Israel Competition Authority Imposes ILS 8 Million Fine on Shufersal for Failing to Comply with Data Request
Summary
- On January 21, 2026, the Israel Competition Authority (ICA) announced an ILS 8 million monetary sanction against Shufersal, Israel’s leading retail chain, for failing to fully comply with data requests issued under Section 46(b) of the Economic Competition Law. The requests, part of a study on cost structures and pricing in Israel’s food industry, were also sent to other companies in the sector.
- Reasons for the Sanction: The ICA emphasized that Shufersal claimed over several months that it lacked the requested data (SKU, supplier, monthly-level data), but later it became clear the data existed internally. The delay and incomplete response obstructed the ICA’s authority, disrupted its study, persisted over many months, and required exceptional efforts to obtain, justifying the monetary sanction.
- Broader Implications: This case demonstrates the ICA’s increasing reliance on monetary sanctions not only for classic competition law violations—such as cartels, unlawful mergers, or abuse of monopolistic power—but also for technical violations, including delays or partial responses to data requests. Enforcement has become stricter, signaling that data provision obligations are a significant regulatory priority.
- Practical Takeaways for Companies: A data request from the ICA should be treated as a high-priority regulatory event. Companies are advised to organize compliance projects under expert guidance, gather and document all relevant information, exercise caution when responding partially or negatively, and consult legal advisors before withholding information for confidentiality reasons. Even inadvertent mistakes can trigger substantial sanctions, making early legal oversight essential.
On January 21, 2026, the Israel Competition Authority (ICA) announced that the Director-General had decided to impose a monetary sanction of approximately ILS 8 million on Shufersal, the leading retail chain in Israel, for failing to fully comply with data requests issued pursuant to Section 46(b) of the Economic Competition Law. The Competition Authority sent the data requests to Shufersal and other companies in the food sector as part of a study examining cost structure and pricing in Israel’s food industry.
According to the Director-General’s decision, Shufersal claimed over several months that it did not possess data at the level of detail required by the ICA (SKU, supplier, and monthly-level data). Only after repeated follow-ups, numerous calls, and the issuance of additional data requests did it become clear that Shufersal did, in fact, possess relevant data, including detailed internal tables, which it did not provide in its original response. Shufersal ultimately completed its data submission, but only months after the final deadline set by the ICA.
Key Considerations Underlying the Director-General’s Decision
The Director-General’s decision included a detailed justification for the amount of the sanction, highlighting several key considerations:
- Obstruction of the ICA’s authority: Section 46(b) of the Economic Competition Law grants the ICA the authority to request data. Shufersal’s failure to provide the requested data directly undermined the ICA’s ability to conduct research, supervise competition, and enforce the law.
- Disruption of the ICA’s work: The requested data was critical to the ICA’s study, and Shufersal’s conduct delayed its progress and impeded the ICA’s work.
- Duration of the violation: Shufersal’s failure to provide the data was neither isolated nor short-lived, but persisted over many months, despite repeated requests by the ICA.
- False claims regarding data availability: Contrary to its claims, Shufersal possessed the requested data at the time of the demand and even used it for internal purposes, yet failed to provide it to the ICA.
- Exceptional efforts by the ICA: The ICA was forced to invest considerable resources to obtain Shufersal’s full response, including through repetitive data requests.
Broad Implications: Stricter Enforcement, Including at the “Technical” Level
The monetary sanction imposed on Shufersal is not an isolated case. In recent years, the ICA has steadily increased its enforcement measures for failures to provide data or submissions of incomplete data.
The Shufersal case illustrates the ICA’s increasing use of monetary sanctions as an enforcement tool not only for “classic” violations of competition law, such as cartels, unlawful mergers, or abuses of monopolistic position, but also for so-called technical violations.
What Does This Mean for Corporations, Officers, and Legal Advisors?
A data request from the Competition Authority should be treated as a significant regulatory event requiring orderly preparations, including:
- Immediate organization of a company-wide (or division-wide) compliance project, under the guidance of a competition law expert.
- Tapping of all relevant sources of information in the company to compile the data, even if this requires considerable operational efforts.
- Methodical documentation of the data collection and review process, as well as the assumptions underlying the response.
- Extreme caution when drafting negative or partial answers, especially when claiming that the requested information “does not exist.”
- Advance legal consultation when considering whether to withhold data on legitimate confidentiality grounds.
The bottom line is that a data request from the Israel Competition Authority is not a routine regulatory request. Even inadvertent errors in responses may result in significant monetary sanctions. Accordingly, if your company receives a data request from the ICA, you should consult with a competition law expert at an early stage to ensure a complete, accurate, and controlled response and reduce unnecessary legal exposure.
***
Adv. Gal Rozent is a partner and the head of our firm’s Antitrust and Competition Department.
Barnea Jaffa Lande’s Antitrust and Competition Department provides comprehensive legal services across all aspects of competition and antitrust law. The department represents clients before civil and criminal courts, the Competition Tribunal, the Director-General of the Israel Competition Authority, and other regulatory and legislative authorities. In addition, it advises clients throughout business processes and provides ongoing legal counsel. Our team is at your service to answer any questions about the Economic Competition Law.