BUSINESS MAVERICK: Shining a spotlight on Covid-19 price gouging

  • 📰 dailymaverick
  • ⏱ Reading Time:
  • 78 sec. here
  • 3 min. at publisher
  • 📊 Quality Score:
  • News: 35%
  • Publisher: 84%

日本 ニュース ニュース

日本 最新ニュース,日本 見出し

South Africa’s competition authorities have been seized with energy when it comes to investigating allegations of price gouging. This has both positive and negative implications.

To date, over 1,600 complaints have been lodged and overBetween April and early July 2020, the authorities’ Covid-19 excessive pricing investigations had yielded settlements to the value of R14-million, of which R5.5-million has been donated to the Solidarity Fund.

The company did not admit “guilt”, but did conclude a settlement agreement with the Commission and has donated essential goods to the value of R243,000 to three community benefit organisations and a further R44,000 to theBrights Hardware on the West Coast agreed to donate R6,074 to the Solidarity Fund, and reduce its gross margin on FFP1 dust face masks to an agreed maximum percentage after the Commission found it had allegedly charged excessive prices for face masks during March 2020.

They did not admit liability, but did settle with the Commission and agreed to make a contribution to the Solidarity Fund or other causes.What has been particularly unusual has been the competition authorities’ approach to assessing dominance during the pandemic. Many of these firms would not – in ordinary circumstances – meet the market share thresholds for dominance for purposes of the Competition Act.

“This, for example, could be as a consequence of panic buying during a period of crisis where goods and services are limited, and consumers are restricted in terms of movement,” he says. “One would usually not regard customers of a small hardware store, pharmacy or seller of ginger to be price takers with no other alternatives or as being captive to those retailers.

It’s also worth noting that the penalties have been structured as contributions to the Solidarity Fund so may not truly fall within the definition of an administrative penalty under the Competition Act, which is ordinarily paid to the National Revenue Fund.

 

コメントありがとうございます。コメントは審査後に公開されます。
このニュースをすぐに読めるように要約しました。ニュースに興味がある場合は、ここで全文を読むことができます。 続きを読む:

 /  🏆 3. in JP

日本 最新ニュース, 日本 見出し

Similar News:他のニュース ソースから収集した、これに似たニュース記事を読むこともできます。

BUSINESS MAVERICK: Commodities’ Covid-19 conundrum: Miners have mixed results, oil majors sinkA tale of two commodities asset classes has broadly emerged under the Covid-19 pandemic. Big-league miners such as Anglo American have had a hit in profits while weathering the storm. By contrast, oil majors have had to make massive asset write-offs as their earnings sink like stones.
ソース: dailymaverick - 🏆 3. / 84 続きを読む »

BUSINESS MAVERICK: Covid-19 Insurance Fiasco: Some disasters can create opportunitiesPublic sentiment is overwhelmingly in support of the hundreds of restaurants and hospitality businesses denied cover by their insurers. Business Maverick chats to the main man in their corner, and asks him what is public loss adjusting anyway?
ソース: dailymaverick - 🏆 3. / 84 続きを読む »