After more than five years of political, corporate, and judicial back-and-forth, TikTok is on the verge of closing the most sensitive chapter in its recent US history. According to advance information provided by Axios, based on an internal document attributed to the company’s leadership, ByteDance has signed an agreement to transfer U.S. operations of TikTok to a joint venture controlled by domestic investors, with a scheduled closure date of January 22, 2026.
The core of this move is simple: to continue operating in the U.S. market without facing new extensions or living constantly on the edge of a regulatory “shutdown.” If confirmed in its final terms, the agreement constitutes a pragmatic change: instead of a “traditional” sale to a single buyer, a corporate structure is formed where control shifts into the hands of U.S. capital, while ByteDance retains a minority stake.
What is known about the distribution of ownership and who is involved
One of the most discussed points is the shareholder distribution attributed to the deal. Published information indicates that Oracle, Silver Lake, and MGX would hold 45% of TikTok’s U.S. joint venture. Additionally, nearly a third would remain in the hands of existing ByteDance investors, while around 20% would continue to belong to the current owner.
Beyond percentages, there is a strategic detail that explains why some names repeatedly appear in negotiations like this: infrastructure and control guarantees. For Oracle, its role is typically associated with the technological and “trust” layer (hosting, auditing, data governance, etc.), a factor considered as crucial in Washington as ownership itself.
Quick table: snapshot of distribution (based on available info)
| Block / Actors | Approximate Share | Strategic Interpretation |
|---|---|---|
| Oracle + Silver Lake + MGX | 45% | U.S. control with technological/financial muscle |
| Current ByteDance Investors | ~33% | Partial continuity of existing partners |
| ByteDance (parent company) | ~20% | Exit from control but maintaining business exposure |
Note: final distribution may vary until closing and depends on regulatory approvals and deal conditions.
Why now: legal pressures left no margin
The regulatory environment is what pushes TikTok toward a stable closure. In April 2024, the U.S. approved and enacted the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act, a law that, in practice, requires a “qualified divestment” to prevent the app from being blocked in key stores and services. The law was signed on April 24, 2024, setting a timeline that led to a critical point in January 2025 if the “adversary-controlled” ownership was not relinquished.
This framework turned negotiations into a countdown: promises of change were no longer enough; a clear ownership and control structure had to be established to withstand scrutiny from regulators, lawmakers, and courts. Meanwhile, the case entered the judicial realm (including references to TikTok v. Garland in the public legal process).
Timeline of a saga that started in 2020 and dragged on
To understand why this news matters, it’s helpful to look at the broader timeline:
- 2020: Political pressure begins at the end of Donald Trump’s first term, with attempts to force a sale on “national security” grounds.
- April 24, 2024: The law establishing a divestment or blocking mechanism is enacted.
- January 2025: The legal window reaches a critical point if TikTok doesn’t comply with the “qualified divestment” framework.
- 2025: Moratoria and political extensions are granted to allow for negotiated solutions.
- January 22, 2026: The date scheduled for closing the deal, according to published reports.
What this means for users, creators, and brands (and what it doesn’t)
For the average user in the U.S., the message is straightforward: TikTok will continue to operate normally, avoiding sudden blocks or ongoing uncertainty. For creators and brands, the impact is even more direct: the U.S. advertising business is too large to sustain threats of “imminent closure” every few months.
What this agreement does not automatically imply is a “sale” outside the U.S. The operation is structured as a U.S.-specific solution, without altering how TikTok functions in Europe or Latin America.
The nuance missing: it’s not just a “sale,” it’s about control and governance
In these kinds of operations, the word “sale” falls short. The real debate—one that has fueled five years of conflict—is who controls the asset: corporate governance, data access, technical operation, decision-making chain, and audit capabilities.
That’s why the joint venture controlled by U.S. investors makes sense from a political perspective: it allows authorities to claim “domestic control” without requiring a complete overhaul of TikTok’s global infrastructure overnight. However, the closure on January 22 is not just a formality; it remains subject to approvals, conditions, and inevitable geopolitical scrutiny.
Frequently Asked Questions
When will TikTok’s operation in the U.S. close?
According to published information, the final closure is planned for January 22, 2026.
Which companies would have control in TikTok’s ‘joint venture’ in the U.S.?
The information indicates a group with Oracle, Silver Lake, and MGX, totaling around 45%.
Does this deal affect TikTok in Spain or Europe?
It shouldn’t: this is a U.S.-focused operation, while TikTok outside the U.S. would continue operating under its current structure.
Why could the U.S. have banned TikTok if there was no sale?
Because the law enacted in April 2024 sets a divestment mechanism to prevent an app under “adversary” control from continuing to distribute and operate in the country.