Proceedings filed against major grocers for alleged cartel conduct
The Commission said it would "shortly" file civil proceedings against the two companies for alleged breaches of the Commerce Act and the Grocery Industry Competition Act. Gilmours is owned by Foodstuffs North Island.
Foodstuffs North Island has denied any unlawful conduct.
It followed an investigation by the Commission into agreements the companies entered with a national grocery supplier regarding the supply of products to a hospitality customer.
The supplier and customer both had "considerable volumes of business" with Foodstuffs North Island and Gilmours.
ADVERTISEMENT
"When FSNI/Gilmours discovered the supplier and customer had established a direct trading relationship, they persuaded the supplier to re-route that business through them," the Commerce Commission said.
Commerce Commission chairman Dr John Small said the Commission believed the companies had engaged in cartel conduct and breached the Commerce Act.
Cartel conduct is when two or more businesses agree not to compete with each other. This could include price fixing, allocating customers, rigging bids or restricting the output of goods and services.
'We take allegations of cartel conduct very seriously. Cartel conduct harms consumers through higher prices or reduced quality, and it harms other businesses that are trying to compete fairly,' Small said.
'In this instance, the supplier wanted to provide a competitive supply channel, but this was stopped by the agreement with FSNI and Gilmours.
'We do not tolerate this kind of behaviour and will not hesitate to take court action, where appropriate."
The morning's headlines in 90 seconds, including Trump's deadline for Russia, legal action against a supermarket giant, and an unusual marathon record. (Source: Breakfast)
ADVERTISEMENT
The commission also believed the companies obstructed the supplier's ability to sell groceries to the customer in question and did not deal with the supplier in good faith, which breached GICA.
'The Grocery Supply Code was introduced to address the power imbalance between the major supermarkets and their suppliers,' Grocery Commissioner Pierre van Heerden said.
'The major supermarkets are the largest customers for most grocery suppliers. This creates a reluctance for suppliers to call out bad behaviour or push back on the supermarkets for fear of damaging relationships or losing access to supermarket shelves.
'The Commission is acutely aware of the risk suppliers may face coming forward and has ways to protect their identity and business. We have anonymous reporting tools for cartels and GICA and encourage anyone concerned to use these ways of contacting us."
Following the Commission's statement this morning, a Foodstuffs North Island spokesperson said: "Foodstuffs North Island and our stores are committed to complying with all our regulatory obligations, and we co-operated fully with the Commerce Commission throughout their investigation of this matter."
The business "strongly" denied any unlawful conduct.
"As this matter will be before the Court in due course, it would not be appropriate to comment further at this time.'
ADVERTISEMENT
Foodstuffs North Island was issued a warning earlier this month for the treatment of a supplier that likely breached the Grocery Industry Competition Act 2023.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Otago Daily Times
12 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Prices shouldn't depend on postcode: consumer group
Fair prices for groceries should not depend on a shopper's postcode, a consumer advocacy group says The Commerce Commission's Grocery Report - released yesterday - highlighted the fact that areas like Auckland enjoyed more competition and cheaper prices. The Grocery Action Group said the commission's report had no good news for consumers. Chair Sue Chetwin said the lack of competition in smaller centres meant markups were much higher, even though overheads such as rent were much lower. "In rural areas and smaller towns where New Zealand's supermarket choices are narrow or non-existent, the report confirms what those living there already know - that consumers pay a premium for the lack of competition. "This kind of geographic price gap is unacceptable. Fair prices shouldn't depend on your postcode." Chetwin said on top of the 4.6% increase in grocery prices for the year to May, there were other findings in the report that were thoroughly alarming. "For instance, it notes we are paying higher than the OECD average for groceries even though we earn well below the average OECD wage. "Another disturbing fact is the prices that the supermarket chains pay their suppliers are subsidised by around $5 billion in rebates, discounts and promotional payments paid by suppliers." The report confirmed Kiwi consumers were paying way over the odds for their groceries, she said.
Scoop
a day ago
- Scoop
A Poser For Labour Party: Tax Wealth Or Tax Capital Gains
Veteran political journalist Vernon Small's latest regular paywalled column in Stuff's Sunday Star Times (3 August) has brought to life a subject that by its very nature can put many people to sleep – tax wealth or tax capital gains: A choice Labour may come to regret. Small was previously an advisor to the former Labour government. Both taxes seek to address tax avoidance. Avoidance involves exploiting or dodging (if there is a difference) the taxation system in order to reduce the amount of tax one might otherwise have to pay. Tax avoidance can be ethically grey This is in contrast to tax evasion which involves concealing income or other relevant information. The latter is illegal and punishable. Wealth taxes involve annually taxing valuable assets such as land, shares, art works, or other valuable collectables. Some prominent economists, such as France's Thomas Piketty, argue that wealth taxes are both necessary and practicable. Drawing upon empirical research Piketty has a particular focus on inherited wealth (think Donald Trump for example). Interestingly Labour leader Chris Hipkins cites Piketty among his reading material. Capital gains taxes (CGT) also tax wealth. However, they tax the gain in value of an asset. Consequently they apply when the asset is sold. CGT is therefore usually paid only once per asset gain unlike an annual wealth tax. Shifting the dial on tax avoidance Former Labour MP and cabinet minister David Parker has for many years been a strong advocate of achieving taxation fairness by addressing tax avoidance. In his recent valedictory speech to Parliament he described his advocacy as 'shifting the dial' over this issue as his most significant achievement. On 26 April 2023, as Minister of Revenue, Parker gave a major speech advocating a wealth tax: David Parker's wealth tax. His proposed wealth tax, supported by Finance Minister Grant Robertson, was not as broad as discussed above. It was based on research undertaken by Inland Revenue that provided 'hard data confirming fundamental unfairness in our tax system.' The study revealed that 311 people had collective wealth of $85 billion. Further, the effective tax rate of middle-income New Zealanders was at least double that of the wealthiest. Subsequently then Labour Prime Minister Chris Hipkins pulled the plug on the Parker-Robertson initiative; a decision which shocked many and helped contribute to Labour's heavy defeat in the general election later that year. Insightful column Vernon Small's above-mentioned insightful column needs to be read in the above context. He reports that the Labour Party's Policy Council has narrowly endorsed a CGT as the centre piece of its tax reform for next year's election. This reportedly is also Hipkins' preferred position. However, this is not the end of Labour's internal decision-making process. Taxing wealth preferred to taxing capital works (Vernon Small) Small described this choice as one that 'it may come to regret.' Small's argument for this conclusion is as follows: CGT would deliver much less revenue initially and takes a long time to build revenue, if applied only to realised gains. CGT requires a 'difficult sales job' as National and its rightwing allies '…whip up a smorgasbord of concerns over the devilish details with a side salad of misinformation.' By comparison, a wealth tax targeted at the very wealthiest '…should be an easier sell.' The claim, which apparently influenced Hipkins' position, that a wealth tax would lead to fear of capital flight is 'over-wrought' and debunked by Treasury There is political advantage of a wealth tax also being the preferred option of Labour's potential coalition allies, the Greens and Te Pāti Māori. It would be easier for a future rightwing government to reverse a CGT because it is slow to accumulate. Widening the thinking beyond either/or It is hard to argue with Vernon Small's logic; it certainly resonates with me. However, while not critical of his column, the debate should be widened including not constraining it to either/or options. The starting point should be recognising the need to address both the unfairness of tax rate inequity favouring the wealthy at the expense of the rest and untaxed income derived in various ways from speculation. It should also differentiate between getting early 'runs on the board' (I'm a cricket addict, just saying) and longer term measures and longer term benefits. Logically this favours a wealth tax for the reasons discussed. Beginning with something like the Parker-Robertson proposal would produce quicker tangible and identifiable fiscal returns. This would be more likely to be sufficiently bedded in to make it more difficult for a subsequent rightwing government to overturn. While this implementation is underway, work should be undertaken on broadening the range of wealth taxation taking the lead from economists such at Thomas Piketty. This does not mean waving goodbye to a capital gains tax. But it is politically savvy to recognise the longer time required to 'reap the benefits' . Taking advantage of the report from the Michael Cullen led working group, further work should be undertaken in order to develop a practical CGT without unintended consequences. The importance of messaging a good narrative Vernon Small correctly observes that the rightwing government parties will quickly get into attack mode once Labour announces its taxation policy. They know full well Labour's past inability to counter such an attack and to look like a possum in a car's headlights. Expect Finance Minister Nicola Willis to lead the charge. The political right are experts in messaging. My way of describing this politically is as follows: the far right communicates in gestures and soundbites (and sometimes violent threats); the political right communicates in sentences reinforced by soundbites; the political left communicates in paragraphs (social liberals in longer paragraphs); and the far left communicates in footnotes. Labour in my view is more technocratic social liberal than leftwing. I have discussed this previously in Political Bytes (30 April 2023): What leftwing really means. Regardless, however, Labour needs to deliver a good narrative on the unfairness of tax avoidance by taking a lead from the political right. Show more spine and do it in crisp succinct sentences further enabled by smart soundbites.
Scoop
a day ago
- Scoop
Genesis, Contact, Meridian, And Mercury Seek Authorisation For Strategic Energy Reserve Huntly Firming Option
The Commerce Commission (the Commission) has received an application from New Zealand's four largest electricity generator-retailers (Genesis Energy Limited, Contact Energy Limited, Meridian Energy Limited, and Mercury NZ Limited) (the Gentailers) seeking authorisation to enter into and give effect to a series of arrangements referred to as the Strategic Energy Reserve Huntly Firming Option. Authorisation is sought until 31 December 2035. The arrangements are proposed to provide a commercial incentive for Genesis to maintain Rankine Unit 2, a gas/coal-fired unit at Huntly Power Station, for use as 'dry year cover' when other forms of electricity generation (such as hydro generators) may not be sufficient to ensure security of supply. The arrangements provide each of Contact, Meridian, and Mercury with an option to access spot price electricity cover in exchange for an annual premium, which Genesis may use to contribute to the cost of maintaining, operating, and resourcing the Rankine Units. The Commission has published a statement of preliminary issues relating to this application. The statement outlines the key issues that the Commission considers important in deciding whether or not to grant authorisation for the Gentailers' proposed arrangements. The Commission invites interested parties to provide comments on the likely benefits and detriments of the proposed arrangements, including any likely competitive effects. Public submissions on the application can be sent by email to registrar@ with the reference 'Huntly authorisation' in the subject line. Any submissions should be received by close of business on 27 August 2025. The statutory deadline for making a determination on this authorisation is 16 February 2026. However, the Commission appreciates the urgency with regard to this application and will progress this as soon as possible. The Statement of Preliminary Issues and a public version of the application for authorisation is available on the Commission's case register.
