov 

Tel: (202) 326-2548 
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 11/2/2022 | Document No. 605076 | PAGE Page 17 of 17 * PUBLIC *; 

 

 

PUBLIC 

Virginia Rosa J. Ronald Brooke, Jr. 

Federal Trade Commission Federal Trade Commission 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20580 Washington, DC 20580 

Email: vrosa@ftc.gov Email: jbrooke@ftc.gov 

Tel: (202) 326-3068 Tel: (202) 326-3484 

Counsel Supporting the Complaint 

April Tabor The Honorable D. Michael Chappell 

Office of the Secretary Administrative Law Judge 

Federal Trade Commission 600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Rm. H-110 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20580 

Suite CC-5610 

Washington, DC 20580 

ElectronicFilings@ftc.gov 

Dated: November 2, 2022 Respectfully submitted, 

/s/ Molly Dillaway 

Molly Dillaway 

Counsel for Intuit Inc.