Hungarian Competition Authority Fines Maspex Approximately $1.1 Million Over Minimum Pricing Scheme

Key Takeaways

• Price-Fixing Through Resale Price Maintenance: Hungary's Competition Authority found that Maspex Olympos unlawfully restricted competition by requiring wholesale partners to adhere to minimum resale prices for alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverages.
• Contract Terms Alone Can Trigger Violations: The GVH emphasized that competition law can be breached even when minimum pricing provisions exist only in contracts and are not actively enforced, because such terms can discourage retailers from competing on price.
• Promotional Guidance Reinforced Pricing Restrictions: Regulators found that Maspex supplemented contractual requirements with promotional price lists and marketing instructions designed to discourage wholesalers from publicly advertising prices below recommended minimum levels.
• Settlement Reduced but Did Not Eliminate Consequences: Maspex cooperated with the investigation and acknowledged the infringement through a settlement procedure, yet still received a fine of approximately $1.1 million (HUF 336 million).
• Compliance Obligations Extend Beyond the Fine: In addition to the monetary penalty, the company must maintain the compliance program it implemented after the investigation began for an additional two years, reflecting the regulator's focus on preventing future competition law violations.

Deep Dive

According to Hungary's Competition Authority (GVH), wholesalers selling beverages distributed by Maspex Olympos. were told that if they offered products below the company's recommended minimum prices, they should not advertise the actual discounted price. Instead, they were encouraged to use attention-grabbing labels such as "TOP PRICE" or "BOMB PRICE."

That detail appeared alongside contractual provisions that, in the view of regulators, crossed a line that European competition authorities have spent decades policing. On Friday, the GVH announced that it had fined Maspex Olympos approximately $1.1 million (HUF 336 million) after concluding that the company systematically restricted price competition among its wholesale partners through unlawful resale price maintenance practices.

Maspex Olympos is one of Hungary's largest beverage suppliers and serves as the Hungarian subsidiary of Poland-based Maspex Group. The company distributes a wide portfolio of products, including Olympos, Kubu, Apenta, Figo, Topjoy, Nestea and Tiger, along with several alcoholic beverage brands.

An Investigation That Began Elsewhere

The case did not begin with a consumer complaint or a competitor report.

Instead, Maspex came onto the authority's radar during a broader sector inquiry examining discount programs in the beverage distribution market and compliance with commercial regulations. As part of that review, investigators examined beverage supply agreements and began asking questions about how pricing expectations were being communicated between manufacturers and distributors.

What they found prompted a formal competition investigation at the end of 2022. The proceeding opened with a dawn raid and eventually focused on whether Maspex had limited the freedom of wholesalers to determine their own resale prices.

The authority concluded that it had.

According to the GVH, contracts between Maspex and its wholesale partners required adherence to minimum prices established by the company for both alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverages. Regulators also found that the company regularly distributed promotional price lists that reinforced those expectations.

The issue was not merely that Maspex suggested prices. Manufacturers do that routinely.

The authority's finding was that wholesalers were expected to respect minimum pricing thresholds and that communications surrounding promotions reinforced those restrictions.

Why the Contracts Mattered

The case illustrates a point that often surprises companies encountering European competition law for the first time. A manufacturer does not need to prove that retailers actually charged a specific minimum price for a problem to arise.

The GVH emphasized that restrictions on retailers' pricing freedom can violate competition law even when they exist only in contractual language. Such provisions, regulators argue, can still influence market behavior by discouraging discounting and creating an expectation that competitors operating under similar arrangements will not reduce prices either.

For competition authorities, that expectation matters because it strikes at the mechanism that is supposed to produce lower prices: retailers competing against one another.

The Competition Council ultimately determined that Maspex had engaged in a systematic and continuous infringement aimed at restricting competition, violating both Hungarian and European competition rules.

The company cooperated during the investigation and acknowledged the infringement through a settlement procedure. That cooperation was reflected in the final resolution, though it did not spare the company from a significant penalty. The Competition Council imposed a fine of approximately $1.1 million (HUF 336 million) and ordered Maspex to maintain the compliance program it introduced after the investigation began for an additional two years.

The GRC Report is your premier destination for the latest in governance, risk, and compliance news. As your reliable source for comprehensive coverage, we ensure you stay informed and ready to navigate the dynamic landscape of GRC. Beyond being a news source, the GRC Report represents a thriving community of professionals who, like you, are dedicated to GRC excellence. Explore our insightful articles and breaking news, and actively participate in the conversation to enhance your GRC journey.