Parallel Imports: Israel Competition Authority Expands Enforcement

In recent weeks, the Israel Competition Authority has announced two new enforcement proceedings against Carasso Motors and Suny Communications, further reflecting its intensified enforcement efforts regarding parallel imports.

For additional updates in this regard, click here.

Expanding Regulations on Direct Importers

Israel’s Economic Competition Law was amended in 2023 to prevent direct importers from thwarting or limiting competition from parallel importers or personal imports. Such competition may lower prices for Israeli consumers, particularly where parallel importers are the main source of competition for direct importers with market power.

The amendment prohibits direct importers from engaging in various practices that may harm parallel imports, including imposing commercial conditions, refusing to supply goods or services, intervening with retailers regarding the marking or displaying of goods originating from parallel imports, and reporting such goods to the manufacturer in a manner that enables tracking of the supply chain. (For elaboration, see our earlier updates here and here.)

Following the amendment, the ICA published Position Statement 2/23, clarifying which practices by direct importers would be considered violations of the law. It later began  proactively identifying violations, contacted 13 major direct importers in various sectors—including the automotive, food, and electrical and electronics sectors—and opened enforcement proceedings against some of them.

For our earlier update on the ICA’s enforcement proceeding against the Ofer Avnir Group, click here. That proceeding concluded with a consent decree under which the Ofer Avnir Group and its officers paid approximately 8.6 million ILS to the State treasury.

Two New Enforcement Proceedings

1. Carasso Motors: requirements for receiving service for vehicles purchased through parallel importers

On July 13, 2026, the ICA’s Director-General published a draft consent decree for public comment after the ICA found that Carasso Motors was making it difficult for owners of vehicles purchased through parallel importers to receive service at its licensed garages.

According to the ICA’s findings, Carasso required these car owners to present an original warranty certificate in order to receive service, even though in most cases the relevant information – including the scope and term of the warranty – was already available in Carasso’s information systems. According to the ICA, this requirement was generally unnecessary and created unjustified difficulties in obtaining service at its garages.

According to the draft consent decree, Carasso will pay more than ILS 11.5 million to the State treasury and undertake commitments designed to ensure that owners of vehicles purchased through parallel importers receive efficient service equal to that provided to owners of vehicles that Carasso imports and markets itself.

The draft consent decree is open for public comment until August 16, 2026.

2. Suny Cellular Communication: reporting parallel imports to the manufacturer and demanding countermeasures

On July 6, 2026, the ICA’s Director-General informed Suny, a direct importer of Samsung products, that she is considering imposing a financial sanction of more than 17 million ILS for alleged violations of provisions of the Competition Law that prohibit harm to parallel imports.

According to the ICA’s announcement, at the end of 2023, Suny contacted Samsung’s representatives in Israel to complain about parallel imports of mobile phones from the Palestinian Authority into Israel. Suny raised concerns about consumer deception, arguing that the parallel importer was presenting itself as an authorized importer and offering customers warranties and services through the laboratories of official importers.

However, according to the ICA’s findings, Suny did more than merely express concern about consumer deception. It also complained that the parallel importer’s devices were better models and were being offered at lower prices than those offered by Suny itself. Suny further reported specific devices that had entered Israel through the parallel importer and demanded that Samsung “solve the problem,” delineate sales territories, and even stop selling to the Palestinian Authority.

According to the ICA, because these actions could have harmed parallel imports or even brought them to a halt, it is considering imposing a financial sanction on Suny. The proceeding is still underway, and Suny has the right to present its arguments to the Director-General.

Implications for Direct Importers

These latest proceedings, together with earlier cases, make clear that they are not isolated incidents but rather part of the ICA’s broader and steadily expanding enforcement policy.

The message to the market is clear: the ICA is focused not only on blatant attempts to block parallel imports, but also on seemingly routine business practices that may in fact make it more difficult for parallel importers to operate or limit their ability to compete.

Among other things, the ICA may examine the following aspects of direct importers’ business practices:

• Procedures and preconditions for receiving service for products purchased through parallel importers.
• Reports to manufacturers regarding specific products imported through parallel import channels.
• Communications with manufacturers or suppliers abroad about parallel importers’ activities.
• Demands that manufacturers take action against parallel imports.

Violations of the Economic Competition Law expose direct importers to financial sanctions of up to 8% of their annual turnover, or approximately 121 million ILS, as well as criminal liability.

Direct importers should therefore regularly review not only their relationships with manufacturers and suppliers abroad, but also their service and warranty procedures, reports and correspondence, and commercial conduct with other parties in the supply chain. The ICA may scrutinize all of these as part of its supervisory and enforcement efforts.  

In light of the expanding enforcement trend, we recommend that direct importers conduct a preliminary legal review of their current procedures and practices, particularly their interactions with manufacturers and suppliers and their policies for providing service for products purchased through parallel importers. Such a review may help identify potential exposure at an early stage and mitigate the risk of enforcement proceedings.

***

Adv. Irit Brodsky is a partner in the firm’s Antitrust and Competition Department.

Adv. Yarden Refua is an associate in the firm’s Antitrust and Competition Department.

Barnea Jaffa Lande’s Antitrust and Competition Department advises companies and importers in Israel and abroad on the competition law aspects of their operations, including parallel imports, relationships with manufacturers and suppliers, commercial policies and contracting practices, and service procedures. The department helps clients prepare in advance by identifying competition law risks arising from their business practices and by revising procedures and policies to ensure compliance with applicable legal requirements. The team also provides legal guidance in connection with regulatory issues and ICA enforcement proceedings.