The Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS) has introduced a draft amendment to the competition law that targets the pricing of socially significant goods, arguing that prices must be economically justified. This move, reported by Forbes Russia via their Telegram channel, signals a shift in how price fairness is evaluated in major markets. The draft suggests that if the cost structure behind essential products cannot be clearly demonstrated, seller actions could be interpreted as collusion, even when it is implied rather than explicit.
Officials indicate that sellers are not allowed to coordinate price levels to the point of artificial increases, and that the current practice of separate price decisions could escalate prices across a broad range of products. The proposed changes would redefine what constitutes concerted action, moving away from a focus on direct agreement to a broader assessment of price rationale. Forbes notes that the new framework would label certain price moves as “unreasonable” when they fail to reflect genuine supply and demand factors, rather than merely signaling coordination among competitors.
Economist Vadim Novikov, cited by the publication, argues that the amendments undermine the traditional principle used by the antitrust body. He suggests that evidence of collusion should rely on solid facts rather than a subjective conviction that a price is not economically justified. This critique highlights a tension between enforcement clarity and the risk of overreach when evaluating market behavior in rapidly changing sectors.
Reports also mention plans to cap margins in specific retail chains, with examples such as Auchan, Atak, O’Key, and Magnit (JSC Tander) in Morocco under consideration to limit margins to around 5 percent. While these particular names reference a different regional context, the policy direction reflects a broader global trend toward tighter margin controls on essential goods, a move that could influence pricing dynamics in other large markets, including North America. Analysts in the Canadian and U.S. retail sectors watch closely as regulators elsewhere weigh how to balance affordability for consumers with incentives for investment and competition. The dialogue around price justification is framed as a question of transparency and accountability in how prices are set for everyday necessities, from groceries to medicines, and how authorities can differentiate between legitimate pricing strategies and anti-competitive behavior. [Cited: Forbes Russia Telegram channel]