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

NSW Fair Trading (the consumer protection regulator of New South Wales) reprimanded used car dealer OzCar Pty Ltd on 22 June 2026 and imposed conditions on its dealer licence. The regulator refers to the maximum available in disciplinary proceedings and does not state the amount imposed on the company. The investigation found a pattern of dishonest conduct between 2023 and 2025; among other things, customers reported being pressured into signing or misled about the purpose of contracts, that contracts were not properly explained – including to particularly vulnerable buyers – and that vehicles of unacceptable quality were sold. Among other things, the company must introduce a compliance programme with training for sales staff, may no longer allow waivers of the statutory cooling-off right to be pre-filled, and must fix defects affecting safety or reliability before sale.

Authority / court

NSW Fair Trading

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing

Legal basis

Motor Dealers and Repairers Act 2013 (NSW), s 45(1)(a), (b), (d) und (d1)(ii)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Automotive

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not set out here.

Published

24 Sep 2026

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

Between September 2020 and September 2024, Bosch exported MEMS sensors and vehicle software worth around 72.4 million USD from outside the US without a licence to Huawei and affiliated companies on the Entity List (Foreign Direct Product Rule). Bosch voluntarily disclosed the violations; around 3.6 million USD of the penalty imposed by the US Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) is credited against a disgorgement agreed with the DOJ.

Authority / court

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS)

Area of law

Sanctions and export control · Export control and dual-use goods

Legal basis

Export Administration Regulations (Foreign Direct Product Rule, Entity List)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Automotive

Employees

10,000 or more

Mitigating circumstances

Voluntary self-disclosure and cooperation

Published

17 Jun 2026

Original amount 36,184,680 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 16 Jun 2026.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · 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

Around 10,000 heavy-duty Volvo diesel engines from model years 2010 to 2016 used auxiliary emission control devices (AECDs) that were not disclosed during certification and emitted more NOx than permitted. The settlement with the California Air Resources Board (CARB) comprises 17.5 million USD in penalties and costs, 71 million USD for mitigation measures and 108 million USD for emission reduction projects in California.

Authority / court

California Air Resources Board (CARB)

Area of law

Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits

Legal basis

Kalifornische Emissions- und Zertifizierungsvorschriften für schwere Nutzfahrzeugmotoren

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Automotive

Employees

10,000 or more

Mitigating circumstances

Cooperation during the investigation; recall and extended warranty for engines from model years 2014 to 2016.

Published

18 May 2026

Original amount 196,500,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 18 May 2026.

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

In an attack on an application operated by a processor, data of a very large number of persons (including personal identification numbers, driving licence and identity card numbers, vehicle identification numbers) were stolen and published. The Romanian data protection authority (ANSPDCP) criticised the lack of security measures and effectiveness testing as well as the selection of a service provider without sufficient guarantees and imposed 637,262.50 lei (125,000 EUR).

Authority / court

Autoritatea Națională de Supraveghere a Prelucrării Datelor cu Caracter Personal (ANSPDCP)

Area of law

Data protection · Data processors

Legal basis

Art. 32 Abs. 1 lit. b und d, Abs. 2 i. V. m. Art. 28 Abs. 1 DSGVO

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Automotive

Published

25 Mar 2026

Original amount 637,262.5 RON, converted at the ECB reference rate of 25 Mar 2026.

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

The automotive supplier's business figures for the first quarter of 2024 deviated significantly from market expectations; this inside information was not disclosed without delay by means of an ad hoc announcement. BaFin imposed a fine.

Authority / court

Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht (BaFin)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Art. 17 Abs. 1 UAbs. 1 MAR

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Automotive

Published

26 Mar 2026

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 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

An Excel file containing data from medical certificates of current and former employees was repeatedly circulated within the company; the company reported the incident itself. The Romanian data protection authority (ANSPDCP) imposed 25,455 lei (5,000 EUR) for breach of data minimisation and accountability and 50,911 lei (10,000 EUR) for insufficient security measures and ordered a monitoring and control procedure. Date = publication of the press release; according to the authority, the investigation was concluded in the previous month.

Authority / court

Autoritatea Națională de Supraveghere a Prelucrării Datelor cu Caracter Personal (ANSPDCP)

Area of law

Data protection · Employee data

Legal basis

Art. 5 Abs. 1 lit. c und Abs. 2, Art. 32 Abs. 1 lit. b und Abs. 2 DSGVO

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Automotive

Published

19 Jan 2026

Original amount 76,366 RON, converted at the ECB reference rate of 19 Jan 2026.

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

The FTC finalised its order against General Motors and OnStar. According to the authority, GM used a misleading enrolment process to sign customers up for the OnStar service and the Smart Driver feature, collected precise location and driving behaviour data from millions of vehicles and sold it to third parties, including consumer reporting agencies, without clear notice and affirmative consent. GM may not disclose this data to consumer reporting agencies for five years and, for the 20-year term of the order, must obtain affirmative consent before collecting, using or sharing connected vehicle data, allow access and deletion, and offer a way to disable location collection; the order does not provide for any payment. The authority allegedly made the findings set out here; this account is not based on a final judgment.

Authority / court

Federal Trade Commission (FTC)

Area of law

Data protection · Marketing and consent

Legal basis

Section 5(a) FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(a) (unlautere und irreführende Praktiken)

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Automotive

Employees

10,000 or more

Published

14 Jan 2026

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

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a Withhold Release Order: car tyres from Linglong International Europe D.O.O. Zrenjanin (Serbia) are being detained at all US ports of entry because there are indications of forced labour (ILO indicators including deception, debt bondage, isolation, retention of identity documents and withholding of wages (nine indicators in total)).

Authority / court

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

Area of law

Supply chain and human rights · Forced and child labour

Legal basis

19 U.S.C. § 1307 (Tariff Act of 1930, Section 307)

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Automotive

Published

18 Dec 2025

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

NSW Fair Trading (the consumer protection regulator of New South Wales) cancelled the motor dealer licence of Atom Motorss Pty Ltd on 17 November 2025 and disqualified the company for five years. Measures against individuals are not set out here. According to the release, the company had traded as a motor dealer without a licence and, when selling vehicles to consumers, had given false information from the Personal Property Securities Register (PPSR, the register of security interests in personal property) in the prescribed dealer forms.

Authority / court

NSW Fair Trading

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing

Legal basis

Motor Dealers and Repairers Act 2013 (NSW), s 45(1)(f) und (g); zugrunde liegende Verstöße gegen den Motor Dealers and Repairers Act 2013 und das Australian Consumer Law

Action

Other

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Automotive

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not set out here.

Published

12 Mar 2026

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · 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

According to the AGCM, ALD Automotive Italia gave long-term rental customers insufficient information about the optional liability-limitation service and about the criteria for assessing damage on return, and charged damage as unreported even where it was not visible to the naked eye for an average consumer or did not result from an incident. The authority imposed a fine of 5,000,000 EUR and prohibited continuation.

Authority / court

Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail

Legal basis

Art. 20, 21, 22, 24, 25 Codice del consumo (D.lgs. 206/2005)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Automotive

Mitigating circumstances

The basic amount of 7,000,000 EUR was reduced to 5,000,000 EUR because ALD had remedied the information deficiencies through its own measures and mitigated their effects.

Published

9 Oct 2025

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

On 8 September 2025, on application by the National Consumer Commission (NCC, South Africa's consumer protection authority), the National Consumer Tribunal (NCT, the consumer protection adjudicator) found that car dealer Kia East Rand (Pty) Ltd had breached section 56(3) of the Consumer Protection Act: a used car sold in September 2022 remained defective despite several repair attempts, and the dealer refused the buyer's request to cancel the sale. The Tribunal ordered a refund of the purchase price of 245,075 ZAR within ten days and imposed an administrative fine of 50,000 ZAR.

Authority / court

National Consumer Tribunal (auf Antrag der National Consumer Commission)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail

Legal basis

Section 56(3) Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008; Verwaltungsstrafe nach Section 112

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Automotive

Repeat case

no

Original amount 50,000 ZAR, converted at the ECB reference rate of 8 Sep 2025.

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 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

Between 2010 and 2019, the Toyota subsidiary submitted false certification applications, altered emissions data and fabricated test results; more than 105,000 non-compliant diesel engines were imported into the USA. The court imposed a fine of 521.76 million USD and forfeiture of 1.087 billion USD, plus five years of probation with an import ban on Hino diesel engines.

Authority / court

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan (Ermittlungen: EPA Criminal Investigation Division, FBI)

Area of law

Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits

Legal basis

Clean Air Act; Verschwörung zum Betrug der Vereinigten Staaten und Schmuggel (Schuldbekenntnis)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Automotive

Employees

10,000 or more

Culpability

intentional

Published

19 Mar 2025

Original amount 1,608,760,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 19 Mar 2025.

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

Honda required excessive information for opt-out requests, used a cookie tool without equivalent choices, made it harder to appoint authorised agents and passed data on to ad-tech firms without the required contracts. The order of the California Privacy Protection Agency (CPPA) requires, among other things, a simplified procedure and training for employees.

Authority / court

California Privacy Protection Agency (CPPA)

Area of law

Data protection · Data subject rights and transparency

Legal basis

California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Automotive

Employees

10,000 or more

Published

12 Mar 2025

Original amount 632,500 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 7 Mar 2025.

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

From 2010 to 2019, the Toyota subsidiary altered test data, carried out tests improperly or fabricated them entirely for more than 50 engine families (around 105,000 on-road and 5,700 off-road diesel engines). The resolution with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of Justice comprises a civil penalty of 525 million USD and a criminal fine of 521.76 million USD (together 1.047 billion USD), five years of probation and an import ban on diesel engines; including the recall and mitigation measures, the overall resolution totals more than 1.6 billion USD.

Authority / court

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency / U.S. Department of Justice

Area of law

Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits

Legal basis

Clean Air Act

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Automotive

Culpability

intentional

Original amount 1,046,760,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 15 Jan 2025.

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

CARB reached a settlement of 4,185,820 USD with FCA US because model year 2014 to 2016 Ram ProMaster vehicles with a 3.0-litre diesel engine had an unapproved device that controlled emissions differently in real-world driving than in certification testing; according to CARB, almost 55 tonnes of excess nitrogen oxides were released. The civil penalty is 2,092,910 USD. An environmental project of the same amount, to slow cargo vessels, stays outside the amount field. The vehicles will be recalled. CARB had already taken action against FCA over similar allegations in 2019 and 2022. The authority allegedly made the findings set out here; this account is not based on a final judgment. The amount field records only the civil monetary penalty.

Authority / court

California Air Resources Board (CARB)

Area of law

Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits

Legal basis

Luftqualitäts- und Fahrzeugemissionsvorschriften des California Air Resources Board

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Automotive

Repeat case

yes

Published

23 Dec 2024

Original amount 2,092,910 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 23 Dec 2024.

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

On the websites for two small electric cars, the providers advertised with ‘100 % sustainable’, ‘100 % Green’, ‘zero emissions’ and ‘zero environmental impact’ without taking into account life-cycle phases or the emissions from electricity generation. Following an intervention by Italy's competition and consumer protection authority (AGCM) by way of moral suasion, the claims were removed.

Authority / court

Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM)

Area of law

Environment and sustainability · Misleading environmental and sustainability claims

Legal basis

Codice del Consumo (unlautere Geschäftspraktiken)

Action

Other

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Automotive

Mitigating circumstances

Voluntary removal of the claims following the authority's intervention.

Published

9 Oct 2024

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 3 · Company name anonymised since 9 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

Since 2015, the Texas-based manufacturer has sold more than 81,000 tuners that deactivate emission controls, as well as 8,400 exhaust pipes with fewer or weaker catalytic converters. The proposed settlement with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of Justice (subject to court approval) provides for a civil penalty of 2,914,000 USD in four instalments, as well as a ban on defeat devices, removal of the ‘delete’ functions, information for dealers and customers, buy-back and destruction of such devices held by employees, and Clean Air Act training for the workforce.

Authority / court

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency / U.S. Department of Justice (U.S. District Court, Western District of Texas)

Area of law

Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits

Legal basis

Clean Air Act § 203(a)(3)(B), 42 U.S.C. § 7522(a)(3)(B)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Automotive

Mitigating circumstances

Amount of the penalty based on demonstrated limited ability to pay; payment in instalments.

Original amount 2,914,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 16 Sep 2024.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 16 Sep 2026 · Direct link

According to the EPA, a US manufacturer of vehicle tuning parts manufactured, sold or installed large numbers of parts for diesel pickups over several years that could remove or disable emission control systems; according to the EPA, the additional emissions equalled those of several million additional vehicles. In the criminal proceedings, the company received a multi-million-dollar fine and a term of probation; a civil settlement providing for a multi-million-dollar civil penalty payable in instalments was subject to court approval.

Authority / court

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency / U.S. Department of Justice

Area of law

Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits

Legal basis

Clean Air Act § 203(a)(3)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Automotive

Culpability

intentional

Mitigating circumstances

Payment in instalments because of demonstrated limited ability to pay.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 7 · Company name anonymised since 10 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

Following a prosecution by NSW Fair Trading (the consumer protection regulator of New South Wales), Kempsey Local Court on 9 August 2024 fined the trailer maker 8,000 AUD after it had accepted 70,000 AUD from customers for custom trailers between 2020 and 2023 but failed to deliver them within a reasonable time or, in some cases, at all. Measures against individuals are not set out here.

Authority / court

NSW Fair Trading

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail

Legal basis

Nichtlieferung bezahlter Waren (Vorschriften in der Mitteilung nicht genannt); Tätigkeit in der Kfz-Händlerbranche trotz Sperre

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Automotive

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not set out here.

Published

30 Aug 2024

Original amount 8,000 AUD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 9 Aug 2024.

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

The manufacturer presented Italy in its advertising as the place of production of its vehicles of two brands, although they are built by Chinese manufacturers and only undergo finishing work in Italy (vehicles of the core brand were assembled in Italy only until 2010); in addition, the manufacturer and its service and spare parts company did not make sufficient spare parts available and failed to provide adequate after-sales service. The AGCM imposed 3,000,000 EUR on the manufacturer and a further 3,000,000 EUR jointly and severally on the manufacturer and the service and spare parts company, a total of 6,000,000 EUR.

Authority / court

Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing

Legal basis

Art. 20, 21, 22 (Praxis A) sowie Art. 20, 24, 25 (Praxis B) Codice del consumo (D.lgs. 206/2005)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Automotive

Employees

Under 50

Published

20 Jun 2024

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Company name anonymised since 11 Jun 2026 · Direct link

A fine of 12,866 EUR, final since 5 June 2024, was imposed on the motor vehicle dealer by the Arnsberg regional government (Bezirksregierung Arnsberg), as anti-money laundering supervisor for the non-financial sector, for breach of the due diligence obligations of the German Money Laundering Act (Geldwäschegesetz, GwG), and the company was publicly named.

Authority / court

Bezirksregierung Arnsberg (Geldwäscheaufsicht Nichtfinanzsektor)

Area of law

Money laundering and terrorist financing · Customer due diligence

Legal basis

Geldwäschegesetz (Sorgfaltspflichten); Bekanntmachung nach § 57 GwG

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Automotive

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 5 Jun 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

In 2020 and 2021, the importer listed features as standard in printed and online data sheets and catalogues for three model variants from two model ranges and for an equipment package which were missing or – like certain driver-assistance functions – only worked with a separately ordered navigation package. Two surcharge orders issued on the same day (599,120,000 JPY for the models of one range, 631,850,000 JPY for the models of the other range) total 1,230,970,000 JPY.

Authority / court

Consumer Affairs Agency (消費者庁, CAA)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing

Legal basis

Art. 8 Abs. 1 i. V. m. Art. 5 Nr. 1, Art. 9 Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations (不当景品類及び不当表示防止法, Gesetz Nr. 134/1962)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Automotive

Culpability

negligent

Mitigating circumstances

For the equipment package on a model of the second range, the amount was halved under Art. 9 because the company had reported the facts itself; a report concerning a model of the first range was not recognised as such a report.

Published

12 Mar 2024

Original amount 1,230,970,000 JPY, converted at the ECB reference rate of 12 Mar 2024.

Checked against the official source on 8 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 12 Mar 2026 · Direct link

The engine manufacturer programmed the engine software so that emission controls were reduced or switched off during normal driving (around 630,000 heavy-duty pickups of one vehicle maker from model years 2013–2019) and failed to disclose auxiliary emission control devices in a further approximately 330,000 vehicles. Civil penalty of 1.675 billion USD – the highest ever under the Clean Air Act – plus recall and mitigation measures, totalling around 2 billion USD.

Authority / court

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency / U.S. Department of Justice (U.S. District Court, District of Columbia)

Area of law

Environment and sustainability · Emissions and permits

Legal basis

Clean Air Act

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Automotive

Employees

10,000 or more

Original amount 1,675,000,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 10 Jan 2024.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 10 Jan 2026 · Direct link

The garage, which ran a roadside assistance service as a subcontractor of a motoring club, was fined 115,000 AUD by the County Court in Melbourne after a guilty plea for failing to provide a safe system of work and information or training to protect against fatigue. Both of its breakdown assistance drivers regularly spent 96 hours on call across four days and nights; in March 2018 one of them left the road and died after 89 hours on call and 17 hours of work, and traces at the scene suggested that he had fallen asleep while driving.

Authority / court

WorkSafe Victoria

Area of law

Health and safety and employment law · Working time

Legal basis

Arbeitsschutzrecht Victoria: Pflicht zu sicheren Arbeitssystemen sowie zu Information, Unterweisung und Schulung

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Automotive

Mitigating circumstances

Guilty plea.

Published

27 Sep 2023

Original amount 115,000 AUD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 27 Sep 2023.

Checked against the official source on 7 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 27 Sep 2025 · Direct link

The manufacturer of hydrogen commercial vehicles misled investors about customer relationships and sales, reported 87 vehicles sold for 2021 when the actual number was zero, and showed a misleading video of a purportedly hydrogen-powered vehicle. The company is paying 25 million USD.

Authority / court

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)

Area of law

Capital markets and financial supervision · Disclosure and reporting obligations

Legal basis

Antifraud- und weitere Vorschriften der US-Wertpapiergesetze

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Automotive

Employees

250 to 999

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not reported here.

Original amount 25,000,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 26 Sep 2023.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 6 · Company name anonymised since 26 Sep 2025 · Direct link

Because of a misconfigured cloud environment at an affiliated contractor within the group, servers for two of the carmaker's connected-vehicle services were accessible from outside for around ten years; data of about 2.3 million people were affected, including in-vehicle device IDs, vehicle identification numbers and location data. The carmaker had not recognised these data as personal data, as the staff responsible had not been adequately trained, and had not checked the contractor’s access controls. The authority gave the company guidance (shidō) under Art. 147 APPI to improve training, access control and supervision of the contractor and to implement its own remedial measures.

Authority / court

Personal Information Protection Commission (PPC, 個人情報保護委員会)

Area of law

Data protection · Data breaches and data security

Legal basis

Act on the Protection of Personal Information (APPI, 個人情報の保護に関する法律) Art. 147 i. V. m. Art. 23 und Art. 25

Action

Reprimand or warning

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Automotive

Employees

10,000 or more

Published

12 Jul 2023

Checked against the official source on 8 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 12 Jul 2025 · 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

The Controladoria-Geral da União (CGU, Office of the Comptroller General) set a fine of BRL 22,423,482.15 against a carmaker in an early resolution procedure (julgamento antecipado) under the cultural incentive law (Lei nº 8.313/1991) and the Anti-Corruption Law. The carmaker had sponsored with BRL 1,000,000 a concert project funded through the National Culture Support Programme (Pronac), which was turned, without the consent of the Ministry of Culture, into a corporate party for the company's 60th anniversary that was not open to the public; according to the final report, false information was given in the project accounts. A separate decision issued the same day fined the project's proponent BRL 2,940,317.28.

Authority / court

Controladoria-Geral da União (CGU)

Area of law

Bribery and corruption

Legal basis

Lei nº 8.313/1991, Art. 38; Lei nº 12.846/2013, Art. 5 II und Art. 6; Portaria Normativa CGU nº 19/2022

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Automotive

Employees

10,000 or more

Mitigating circumstances

The CGU took into account the company's cooperation and commitments and decided in the early resolution procedure under Portaria Normativa CGU nº 19/2022 (CGU regulatory ordinance).

Published

10 Feb 2023

Original amount 22,423,482.15 BRL, converted at the ECB reference rate of 9 Feb 2023.

Checked against the official source on 7 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