Who was sanctioned, and for what?

Maxxis guaranteed wholesalers fixed margins per tyre sold of the Maxxis and CST brands, monitored prices in particular on the Tyre24 platform and intervened when prices were too low. Germany's Federal Cartel Office (Bundeskartellamt) imposed fines on Maxxis and two tyre wholesalers that had pushed for the margin guarantees; at the time of publication the decisions were not final (an objection to the Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf was possible).

Authority / court

Bundeskartellamt

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

§ 1 GWB (vertikale Preisbindung)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Automotive

Mitigating circumstances

Settlement with Maxxis and Reifen Müller

Published

21 Jul 2026

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link

The Tribunal of the Conselho Administrativo de Defesa Econômica (CADE, Brazilian competition authority) unanimously fined Denso Corporation 100,787,523.05 BRL for taking part in an international cartel in wire harnesses and electrical and electronic automotive components with effects in Brazil. According to the rapporteur’s vote, Denso took part in price fixing, the allocation of projects, geographic market sharing and the exchange of sensitive information roughly between 2000 and 2008. For other participants the proceedings ended through leniency, settlements or for lack of evidence; CADE dismissed Denso’s motion for clarification (embargos) in August 2026. The amount and the facts have not been confirmed against the primary source.

Authority / court

Conselho Administrativo de Defesa Econômica (CADE), Tribunal Administrativo

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

Lei nº 12.529/2011 (Lei de Defesa da Concorrência)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Automotive

Employees

10,000 or more

Published

10 Jun 2026

Original amount 100,787,523.05 BRL, converted at the ECB reference rate of 10 Jun 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

In two tenders by ‘Vilniaus viešasis transportas’ for vehicle spare parts (May–October 2025), the dealers coordinated bids and prices, wrote the bids for each other and sent them from the same computer. The contracting entity reported the suspicion. Following acknowledgement (minus 15%), fines of 17,950 EUR (Manado) and 23,130 EUR (Parts ready). Source: archived copy of the press release.

Authority / court

Konkurencijos taryba (Litauischer Wettbewerbsrat)

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

Konkurencijos įstatymas (verbotene Vereinbarungen)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Automotive

Mitigating circumstances

Acknowledgement of the infringement (15% reduction)

Published

12 Feb 2026

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

From 2005 to 2017, the manufacturers of automotive starter batteries agreed, with the help of the association EUROBAT, to publish jointly calculated lead surcharges (EUROBAT premiums) and to use them in price negotiations with carmakers. Fines: Exide 30 million EUR, Rombat 20.218 million EUR, Elettra 15.594 million EUR, FET 6.11 million EUR, EUROBAT 125,000 EUR; Clarios escaped a fine as leniency applicant.

Authority / court

Europäische Kommission

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

Art. 101 AEUV, Art. 53 EWR-Abkommen

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Automotive

Mitigating circumstances

Leniency programme (Clarios 100 %, FET 50 %, Rombat 30 %); reduction for inability to pay for one company; payment in instalments

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

In 2014–2015, chassis and body manufacturers allocated contracts and submitted cover bids in tenders for refuse collection and sewer cleaning vehicles. The Gazdasági Versenyhivatal (Hungarian Competition Authority, GVH) imposed cartel fines of 1,278.4 million HUF (of which 972.9 million on Volvo Hungária) and, in addition, a record procedural fine of 270 million HUF on Volvo Hungária for obstructing access to data secured during the inspection.

Authority / court

Gazdasági Versenyhivatal (GVH)

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

Ungarisches Wettbewerbsgesetz, Art. 101 AEUV (Submissionsabsprachen, Verfahrensbuße)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Automotive

Culpability

intentional

Mitigating circumstances

Admissions and leniency applications by most participants; MUT paid 116 million HUF in compensation to contracting authorities.

Published

5 Dec 2025

Original amount 1,548,400,000 HUF, converted at the ECB reference rate of 5 Dec 2025.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link

Valvoline wanted to acquire around 200 Oil Changers shops from Greenbriar for 625 million USD. Because the two competed directly in 25 local markets, under the proposed consent order the acquisition may only be completed if 45 shops are sold to Main Street Auto.

Authority / court

Federal Trade Commission (FTC)

Area of law

Competition law · Merger control

Legal basis

Section 7 Clayton Act; Section 5 FTC Act (Consent Order)

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Automotive

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The CADE Tribunal convicted two car dealers of gun jumping: in March 2015 Navesa had acquired tangible and intangible assets from Renauto for operating Renault dealerships in Goiânia without obtaining clearance for the notifiable transaction. Although the Tribunal had ordered notification in August 2023, the parties filed the form only in November 2024; a fine totalling 5,360,560.00 BRL, payable within 30 days, was imposed. The amount and the facts have not been confirmed against the primary source.

Authority / court

Conselho Administrativo de Defesa Econômica (CADE), Tribunal Administrativo

Area of law

Competition law · Merger control

Legal basis

Art. 88 § 3 Lei nº 12.529/2011; Art. 12 II a Resolução CADE nº 24/2019

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Automotive

Published

9 Apr 2025

Original amount 5,360,560 BRL, converted at the ECB reference rate of 9 Apr 2025.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The Commission imposed fines of around 458 million EUR on 15 carmakers and the association ACEA. From 2002 to 2017, they had agreed not to pay dismantlers for recycling end-of-life vehicles and not to advertise recycling rates or recycled content; ACEA organised the meetings. Mercedes-Benz received full immunity as leniency applicant, and all parties reached a settlement (10 % reduction).

Authority / court

Europäische Kommission

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

Art. 101 AEUV, Art. 53 EWR-Abkommen

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Automotive

Employees

10,000 or more

Mitigating circumstances

Leniency programme (Mercedes-Benz 100 %, Stellantis/Opel 50 %, Mitsubishi 30 %, Ford 20 %), 10 % settlement reduction, lesser involvement of Honda, Mazda, Mitsubishi, Suzuki

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The CMA found two cartel infringements: from 2002 to 2017 the manufacturers had agreed not to advertise recyclability rates above the statutory minimum of 85%, and from 2004 to 2018 eight of them, later joined by others, had operated a buyers' cartel agreeing not to pay companies that recycle end-of-life vehicles. Under settlement, fines totalling GBP 77,688,917 were imposed: Ford 18,541,929, Volkswagen 14,755,900, BMW 11,060,925, Nissan/Renault 9,979,826 jointly plus 2,800,646 for Nissan alone, Peugeot Citroën/Stellantis 5,189,948, Vauxhall/Opel (with General Motors and Stellantis as former and current owners) 5,171,248 in total, Jaguar Land Rover 4,626,404, Toyota 4,502,760, Mitsubishi 898,531, ACEA 114,000 and SMMT 46,800 GBP. Mercedes-Benz had reported the cartel and received full immunity; the European Commission adopted its own decision for the EU on the same day.

Authority / court

Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

Chapter I prohibition, section 2(1) Competition Act 1998

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Automotive

Employees

10,000 or more

Mitigating circumstances

20% settlement discount for all addressees; additional leniency reductions for Peugeot Citroën and Vauxhall/Opel together with their current and former owners Stellantis and General Motors (45%), the SMMT (35%) and Mitsubishi (25%); full immunity for Mercedes-Benz as the first to report.

Published

1 Apr 2025

Original amount 77,688,917 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 1 Apr 2025.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

In 2021, the Slovenian Competition Protection Agency (AVK) had found that a Slovenian importer of a car brand and four car dealerships had infringed the cartel prohibition in the repair and maintenance of vehicles of that brand for public contracting authorities. In a settlement procedure under the new competition act, the importer withdrew its action and received an administrative sanction of 650,000 EUR, payable in three instalments.

Authority / court

Javna agencija Republike Slovenije za varstvo konkurence (AVK)

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

Art. 6 ZPOmK-1 bzw. Art. 5 ZPOmK-2, Art. 101 AEUV; Vergleich nach Art. 95 ZPOmK-2

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Automotive

Mitigating circumstances

Settlement with a reduction of up to 20%; termination after the inspection, cooperation.

Published

30 Sep 2024

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 5 · Company name anonymised since 24 Sep 2026 · Direct link

UOKiK found an agreement between a car importer and its dealer network that divided the market for passenger cars of the brand distributed by the importer in Poland and fixed prices. The fines on the companies total PLN 395,280,209.80: the importer PLN 331,021,284.64 and six dealer companies PLN 27,263,871.67, PLN 11,617,847.67, PLN 8,148,931.36, PLN 6,880,036.14, PLN 6,687,061.81 and PLN 3,661,176.51. Fines on natural persons are not included in the amount. The decision is not final.

Authority / court

Prezes Urzędu Ochrony Konkurencji i Konsumentów (UOKiK)

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

Art. 6 Abs. 1 Nr. 1 und 3 ustawa o ochronie konkurencji i konsumentów; Art. 101 Abs. 1 lit. a und c AEUV; Art. 106 Abs. 1 Nr. 1 und 2 ustawa o ochronie konkurencji i konsumentów

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

under appeal

Sector

Automotive

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not reported here.

Original amount 395,280,209.8 PLN, converted at the ECB reference rate of 9 Sep 2024.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Company name anonymised since 9 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The Kartellgericht (Cartel Court) fined the Austrian general importer of a car brand 15 million EUR for abusing its dominant position (relative market power) over an authorised dealer from 2017 or 2018 until 22 March 2021. The court objected to bonuses tied to customer satisfaction surveys, deliberately inflated sales targets, low prices charged by group-owned dealers while the dealer was given unfavourable terms, warranty and guarantee work paid below cost, and costs for mystery shopping and audits passed on to the dealer. A final cease-and-desist order obtained by the dealer had preceded the fine.

Authority / court

Oberlandesgericht Wien als Kartellgericht (Antrag der Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde)

Area of law

Competition law · Abuse of market power

Legal basis

§ 5 KartG; § 29 Abs. 1 Z 1 lit. a KartG

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Automotive

Culpability

intentional

Repeat case

no

Published

20 Jan 2025

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 4 Jun 2026 · Direct link

The KFTC (Korea Fair Trade Commission, Korea's competition authority) sanctioned an agreement reached in 2006 by the four German manufacturers to use a dosing strategy with lower AdBlue consumption in the software of their SCR exhaust after-treatment systems; in doing so they had blocked the development of more effective nitrogen oxide reduction and deprived buyers in Korea of the choice of cleaner diesel cars. In addition to cease-and-desist orders, it provisionally set fines totalling KRW 42,372 million (first manufacturer KRW 20,743 million, second manufacturer KRW 15,656 million, third manufacturer KRW 5,973 million; the breakdown shows no amount for the fourth manufacturer). According to the KFTC, it was its first action against an agreement in the field of research and development.

Authority / court

Korea Fair Trade Commission (KFTC)

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

Art. 19 Abs. 1 Nr. 6 MRFTA a. F. (Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Automotive

Employees

10,000 or more

Published

9 Feb 2023

Original amount 42,372,000,000 KRW, converted at the ECB reference rate of 9 Feb 2023.

Checked against the official source on 8 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 9 Feb 2025 · Direct link

In the competition proceedings concerning end-of-life vehicle recycling, the group did not fully respond to a formal information request from the CMA and disputed its jurisdiction. The CMA imposed a fixed penalty of 30,000 GBP and a daily penalty of 15,000 GBP until compliance.

Authority / court

Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)

Area of law

Competition law · Cartels and collusion

Legal basis

Competition Act 1998 (Pflicht zur Beantwortung förmlicher Auskunftsverlangen)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Automotive

Employees

10,000 or more

Published

8 Dec 2022

Original amount 30,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 8 Dec 2022.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 8 Dec 2024 · Direct link

On 10 October 2022 the Competition Commission (Hong Kong's competition authority) accepted commitments from seven sole distributors covering 17 passenger car brands. Their warranty terms required maintenance and repairs – including work not covered by the warranty – to be carried out at authorised repair centres, failing which the warranty was at risk; the authority considered this a possible breach of the First Conduct Rule (the ban on anti-competitive agreements) to the detriment of independent workshops. The distributors no longer enforce these clauses, will remove them from their warranty documents within 90 days, will inform existing customers and are bound for five years; no fine was imposed.

Authority / court

Competition Commission (Hongkong)

Area of law

Competition law

Legal basis

Competition Ordinance (Cap. 619), s. 6(1) (First Conduct Rule); Annahme von Verpflichtungszusagen nach s. 60

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Automotive

Published

10 Oct 2022

Checked against the official source on 7 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 10 Oct 2024 · Direct link