2024-06-18 12:34:44
Elon Šatas, senior advisor of the Competitors Council, says that cartel agreements will not be new in Lithuania. A month in the past, it was determined to allocate 710.8 thousand to the true property (NT) company “Capital Realty” attributable to potential cartel agreements with 20 companies that signed franchise agreements. EUR high quality.
In line with E. Šatos, KT discovered that “Capital Realty” and 20 of its franchise sponsors mutually agreed on fee charges. They apply to individuals utilizing the companies of those brokers who promote actual property.
“It was agreed that the fee must be no less than 3 %. from the transaction worth. In line with the Competitors Regulation, that is prohibited and firms should compete available in the market, and never agree on the relevant costs. The truth that on this case we discovered that they function in a franchise community doesn’t change the essence – they’re nonetheless impartial firms and should compete on worth”, stated E. Šatas in regards to the violation.
It’s noticed that the members of the franchise community normally typically overlook that they’re opponents and should compete on costs. And the settlement recorded by CT isn’t potential as a result of it limits the selection of shoppers to purchase the service cheaper.
“Think about the state of affairs. You wish to promote your actual property, you contact a Capital community dealer, he tells you that he agrees to promote for 3%. from the property worth. Naturally, you wish to verify with one other dealer. When you go to a different Capital dealer, they may once more give you 3%. as a result of they’ve consulted amongst themselves and know that the opposite franchise dealer won’t provide a lower cost,” KT’s senior advisor gave an instance.
In line with the interviewee, it’s doubtless that if the companies had not concluded an settlement, shoppers would have had a larger alternative to agree on a lower cost. This would scale back the earnings of the companies themselves, which is why such agreements are concluded.
“Firms ought to compete and appeal to clients with their benefits. I’ve little doubt that it’s potential to search out purchasers underneath regular circumstances. And if you happen to can provide a lower cost, there are extra alternatives to draw clients”, E. Šatas shared his insights.
It’s true that this isn’t the primary time that actual property companies have been punished for cartel agreements. A yr and a half in the past, virtually 1 million Thirty companies have been fined EUR.
“Previously, companies agreed with one another to share sure teams of purchasers moderately than compete for them. Additionally they agreed to not lure one another’s workers – thus the workers misplaced the chance to get a greater provide for his or her remuneration”, E. Šatas in contrast the circumstances.
In line with the interviewee, the follow of current years reveals that cartel agreements are recorded in different sectors as effectively.
“These could be golf equipment of the Lithuanian Basketball League (LKL) that agree on non-payment of salaries to their gamers, in addition to notaries that agree on the coordination of sure charges, or suppliers of meals merchandise that provide meals to kids’s care properties and kindergartens.
I wish to draw consideration to public procurement, the place it’s comparatively extra frequent for firms to barter and enter into cartel agreements. However such a pattern is attribute of the entire world”, stated E. Šatas.
CT normally detects 2-3 violations per yr – it’s stated that extra may very well be detected, however there’s a lack of sources for this, as investigations typically take as much as a few years.
2024-06-18 12:34:44