Displaying items by tag: Fine

Pakistan: The Competition Commission of Pakistan (CCP) has fined four cement producers for deceptive marketing practices in violation of the Competition Act 2010. Fines of US$1.8m each have been levied on Al-Abbas Cement, Attock Cement, Bestway Cement and Lucky Cement.

A CCP official said that the commission is mandated under the Competition Act 2010 to ensure fair competition in all spheres of commercial and economic activities. The Competition Commission of Pakistan is committed to maintain transparency for enhancing economic efficiency and to protect consumers from anticompetitive practices, including deceptive marketing.

Spain: The National Commission for Markets and Competition (CNMC) has issued total fines of Euro29.2m to 23 cement companies for involvement in a cartel between 1999 and 2014. Among the companies are Cementos Portland Valderrivas, with a Euro10.2m fine, Cemex Spain with a Euro5.8m fine and Holcim Spain, with a Euro4.4m fine, according to the Cinco Días newspaper.

The CNMC’s investigations have shown that the companies coordinated the exchange of commercial information, market sharing and price fixing between 1999 and 2014 in three distinct geographical areas in the north, centre and south of the country. Notably, the southern region examined the companies used email and WhatsApp mobile phone application to share sensitive information.

India: The Competition Commission of India (CCI) has imposed a penalty of more than Rs67bn (US$1bn) on 11 cement companies for alleged cartelisation. The companies affected are UltraTech, Binani, Ramco, Jaiprakash Associates, JK Cement, Lafarge, India Cements, ACL, ACC, Century, and Shree Cement, besides the Indian Cement Manufacturers' Association (CMA). The order issued by the anti-trust regulator held the companies and the CMA responsible for 'acting in concert in fixing prices of cement.' The companies and the CMA allegedly shared details relating to prices, capacity utilisation, production and dispatch, which led to restricted production and supplies in the market hurting consumers and the Indian economy, the order said. Further, the CCI also found the cement companies to be acting in concert in fixing prices of cement. A final order has been passed by CCI, pursuant to the directions issued by the Competition Appellate Tribunal (CAT) remanding the matter back, while setting aside the original order of the fair trade regulator, which had had also imposed fine on cement companies.

Penalties of US$171m on ACC, US$173m on ACL, US$24.9m on Binani, US$40.9m on Century, US$27.9m on India Cements, US$19.1m on JK Cement, US$73.1m on Lafarge, US$38.5m on Ramco, US$175.3m on UltraTech and US$197.5m on Jaiprakash Associates were imposed by CCI. In addition, a penalty of US$109,000 was slapped on the CMA.Penalising the companies, the CCI said the actions of the companies and the CMA are not only detrimental to the interests of consumers but also to the whole economy, as cement is a critical input in construction and infrastructure industry, and vital to economic development. Through a separate order, the regulator has slapped US$59.2m fine on Shree Cement for unfair businesses practices.

The CAT had, in late 2015, revoked CCI's order, imposing a combined penalty of US$943m on cement companies for allegedly forming a price cartel. The tribunal quashed the commission's order after observing that Ashok Chawla, then CCI chairperson, was party to the order, despite not being present during hearings. The tribunal also allowed the cement companies to withdraw the US$94m deposited by them in compliance of its interim order. The interim order, in May 2013, had stayed the penalty but asked the companies to deposit 10 per cent of its pending disposal of their appeal. In June 2012, the commission had fined ACC, Ambuja Cement, UltraTech Cement and Jaiprakash Associates a little over US$149m each for forming a cartel. The other companies fined included Madras Cements, Century Cement, Binani Cement, Lafarge India, JK Cement, India Cements and Grasim Cements (now merged with UltraTech). The CMA was also a party in this case and it was fined a token amount.

Competition watchdog CCI said interactions between the trade body and the cement companies were not confined to promoting the interest of the industry. "Such interactions have been found to have transgressed the limits in sharing of information and extended to discussions on cost, prices, production and capacities...," the CCI order said. The case was filed by Builders Association of India against the cement companies and CMA alleging collusion to fix prices.

Puerto Rico: The US Department of Labor’s Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) has fined Cemex Puerto Rico US$291,722 in penalties relating to 119 citations and orders issued for safety violations at the company’s Ponce Cement Plant and Cantera Canas mines. The cement producer must now implement enhanced safety measures at its three MSHA-regulated facilities in Puerto Rico.

The MSHA issued the citations and orders for a wide variety of violations, including obstructed and unsafe travel ways and workplaces, safety defects on mobile equipment and machinery, and unguarded machine parts. The settlement was approved on 7 June 2016.

In the settlement Cemex agrees to hire an independent external safety consultant knowledgeable about surface mining and cement plant operations to conduct annual, wall-to-wall employee safety audits of these three facilities over the next four years. It will also arrange for the MSHA’s Educational Field and Small Mine Services to teach a mine safety course and cement plant safety course to safety directors, assistant safety directors, area supervisors and foremen.

Australia: The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has filed an appeal against a US$12.6m fine against Cement Australia, which it views is too low. On 16 May 2016 a Federal Court published orders imposing a penalty of US$13.7m on the cement producer. One order was then set aside, reducing the fine to US$12.6m. However, the ACCC contends that a penalty of over US$66m is more appropriate for the breaches of Australia’s competition legislation.

“The ACCC will argue to the Full Court that the penalties imposed on Cement Australia are manifestly inadequate, and not of appropriate deterrent value,” said ACCC Chairman Rod Sims. He added that suitable financial penalties were considered ‘essential’ as a deterrent to anti-competitive conduct and to prevent businesses viewing such behaviour as an acceptable cost of doing business.

The proceedings relate to contracts that were entered into by Cement Australia companies between 2002 and 2006 with four power stations in South East Queensland, to acquire fly ash. The court found numerous contraventions of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010. It also fined Christopher White, a manager in the Cement Australia fly ash business during the relevant period, a penalty of US$14,700 for his involvement in making the contravening contracts with the operator of the Swanbank power station in 2005.

US: The US Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration's (OSHA) Cleveland Area Office has cited Essroc Cement for one repeated and 10 serious safety and health violations at its site in Middlebranch, Ohio. OSHA found that the company had exposed workers to machine, noise and respiratory hazards following an investigation started in November 2015 after a complaint was submitted alleging unsafe working conditions. The US subsidiary of Italacementi faces fines of up to US$92,000 for the violations.

"Employers have a responsibility to protect workers from exposure to noise and respiratory hazards that can lead to debilitating health conditions," said Howard Eberts, OSHA's area director in Cleveland. "Essroc needs to immediately re-evaluate its safety and health programs to keep workers safe on the job."

Essroc operates a slag grinding plant and a cement terminal at the site.

US: Kosmos Cement, a subsidiary of Cemex, has pleaded guilty to violating workplace safety standards. It is liable to be fined to up to US$400,000 towards the death of a worker at its Louisville cement plant in Kentucky in 2014. Michael Egan, Cemex's executive vice president and general counsel, entered the guilty plea for the company. Contract employee Felipe Mata Vizcaya fell to his death after opening an elevator door when the elevator car wasn't there, according to the Courier-Journal.

Cemex is required to pay US$200,000 immediately and the balance if it doesn't make required repairs within three years. It has also pledged to design, operate and test all elevators at the site to meet national safety standards and to install additional safety features.

In a statement, US Attorney John Kuhn called the matter "one of the worst cases of negligence on the part of a company." The company was accused of violating the Mine Safety and Health Act, and the case was investigated by the US Labor Department's Mine Safety & Health Administration.

Brazil: The office of the Superintendent-general of the antitrust watchdog Cade has recommended a penalty with fines to Votorantim, Holcim and Cimento Tupi for a coordinated refusal to sell certain types of cement in São Paulo state. According to the office, these companies damaged free competition and made it hard for potential competitors to enter the market.

The office also said that there was not enough evidence against Cimentos Liz, Cibrasa, Ciplan, Cimpor, Itabira, Itaguassu, Itambe, Ibacip, Itapessoca, Itapicuru, Itapetinga, Itapicuru, Itapissuma, Itautinga, Intercement and Lafarge and that the administrative process should be dismissed. Cade's own tribunal will have the final decision on whether the cement firms will be fined or not.

India: The Competition Appellate Tribunal has set aside a US$945m penalty imposed on 11 cement firms by the Competition Commission of India (CCI) on accusations of cartel behaviour and asked the fair trade regulator to resubmit the case. The Tribunal also allowed the cement manufacturers to withdraw the 10% penalty amount already deposited with the CCI, according to the Press Trust of India.

The judgement follows appeals filed by the cement firms and their industry body, the Cement Manufacturers Association, against the two CCI orders passed in June - July 2012. The cement companies included ACC, Ambuja Cements, Binani Cements, Century Textiles Ltd, India Cements, JK Cements, Lafarge India, Madras Cements, Ultratech, JP Associates and Shree Cements.

The CCI had passed the orders after an investigation into complaints, including from Builders Association of India (BAI), against alleged price collaboration between cement firms.

The orders were later challenged at the Competition Appellate Tribunal, which ordered that 'the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remitted to the CCI for fresh adjudication of the issues relating to alleged violation" of the relevant sections of the Competition Act.'

Uzbekistan: The Higher Economic Court of Uzbekistan has upheld a penalty tax on excess profit of Ahangarancement JSC (a subsidiary of Russian Eurocement Group JSC) from 2009 to 2014 and penalties for its late payment.

Ahagarancement stated that it would appeal the decision because it calculated the excess profit tax in accordance with the laws of the country. It added that the calculation had been confirmed as correct by the ministry of finance and the expert council at the State Tax Committee.

"The decision significantly changes the legal practice on issues of the formation of profits of cement companies, significantly encumbers the plant with an additional tax burden, leads to a reduction of investment opportunities of the enterprise and jeopardises the implementation of the project of modernisation of the enterprise," said the company in a press release.

The tax authorities of Uzbekistan have not commented on the situation.