35 years of antitrust regulation: achievements and future directions

In 2025, Russia marks 35 years since the establishment of its antimonopoly authorities, which have played a pivotal role in fostering market competition and safeguarding consumer rights. Over these decades, the country has built a comprehensive antimonopoly framework, extending to public procurement and defence contracting. A major milestone was the introduction of turnover-based fines, significantly enhancing regulatory effectiveness. Yet challenges remain. Participants in the session entitled 35 years of Antitrust Regulation: Achievements and Future Directions, which took place during the 2025 St. Petersburg International Legal Forum, highlighted ongoing issues such as enforcement gaps and the need for stronger legislative mechanisms to promote compliance.

Key conclusions

A vital institution for the economy and society

“The first antimonopoly body – the State Committee for Antimonopoly Policy and Support of New Economic Structures – was established on 14 July 1990. So, 14 July is not only Bastille Day, but also an important date in the history of Russian competition law,” Sergey Puzyrevsky, Secretary of State – Deputy Head, Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Russian Federation (FAS Russia).

Stronger oversight and support for fair competition

“We prioritize both regulation and developmental support. Our work targets both market and administrative monopolies. We have strengthened oversight across the full lifecycle – before, during and after key events – to improve enforcement and contribute to sustainable economic recovery,” Jiheng Wang, Director of Monopoly Agreement Regulation Division I, Anti-Monopoly Enforcement Department I, State Administration for Market Regulation of the People's Republic of China.

Problems

Low awareness of EAEU law among market participants

“Efforts to improve information-sharing are ongoing, and I would like to draw attention to the fact that the level of awareness of EAEU law among economic actors and our colleagues in antimonopoly authorities remains insufficient and calls for substantial educational efforts. In response, together with the antimonopoly authorities of the Union countries – first and foremost, I would like to thank the Federal Antimonopoly Service of Russia – we have launched an educational project that brings together specialists from antimonopoly agencies and practising lawyers, to inform them about EAEU law, EAEU competition law, how it is applied in practice, relevant case law, and the functioning of the Eurasian Economic Union as a whole,” Maksim Ermolovich, Member of the Board (Minister) for Competition and Antimonopoly Regulation, Eurasian Economic Commission.

Need to reinforce antimonopoly legislation

“Antimonopoly authorities lack sufficient tools. We must strengthen the law to ensure that investigations genuinely deter those who violate competition rules,” said Sergey Lisovsky, Deputy Chairman of the State Duma Committee of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation for the Protection of Competition.

Economic concentration due to flawed privatization

“This is an extreme, quite frankly, monopolization – a severe concentration of the Russian economy that has come about as a result of what I believe to have been a misguided privatization policy, one that failed to take into account the principles and approaches our Chinese colleagues incorporated into their work, including the Bukharin principle underpinning the organization of the New Economic Policy back in the 1920s. As a result, here we are, thirty-five years later, essentially lamenting the outcome and saying: look, things don’t seem to be going particularly well – competition isn’t really progressing,” Aleksey Ivanov, Director, HSE – Skolkovo Institute for Law and Development, International BRICS Competition Law and Policy Centre, National Research University Higher School of Economics.

Solutions

Turnover-based fines as an effective enforcement tool

“The year 2007 marked an important milestone, when amendments were made to the Code of Administrative Offences, introducing turnover-based fines for violations of antimonopoly legislation in our country. This was a significant development, as although we had been initiating a considerable number of antimonopoly cases and issuing orders, monopolists generally remained unperturbed, since, by and large, there were no serious sanctions in place,” Sergey Puzyrevsky, Secretary of State – Deputy Head, Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Russian Federation (FAS Russia).

Sharing best practices across borders

“This is an exchange of experience, knowledge and practices. It involves analysing the practices employed by the other party. In addition, it may also include comparative assessments of regulatory approaches,” Rusman bin Abu Samah, Member, Malaysia Competition Commission (MyCC).

International cooperation in addressing cross-border monopolies

“International cooperation is indeed a highly important and engaging area of activity. Through our collaboration within the BRICS framework, for example, which has been ongoing for two decades, we have come to clearly understand that many issues are far easier to resolve together. When countries representing half the world’s population are tackling monopolies and cross-border challenges, progress can sometimes be made more swiftly and effectively,” Andrey Tsyganov, Deputy Head, Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Russian Federation (FAS Russia).

Joint codes of conduct to improve industry practices

“Together, we developed a code of conduct for automobile manufacturers and dealers. In addition, in 2016, we jointly drew up a code of fair practices for the pharmaceutical industry,” Tadzio Schilling, Chief Executive Officer, Association of European Businesses (АЕВ).

*This is a translation of material that was originally generated in Russian using artificial intelligence.

For more information, visit the Roscongress Foundation’s Information and Analytical System at roscongress.org/en

Share: