The Romanian Competition Council (the “RCC”) handled an important number of cases in 2025, demonstrating increased regulatory oversight across multiple business sectors. Some of these cases were finalized by sanctioning decisions in early 2026. For businesses operating in Romania, understanding these developments in the RCC’s approach is essential for compliance and strategic planning.
Investigations and Unannounced Inspections: An Increasing Trend
In 2025, the RCC launched 14 new investigations into areas such as automotive, road signage, tenders for IT services, and tenders for medical products and equipment used in epidemic prevention. 50% of the investigations opened concerned possible anticompetitive agreements between companies.
At the end of 2025, the RCC had 46 ongoing investigations, of which 74% concerned agreements between companies.
The RCC conducted 21 unannounced inspections in 2025 covering 52 business locations, which represents a record number for the authority.
As novelty, the dawn raids’ focus was also on the unfair trading practices in the retail sector concerning business-to-business relationships in the agricultural and food supply chain. Major retail chains, including Auchan, Metro, Carrefour, Kaufland, Mega Image and Selgros, were inspected regarding their practices with dairy suppliers, under the aforementioned unfair trading practices legislation.
Thus, businesses should ensure compliance systems are robust, as dawn raids usually happen without warning. They need to have clear policies on competition law compliance, behaviour rules during dawn raids and train staff accordingly.
Fines and Enforcement: Significant Financial Consequences
The RCC imposed fines totalling RON 347.4 million (approximately EUR 70 million) on 68 companies in 2025, of which approximately 56% represented fines for cartel-type agreements.
Major Cases:
► No-pouch agreements — First fine applied by the RCC
Eight automotive companies were fined RON 163.7 million (approximately EUR 32.15 million) for anticompetitive agreements consisting of sharing the labour market that restricted employee mobility and suppressed wages. This groundbreaking case signals that competition rules now extend to how companies compete for talent.
The sanctioned companies were: Alten Si-Techno Romania SRL, Akkodis Romania SRL, Automobile-Dacia SA, Bertrandt Engineering Technologies Romania SRL, Expleo Romania SRL, FEV ECE Automotive SRL, Renault Technologie Roumanie SRL, and Segula Technologies Romania SRL.
Following its investigation, the RCC found that the above-mentioned companies agreed not to compete with one another in recruiting and hiring qualified and specialised staff associated with motor vehicle manufacturing activities and/or other related activities, including engineering and technical consultancy services in Romania. The companies also agreed not to recruit human resources from one another without the prior consent of the company concerned.
Sanctioning such “no-poaching” agreements was a premier for the RCC.
The investigation, triggered by a complaint through the Competition Whistleblowers Platform, benefited significantly from the leniency programme. One company came forward with crucial evidence, securing a substantial fine reduction, whilst five others acknowledged their wrongdoing and received lighter penalties.
Therefore, in this case, the RCC confirmed that no-poach agreements, wage-fixing arrangements, or coordinating recruitment practices with competitors are illegal and are likely to be heavily penalized by the competition authorities.
► Construction materials market — Price fixing
According to an investigation conducted by the RCC, Holcim Romania SA, Romcim SA and Heidelberg Materials Romania SA, companies involved in cement production, engaged in anti-competitive practices between 2017 and 2018 and, as a consequence, incurred in 2025 fines totalling RON 217,966,541.82 (approximately EUR 43.7 million).
The anti-competitive practices consisted of exchanging sensitive commercial information (including information on future prices, discounts, payment conditions, payment deadlines, quantities and volumes) between the three sanctioned competitors. The illicit exchange was facilitated by regional sales agents who collected the aforementioned data from various clients. Each of the three competitors implemented mechanisms for the internal organisation and use of the collected commercially sensitive information. The investigation revealed that the information was subsequently centralised, monitored and used by the three companies to develop their commercial strategies, particularly to establish their pricing policies.
The RCC concluded that the anti-competitive behaviour of the three companies led to a reduction in competition, which triggered an increase in the price of cement compared with neighbouring countries.
► Tobacco market — Fines for resale price fixing
The RCC has sanctioned the companies Philip Morris Trading SRL, Interbrands Orbico SRL, and Mediaposte Hit Mail SA with fines amounting in total to RON 135.2 million (approximately EUR 26.6 million) for participating in anti-competitive agreements on the heated tobacco products market.
In particular, the RCC found that agreements existed between Philip Morris Trading SRL and each of the distributors Interbrands Orbico SRL and Mediaposte Hit Mail SA aimed at fixing resale prices for Philip Morris’s IQOS heated tobacco products.
In practice, they set the prices at which IQOS products were to be resold to customers, as well as the discounts applied within promotional campaigns carried out by Interbrands Orbico SRL at IQOS stands and by Mediaposte Hit Mail SA on the website iqos.ro. Furthermore, the distributors' promotional campaigns could only be conducted with the approval of Philip Morris Trading SRL. The RCC deemed that the freedom of the distributors to set their own prices was restricted by fixing resale prices and setting discount levels, which eventually affected the consumers.
Interbrands Orbico SRL acknowledged the infringement of the competition law and, as a result, benefited from a reduction of the fine.
► The pharmaceutical market — Fines for abuse of dominant position
In December 2021, the RCC initiated an investigation into the Romanian market for medications used to treat chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) concerning a possible abuse of dominant position by Boehringer Ingelheim RCV GmbH & CO. KG.
The RCC completed the investigation in January 2025 and imposed a fine of RON 128,470,123 (approximately EUR 25.81 million) on the Austrian company for abuse of dominant position in the COPD market.
The RCC found that the company directed patients towards a more complex and expensive innovative medication, namely Spiolto Respimat, through an intensive communication and promotional strategy, even in cases where it was not necessary, whilst limiting market access for the similar generic medication, Spiriva, which had a lower price, during the period 2017–2021.
According to the RCC, the intention behind this strategy was to make it more difficult to sell competing generic medicines, such as Spiriva, a drug that contains the same active substance in the same quantity as Spiolto Respimat, but is no longer protected by a patent, and is therefore less expensive.
The RCC argued that, in order to generate more revenue by selling the patent-protected Spiolto Respimat, Boehringer Ingelheim RCV GmbH & CO. KG made efforts to influence doctors' decisions to prescribe on a general basis Spiolto Respimat, which was necessary only for double therapy, even when Spiriva would have been sufficient (i.e. for cases requiring monotherapy only).
Boehringer Ingelheim RCV GmbH & CO. KG has publicly denied the claims relating to the Spiolto drug, declaring that it has always communicated in accordance with therapeutic guidelines and applicable laws and consistently ensures appropriate and balanced communication in all the markets in which it operates, including Romania.
► Auto repair services — Fines for fixing prices and other commercial conditions
The RCC sanctioned with fines totalling RON 14.73 million (approximately EUR 2.9 million) twenty-five service centres, members of the authorized service network of Auto Italia Impex SRL in Romania, and two insurance companies for participating in an anticompetitive agreement in the vehicle repair market in Romania.
The RCC found that the aforementioned twenty-five companies coordinated their commercial behaviour in order to fix labour rates, standardise spare parts prices, and dictate commercial terms when dealing with insurance companies, effectively eliminating competition amongst themselves.
The coordination of the car repairers was facilitated actively by the involvement of the insurance companies Gothaer Asigurări-Reasigurări SA (currently Allianz-Țiriac Unit Asigurări SA) and Uniqa Asigurări SA. As a result, the two insurance companies were also sanctioned by the RCC with a combined fine of RON 6.7 million (approximately EUR 1.35 million).
Once again, the leniency programme proved instrumental. One company's decision to blow the whistle earned it complete immunity, demonstrating the programme's effectiveness as a powerful weapon in the RCC's enforcement arsenal. All sanctioned companies acknowledged their violations and received reduced penalties.
► Road maintenance and rehabilitation works — Fines for public procurement bid-rigging
The RCC has exposed several bid-rigging operations on Romania's road maintenance works market in 2025 in relation to tenders organized by the National Company for the Administration of Road Infrastructure SA (“CNAIR”). Companies coordinating bids for road maintenance contracts faced substantial penalties.
In one case, the RCC has sanctioned three companies, namely Oyl Company Holding AG SRL, Autoprima Serv SRL and Saga Infrastructură SRL, with fines totalling RON 8.29 million (approximately EUR 1.66 million) for the allocation of current and periodic maintenance works for national roads and motorways in several counties of Romania (i.e. Constanța, Tulcea, Brăila, Călărași, and Ialomița). More specifically, the companies coordinated their commercial policies with the aim of ensuring that a certain company among them would submit the highest-value bid and would win the tender.
All three defendants fully acknowledged their competition law violations and secured fine reductions. Notably, a fourth company under investigation, Asfalt Dobrogea SRL, escaped sanctions due to insufficient evidence.
In another case, the RCC has imposed fines amounting to RON 2,317,896.04 (approximately EUR 466,000) on four companies —Tredeco Holding SRL, Trecon Logistic SRL, Data Capture SRL, and Geo Drumuri Banat SRL — for coordinating their conduct across seven public procurement procedures for routine maintenance services of the national road and motorway network administered by CNAIR through its regional directorates in Brașov, Bucharest, Constanța, and Timișoara.
The RCC’s investigation found that the aforementioned companies submitted bids after exchanging commercially sensitive information, putting into effect a market-sharing arrangement intended to distribute the awarded contracts among themselves. The RCC determined that this concerted conduct led to a restriction of competition in the market for routine maintenance of national roads and motorways in Romania.
In an earlier case, the RCC initiated an ex officio investigation in 2023 and subsequently determined in April 2025 that two companies — Societatea de Construcții Napoca SA and Beton Constructorul SRL — had participated in bid rigging during a public procurement procedure launched by the local government of Cluj County for the rehabilitation of public road infrastructure. The RCC imposed fines totalling RON 1.42 million (approximately EUR 286,758).
The RCC concluded that the bid rigging arose from the exchange of commercially sensitive information and the coordination of behaviour between the two competitors whilst participating in the tender.
Both companies fully acknowledged their engagement in the anti-competitive conduct and benefited from a reduction in fines following a settlement with the RCC.
► Luxury brands sector — Fines for online sales restrictions
The RCC has turned its spotlight on the luxury goods sector, fining Thelios SpA — the exclusive manufacturer and distributor of LVMH Group products (Louis Vuitton – Moët & Chandon – Hennessy) in Romania — RON 4,552,647 (approximately EUR 915,068) for imposing online sales restrictions.
The company's commercial policy completely banned its retail partner, Shades Originators SRL, from selling luxury eyewear through its online store, a restriction that the RCC deemed anticompetitive and harmful to Romania's luxury eyewear market.
Shades Originators SRL turned whistleblower, reporting the anticompetitive practices to the RCC under the leniency policy and securing complete immunity from fines.
It is to be noted that 90% of the RCC’s decisions were upheld by the Romanian High Court of Cassation and Justice. Also, the courts maintained 95-97% of the contested fine amounts applied by the RCC. This demonstrates that appeals rarely result in significant reductions, making prevention and compliance the most cost-effective strategy.
Mergers and Acquisitions: Faster Processing, Stricter Scrutiny
The RCC approved 119 transactions in 2025 – the highest number in over two decades. Also, for the first time in eight years, the RCC launched an in-depth investigation into a retail acquisition (i.e. the Schwarz Group's purchase of La Cocoș stores), signalling closer scrutiny of major retail consolidation. In addition, for the first time, the RCC performed a dawn raid within an investigation regarding the compatibility of an economic concentration with the normal competitive environment.
Moreover, two major deals required commitments from the parties: (i) The Digi and Vodafone joint acquisition of Telekom Romania Mobile, and (ii) Mehiläinen Oy's acquisition of the Regina Maria medical group (i.e. Centrul Medical Unirea SRL).
Thus, companies planning acquisitions should factor in potentially longer review periods for complex or market-leading transactions, and be prepared to offer remedies to secure approval.
Foreign Direct Investments: Wide Approach, High Volume of Authorisations
Regardless of or in addition to merger control, an important number of transactions are currently subject to foreign direct investment (“FDI”) screening in Romania based on a separate procedure.
Romania's FDI screening regime is currently one of the most expansive and complex in Central and Eastern Europe, covering a very broad range of foreign (non-EU) direct investments, EU investments and domestic investments across multiple industries. As a general rule, investments subject to examination and notification to CEISD are those that (i) concern certain sensitive activity sectors specified by decisions of the Supreme Council of National Defence (“CSAT”), such as security of individuals and communities, border security, energy and transport security, security of supply systems for vital resources, critical infrastructure security, IT and communications systems security, financial, fiscal, banking and insurance activities security, production and distribution of weapons, ammunition, explosives and toxic substances, industrial security, disaster protection, protection of agriculture and the environment, and protection of state-owned companies' privatisation or management teams, and (ii) exceed the threshold value of EUR 2 million. These two conditions must be cumulatively satisfied. The FDI Screening Commission (“CEISD”) is the inter-institutional body subordinated to the Romanian Government responsible for examining investments. Its secretarial function is currently provided by the RCC, which also issues authorisation decisions for the investments examined by CEISD and applies sanctions for failure to obtain the required authorisation. Investment rejection decisions (only one publicly announced in 2025) and conditional authorisation decisions are currently issued by the Romanian Government, taking into account the opinion of CSAT.
The mechanics of the regime are straightforward in theory, but complex in practice. The regime's practical impact is substantial, as a significant number of notifications were filed and authorised by decision of the RCC, based on filings regarding non-sensitive transactions. This volume creates an administrative burden whilst generating uncertainty for investors who cannot easily predict whether their transaction requires FDI notification and clearance, and whether they should adapt the transactional timeline accordingly.
State Aid Oversight
The RCC approved over RON 50.6 billion (approximately EUR 10.1 billion) in state aid schemes, covering EU funds, recovery programmes, and national support measures. Businesses seeking public funding should ensure early engagement with competition rules to avoid delays or rejections.
What Businesses Should Do:
1. Review compliance programmes: Ensure to keep up to date the competition law compliance programs and hold periodic training covering hardcore restrictions, but also other infringements, especially cartels, pricing practices, market allocation, bid rigging, parity clauses, non-compete clauses, abuse of dominance and now also online sales restrictions and labour market conduct;
2. Assess merger strategies: Factor in longer timelines and potential remedies for significant acquisitions to cover the merger control, but also FDI screening procedures;
3. Prepare for inspections: Have clear dawn raids rules, including document retention policies and response protocols;
4. Monitor enforcement trends: Take into consideration that the authority is expanding constantly into new areas (e.g. labour markets, unfair trading practices, online sales restrictions);
5. Engage early: For mergers, foreign investments, state aid, or regulatory changes, early consultation can prevent costly delays.
Looking Ahead
With Romania ranking first in the EU in terms of the number of completed competition investigations involving possible infringements of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU - Articles 101/102) in 2025, the RCC has established itself as one of Europe's most active enforcement authorities. Businesses should expect this heightened scrutiny to continue, with expansion into new enforcement areas and increasingly sophisticated investigative techniques.
The message is clear: competition compliance is not optional, and the financial and reputational costs of violations are substantial. Therefore, prevention is the key.
Author: Cristina de Jonge, Partner
