Competition watchdog fines remittance service providers S$5.4 million for anti-competitive conduct

Singapore Law Watch

01-08-2025

Competition watchdog fines remittance service providers S$5.4 million for anti-competitive conduct
Source: Business Times
Article Date: 01 Aug 2025
Author: Therese Soh
The Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore (CCCS) on Thursday (Jul 31) issued fines totalling around S$5.4 million to two remittance service providers for anti-competitive behaviour.
The Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore (CCCS) on Thursday (Jul 31) issued fines totalling around S$5.4 million to two remittance service providers for anti-competitive behaviour.
ZGR Global and Hanshan Money Express, which run shops near each other in People's Park Complex in Chinatown, illegally exchanged information about each other's outward remittance rates. These are the amounts of foreign currency remitted overseas for each unit of local currency paid for the remittance service.
ZGR Global was fined around S$2.8 million, and Hanshan, around S$2.6 million.
CCCS said: 'This information was commercially sensitive, as each party's decisions regarding remittance rates and the timing of (rate) updates were influenced by the other party's rates.'
Both parties provide remittance services for Chinese yuan and are therefore direct competitors, it added.
As remittance rates offered to customers are a key aspect on which remittance service providers compete, exchanging information about one another's rates undermines competition in the market, the competition watchdog said.
'These regular exchanges enabled the parties to directly receive information from their competitor, which influenced the setting of their CNY remittance rates,' it said. As a result of the information exchange, ZGR Global and Hanshan had similar outward CNY remittance rates, which limited the variety of rates available for customers, it added.
Alvin Koh, chief executive of CCCS, noted that competition law requires businesses to act independently when determining their conduct in the market.
He added: 'While businesses may observe and adapt to their competitors' behaviour, they must not communicate with competitors to influence their conduct in the market, or share their pricing strategies, for example, information on when they intend to change their quoted rates, and the extent of the changes.
'By colluding together to exchange such information, the parties undermined competition ... which reduced options for customers.'
Before the parties began illegally exchanging rate information, they monitored one another's CNY remittance rates and at times had their employees pose as customers.
Remittance rates are highly volatile and are updated frequently through the day, the CCCS noted.
'To overcome the uncertainty associated with each other's remittance rates in an unpredictable environment where rates change several times daily, the parties began exchanging information on their prevailing remittance rates, from at least January 2016,' it said.
ZGR Global and Hanshan would disclose their opening rates to each other at the start of the day and whenever the rates were updated. These exchanges occurred daily and often several times during a day.
Their staff exchanged this rate information over the phone and over the counter, by passing each other slips of paper with the information.
While the CCCS formally engaged ZGR Global and Hanshan in July 2021, they stopped exchanging rate information only in February 2022, the competition watchdog said.
It issued written notices to the parties in November 2024 and April 2025, and received responses from both, which it considered before deciding to issue the infringement decision.
Factors such as each parties' turnover, the seriousness of their infringements as well as aggravating and mitigating factors were considered in deciding the financial penalties for each.
Hanshan's S$2.6 million fine was discounted twice, once because it cooperated with the investigation, and a second time because it admitted to the infringement.
CCCS warned: 'Businesses asked to participate in anti-competitive information exchanges should immediately decline participation, publicly distance themselves from such discussions, and report the matter to CCCS.'
Source: The Business Times © SPH Media Limited. Permission required for reproduction.
Print