The Commerce Commission has released its 2025/26 enforcement and compliance priority areas. While the Commission maintains enduring priorities, such as cartels, anti-competitive behaviour and product safety, it has identified specific areas for intensified scrutiny this coming year.^[1]

These priorities are not exhaustive but signal where enforcement resources and litigation funding will be concentrated. They are shaped by public feedback, market intelligence, and emerging economic trends.

Breakdown of priorities

The Commission has identified six specific priorities for 2025/26, being:

1.  Cartels in public procurement

Cartel enforcement - focusing on conduct affecting public services and infrastructure contracts. The Commission has signalled a strong commitment to protecting public funds and ensuring fair competition in government procurement. It is worth noting that the Commission’s first ever criminal cartel conduct case has been brought in this space (refer to our previous article here for more details about that case).

2.   Online sales conduct

Digital consumer protection and enforcement will focus on:

• Fake reviews
• Misleading scarcity claims
• Social proof tactics
• Drip pricing
• Subscription traps

3.  Grocery sector compliance

The grocery sector remains a high-priority area. The Commission is scrutinising supermarket pricing accuracy and promotional integrity, alongside compliance with codes of conduct and obligations of good faith.

We are already seeing this focus by the Commission in action:^[2]

• Code review - the Grocery Supply Code review is ongoing (first review due by 28 September 2025).
• Investigations - as at June 2025, more than 18 matters were under investigation by the Commission involving the grocery sector.
• Litigation - recent or ongoing proceedings include:
  • Pak’n’Save Mill Street and Pak’n’Save Silverdale (inaccurate pricing and misleading specials)
  • Woolworths NZ (pricing integrity and misleading specials)
  • Foodstuffs North Island Ltd and Gilmours Wholesale Ltd (alleged cartel conduct and breaches of clauses 6 and 22 of the Grocery Supply Code).^[3]

4.  Telecommunications sector

With the 3G shutdown underway, the Commission is watching for misleading or deceptive marketing and billing practices. It will also enforce obligations that promote competition during tech transitions.

5.  Motor vehicle sales and finance

The Commission has indicated that it will be taking action against dealers and lenders for breaches of the Fair Trading Act and Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act. Particular attention will be paid to lenders providing credit to vulnerable consumers.

6.  Unconscionable conduct

The Commission has highlighted unconscionable conduct as a standalone priority, signalling increased willingness to act against conduct that substantially departs from expected standards of business conduct, affecting consumers or businesses.

Areas to watch

The Commission’s enforcement priorities are consistent with wider regional trends, with both the Commission and Australia’s Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC)’s priorities overlapping.^[4]

Other areas to watch are competition and consumer issues in the aviation sector, greenwashing, and unfair contract terms. The ACCC has listed all of these as enforcement priorities, and we expect these themes to continue crossing the ditch as regulators on both sides align their focus.

Jetstar’s $2.25 million fine for FTA breaches

Although the Commission has not listed the aviation sector as a formal priority (in contrast to the ACCC), it remains under scrutiny in New Zealand. 

On Monday it was announced that Jetstar has been fined $2.25 million for misleading New Zealand consumers; one of the biggest penalties ever imposed under the Fair Trading Act.  The Commission alleged Jetstar misled thousands of consumers about their rights to claim compensation under the Civil Aviation Act, as a result of delays or cancellations due to staffing or mechanical issues which were within its control. When fights are cancelled for reasons within an airline’s control, consumers are entitled to reimbursement for reasonable costs caused by the delay or cancellation up to a cap. 

As a result of the Commission’s action, Jetstar also paid out over $1 million in compensation to affected passengers. 

Auckland construction company pleads guilty in cartel conduct case

We have previously reported here on the Commission’s first criminal cartel case involving two construction companies which had bid rigged tenders to supply public infrastructure services. One of the companies involved (MaxBuild Limited) and its director Mr Kumar were sentenced last year.

Now the other company (which is subject to name suppression) has pleaded guilty, and is set for sentencing in the Auckland High Court next month. Media are reporting that the admission of guilt by the company was made in exchange for the Commission agreeing to withdraw charges against the company’s director. We will further report on this after sentencing has taken place next month.

Get in touch

Please let any of our experts below know if you have any questions about the Commission’s priorities, the Jetstar case, or the cartel conduct case. We will continue to keep you updated on developments in the competition space.

Special thanks to Holly Soar and Achi Simhony for their assistance in preparing this article.