A number of horizontal agreements between companies may not have a severe core cartel and, in some cases, have positive effects. For example, agreements between competitors in the fields of research and development, production and marketing can result in lower costs for companies or improved products whose benefits are passed on to consumers. The challenge for competition authorities is to assess these agreements and balance the pro-competitive effects with the anti-competitive effects that could distort the market. Some companies may claim that there is an agreement and behave like cartels when there is no formal agreement, which can be investigated by regulators. If you are invited to a cartel-like agreement, seek independent legal advice and notify the ACCC. Keep in mind that if you do not report any suspicious activity to the ACCC, others may decide to break ranks and report your involvement to us. One of the cartel members, Abb, originally from Switzerland, had escaped a fine for being a “whistleblower” and providing decisive evidence to the Commission. The best results are achieved by discouraging companies from creating agreements. Severe sanctions are therefore a fundamental element of an effective policy on cartels and abuse of dominance against fundamental agreements. Sanctions imposed on individuals for their involvement in the conspiracy are an important complement to the funds paid to organizations for cartel behaviour.
These sanctions may take the form of significant administrative sanctions or, in some countries, the criminal sanction of detention. The prospect of detention can be a strong deterrent for businessmen considering a cartel agreement. With respect to judicial treatment, vertical agreements are treated more leniently compared to horizontal agreements, as subsequent competition is greatly reduced. A person who participates in or will be involved in a collaborative activity may apply for authorization to enter into an agreement with one or more provisions for cartels and abuse of dominance. The authorisation process is described in the cooperation guidelines between competitors. Cartels deprive consumers and other businesses of a fair deal. An agreement is the case where two or more companies agree not to compete. This behaviour can take many forms, including pricing, market distribution, bid manipulation or limiting the production of goods and services. Based on research on organizational errors, scientists from economics, sociology and management studied the organization of cartels.   They ensured that cartel participants cooperated to conceal their activities from antitrust authorities. More than achieving efficiency, participating companies must ensure that their collective secrecy is preserved.  It was also argued that the diversity of participants (for example.
B the age and size of companies) affects their ability to coordinate to be undetected.  In other words, the alliance of competitors in the same industry involves the cartel. Cartel and abuse practices can lead to higher prices and reduced selection and quality. Under the Trade Act, businesses and individuals can be fined heavily if they are part of an agreement and individuals may be barred from running a business. A survey of hundreds of published economic studies and legal decisions by antitrust authorities showed that the median price increase achieved by cartels over the past 200 years was about 23%. International private agreements (with participants from two or more countries) recorded an average price increase of 28 per cent, while national agreements averaged 18 per cent. Less than 10% of the cartels in the sample failed to raise market prices. [12