There are a number of ongoing investigations being conducted by the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). The main enquiry involves suspected anti-competitive conduct by housebuilders in Great Britain. If found guilty, the combined fine will be in the region of £2.5 billion.
While this case and others are investigated, we unpack the fines already issued. If you're interested in earlier penalties, see Competition Law fines of 2020, the highest Competition fines of 2021, thebiggest Competition Law fines of 2022, and most recently, the largest fines of 2023.
Biggest competition law fines in 2024
- Apple - €1.84bn - Anti-trust
- Mondelēz - €337.5m - Anti-competitive behaviour
- Keltbray - £20m - Cover bidding (original fine restored)
- Swisscom - $19.7m - Anti-trust
- Apple - £13.7m - Anti-trust
Anti-trust and anti-competitive behaviour has resulted in significant fine amounts issued. However, this has not been without protest. Companies fined have appealed the decisions made by regulatory authorities, albeit unsuccessfully.
Biggest competition law fines of 2024 in detail
1. Apple - €1.84bn
The European Union has fined Apple €1.84 billion ($2 billion) for violating its competition laws. The EU announced its first-ever antitrust penalty against Apple (AAPL) for preventing rival music streaming services like Spotify from informing iPhone users about cheaper subscription options outside of Apple’s app store.
Margrethe Vestager, the EU’s competition and digital chief, stated that Apple had “abused its dominant position” as a distributor of music streaming apps, limiting European consumers' "free choice as to where, how, and at what prices to buy music streaming subscriptions.”
2. Mondelēz - €337.5m
The European Commission has imposed a hefty €337.5 million fine on Mondelēz, renowned for producing Toblerone, Cadbury's Dairy Milk, and Oreo cookies. Margrethe Vestager, the head of the competition watchdog, highlighted the confectioner's anti-competitive practices, which included restricting cross-border trade and exploiting its dominant market position from 2006 to 2020.
Among other things, it accused Mondelēz of:
- Withdrawing chocolate bars from sale in the Netherlands to prevent resale in Belgium, where they were sold at higher prices
- Limiting traders' ability to resell products and ordering them to apply higher prices for exports
According to Vestager, the price of the same product varied significantly by 10-40% depending on the country. In November 2019, the Commission conducted unannounced inspections at Mondelēz sites in Austria, Belgium, and Germany, initiating an investigation in 2021.
Mondelēz stated that the fine "relates to historical, isolated incidents, most of which ceased or were remedied well in advance of the Commission's investigation." The company added, "This historical matter is not representative of who we are and the strong culture of compliance for which we strive."
The fine was €37.5 million higher than what Mondelēz had anticipated in its 2022 annual report.
3. Keltbray - £20m fine (original fine restored)
Keltbray, a demolition firm, contests the £20 million fine imposed by the CMA for cover bidding, claiming it was arbitrarily set. The fine, initially £20 million but reduced to £16 million through a settlement, was the largest among 10 firms fined by the competition regulator for colluding on tender prices from 2013 to 2018.
The CMA has decided to reinstate the £20 million fine after Keltbray initiated the appeal process. The demolition firm has also objected to this. Despite admitting involvement, Keltbray asserts that the penalty is disproportionate and inaccurately calculated.
They argue that the CMA should have only considered turnover from their largest projects when determining the fine. The CMA defends its actions, stating that Keltbray failed to recognise industry standards and the need for deterrence.
4. Swisscom - $19.7m fine
The Swiss Federal Competition Commission (COMCO) fined Swisscom CHF 18 million ($19.7 million) over an antitrust dispute related to its fibre-optic cable network. COMCO objected to Swisscom's use of single-mode cables, which it claimed violated anti-cartel laws and hindered fair competition.
The commission mandated the conversion of these cables to multi-modal ones by December 2025 or face shutdown. According to COMCO, using multi-modal cables is essential for fair competition and delivering higher internet speeds to customers.
Swisscom's decision to opt for cheaper construction methods, despite higher costs involved in direct lines to households, incurred additional expenses estimated between CHF 600 million and CHF 800 million. Swisscom contested these figures but continued building with single-mode cables despite warnings from COMCO.
Swisscom's appeal against interim antitrust measures ordered by COMCO was unsuccessful. They argued that changing construction methods caused delays in network expansion, resulting in fewer connections built than planned. However, COMCO deemed the disadvantages to competition, consumers, and business customers outweighed Swisscom's concerns over additional costs and delays.
5. Apple - $13.7m
Russia's FAS antitrust agency announced that U.S. tech giant Apple has paid a Russian fine of 1.2 billion roubles ($13.65 million), imposed for allegedly abusing its dominant market position regarding in-app payments.
Apple did not immediately respond to a request for a comment. However, they have previously stated that it "respectfully disagreed" with the FAS ruling, arguing that its distribution of apps through the iOS operating system gave its own products an unfair competitive advantage.
What can we learn from these fines?
- It is essential to have robust internal controls and compliance mechanisms in place to prevent antitrust violations.
- Implement comprehensive training programmes to educate employees about competition law compliance.
- Ensure swift, corrective actions and remediation measures in response to identified violations.
- Develop a strong compliance culture with an emphasis on ethical conduct and integrity.
- Regularly review and update policies and procedures to align with evolving legal requirements.
- Establish clear reporting channels for employees to raise concerns or seek guidance on competition law compliance issues.
Want to learn more about competition compliance?
We have created a series of comprehensive roadmaps to help you navigate the compliance landscape, supported by several financial crime prevention courses in our Essentials Library.
We also have 100+ free compliance training aids, including assessments, best practice guides, checklists, desk aids, eBooks, games, posters, training presentations and even e-learning modules!
Finally, the SkillcastConnect community provides a unique opportunity to network with other compliance professionals in a vendor-free environment, priority access to our free online learning portal and other exclusive benefits.
