The CMA has accepted a remedy from Carpenter and Recticel following concerns that Carpenter’s merger with Recticel could harm manufacturers and lead to a worse deal for shoppers on items like mattresses and kitchen sponges.
US-based Carpenter agreed to buy Belgian firm Recticel’s global engineered foams business in a €656 million (Euros) deal announced in 2021. The firms both supply engineered foam products used to make household goods such as mattresses, upholstery and kitchen sponges from plants located in the UK.
Following an initial Phase 1 investigation, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) identified competition concerns in 3 foam-related markets in the UK (the supply of comfort foam, unconverted technical foam, and converted comfort foam), and referred the deal for an in-depth Phase 2 investigation in July 2022.
Related: FTC Concludes Merger Of Polyurethane Foam Producers Was Anticompetitive
At the outset of the Phase 2 investigation, Carpenter and Recticel conceded that the deal raised competition concerns and asked the CMA to “fast-track” the case to the assessment of a remedy that could address those concerns.
The CMA accepted the businesses’ request and consulted, in September, on the merging business’ proposal to sell the majority of the UK arm of Recticel’s engineered foams business to address the competition concerns raised by the deal.
The CMA’s final report confirms that the deal could reduce competition. This means that, without remedies to restore this loss of competition, the deal could have damaged the competitiveness of UK-based manufacturers that rely on foams to make their products, as well as leading to less choice and a poorer outcome for consumers.
The CMA has also concluded that, with minor modifications, the remedy proposed by the merging businesses will fully replace the loss of competition arising from the merger. This means that Carpenter will now be required to sell the majority of the UK arm of Recticel’s engineered foams business to an independent third-party, approved in advance by the CMA, with the capabilities to ensure that the business remains as competitive as it is at present.
Featured News
Judge Appoints Law Firms to Lead Consumer Antitrust Litigation Against Apple
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Epic Health Systems Seeks Dismissal of Antitrust Suit Filed by Particle Health
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Qualcomm Secures Partial Victory in Licensing Dispute with Arm, Jury Splits on Key Issues
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Google Proposes Revised Revenue-Sharing Limits Amid Antitrust Battle
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Japan’s Antitrust Authority Expected to Sanction Google Over Monopoly Practices
Dec 22, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – CRESSE Insights
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Effective Interoperability in Mobile Ecosystems: EU Competition Law Versus Regulation
Dec 19, 2024 by
Giuseppe Colangelo
The Use of Empirical Evidence in Antitrust: Trends, Challenges, and a Path Forward
Dec 19, 2024 by
Eliana Garces
Some Empirical Evidence on the Role of Presumptions and Evidentiary Standards on Antitrust (Under)Enforcement: Is the EC’s New Communication on Art.102 in the Right Direction?
Dec 19, 2024 by
Yannis Katsoulacos
The EC’s Draft Guidelines on the Application of Article 102 TFEU: An Economic Perspective
Dec 19, 2024 by
Benoit Durand