According to the Authority, the company promoted its innovative “smoke-free” products in an unfair manner

The Italian Competition Authority has launched an investigation into Philip Morris Italia S.p.A. over a suspected unfair commercial practice in the promotion of products using expressions such as “smoke-free”, “a smoke-free future” and/or “smoke-free products”.

These expressions may be unclear and incomplete to consumers, because they refer to products which – despite the absence of combustion – may still be harmful to health. Moreover, they are not less harmful than other products and may lead to addiction.

An inspection at the premises of Philip Morris Italia S.p.A. and Philip Morris Manufacturing & Technology Bologna S.p.A. was carried out yesterday by the Authority’s officials, assisted by the Special Antitrust Unit of the Italian Financial Police (Guardia di Finanza).

Rome, 15 October 2025

The company gave consumers incomplete and unclear information about the terms of the paid optional service intended to limit liability for vehicle damage in long-term rentals

The Italian Competition Authority has imposed a €5 million fine on ALD, a global player in the long-term car rental market, for an unfair commercial practice in the handling of customer charges for vehicle damage sustained during the rental period. In particular, at both the pre-contractual and contractual stage, the company gave consumers incomplete and unclear information about the nature, key features and terms of the paid optional service designed to limit liability for vehicle damage. This service, purchased by the vast majority of customers, was intended to limit consumers’ liability to the agreed deductible in the event of damage to the rental vehicle. However, the company failed to clarify that each incident had to be promptly reported through the ALD portal, preventing customers from fully benefiting from the service they had paid for.

Moreover, the investigation revealed that consumers were not adequately informed of the criteria used by the company to assess which damages fell outside normal wear and tear, and would therefore be charged to customers unless reported immediately (ALD only waives charges where the damage is considered “normal wear and tear”). Lastly, the Authority considered it aggressive to charge customers for repair costs of damages identified only at drop-off, following the technical inspection, since such damages were minor or not readily visible. These damages, unreported before drop-off precisely because they were difficult to detect, left consumers unable to benefit from the liability protection they had paid for, as a result of the company’s conduct.

Rome, 9 October 2025

Text of the decision

The investigation, prompted by a whistleblower’s complaint, revealed that the main oil companies coordinated to fix the value of the bio component factored into fuel prices.

The Italian Competition Authority has closed its investigation into Eni, Esso, Ip, Iplom, Q8, Saras and Tamoil (for the latter, also in relation to the conduct of Repsol, which it has now acquired), the most important oil operators in Italy. The Authority’s findings revealed an agreement restricting competition in the sale of motor fuel involving all companies except Iplom and Repsol. As a consequence, the companies were fined 936,659,087 euro in total. The Authority imposed a fine of 336,214,660 euro on Eni, 129,363,561 euro on Esso, 163,669,804 euro on Ip, 172,592,363 euro on Q8, 43,788,944 euro on Saras and 91,029,755 euro on Tamoil.

Following a complex investigation, prompted by a whistleblower’s complaint, the Authority found that Eni, Esso, Ip, Q8, Saras and Tamoil coordinated to set the value of the bio component factored into fuel prices (a component introduced by the companies to comply with obligations under current legislation). The cartel began on 1 January 2020 and continued until 30 June 2023. The value of this important price component rose from around 20€/m³ in 2019 to around 60€/m³ in 2023.

According to the Authority, the companies implemented parallel price increases – largely coinciding – which were driven by direct or indirect information exchanges among them. The cartel was further aided by the disclosure of the exact value of the bio component in numerous articles published in “Staffetta Quotidiana”, a well-known industry daily, also as a result of information sent directly to the newspaper by Eni.

Rome, 26 September 2025

Text of the decision

In mid-July, San Benedetto S.p.A. changed its mineral water labels and packaging, as well as website and advertising, by removing green claims stating that the production of its Ecogreen bottles had no impact on the environment.

The Italian Competition Authority has successfully exerted its moral suasion on Acqua Minerale San Benedetto S.p.A., prompting the company to remove potentially misleading green claims previously used to promote and market its Ecogreen line products.

The labels of the Ecogreen line bottles, the www.sanbenedetto.it website and several promotional spots/videos displayed on the company’s website and YouTube featured green claims stating that the production of mineral water bottles caused zero greenhouse gas emissions, and even implying a positive impact on the environment.

Following the Authority’s moral suasion, San Benedetto removed the potentially misleading references from its advertising, in particular by withdrawing the “zero CO₂ impact” claim from labels, packaging and all promotional materials (including TV ads and its website). The company also revised its environmental claims, along with the graphic elements evoking natural imagery. In addition, it included a QR code on the label, directing consumers to a new section of its website dedicated to sustainability.

On green claims, the Authority once again stresses the importance for companies to make clear and accurate statements about the steps they are taking to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions resulting from their activities.

Rome, 26 August 2025

The well-known brand, operating in the “fast” and “superfast fashion” sectors, adopted a misleading communication strategy regarding the characteristics and environmental impact of its clothing products.

The Italian Competition Authority has imposed a fine of 1 million euros on Infinite Styles Services Co. Ltd, the company responsible for managing Shein’s product trading websites in Europe, for the use of misleading and/or deceptive environmental messages and claims (so-called green claims) in the promotion and sale of Shein-branded clothing products. Through its website https://it.shein.com and other promotional and/or informational online pages, the company disseminated environmental claims within the sections #SHEINTHEKNOW, evoluSHEIN, and Social Responsibility that were, in some instances, vague, generic, and/or overly emphatic, and in others, misleading or omissive.

The environmental assertions in the #SHEINTHEKNOW section, regarding the “design of a circular system” or the recyclability of products, were found to be either false or at least confusing. Claims used by Shein to present, describe, and promote garments in the evoluSHEIN by Design line highlight the use of “green” fibres without clearly specifying the substantial environmental benefits of these products throughout their full life cycle, and without clarifying that this line remains a marginal share of the total Shein-branded offering. Moreover, these claims may lead consumers to believe not only that the evoluSHEIN by Design collection is made solely from “sustainable” materials, but also that its products are fully recyclable — a statement which, given the fibres used and current recycling systems, does not reflect reality. Statements by Shein about its intention to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 25% by 2030 and to reach zero emissions by 2050 are presented, in the Social Responsibility section, in a vague and generic way— and were even contradicted by an actual increase in Shein’s greenhouse gas emissions in 2023 and 2024.

In assessing the unfairness of Shein’s conduct, the Authority emphasized the heightened duty of care upon the company, given that the sector it belongs and the business practices through which it operates, such as the so-called “disposable fashion” (fast and ultra-fast fashion) are highly polluting.

Rome, 4 August 2025

• Testo del provvedimento

The two companies made misleading statements regarding their ethical and social responsibility commitments, which were contradicted by the actual working conditions identified at the suppliers and subcontractors to whom the majority of the production of Armani branded leather bags and accessories had been outsourced.

The Italian Competition Authority imposed a fine of 3.5 million euros on the companies Giorgio Armani S.p.A. e G.A. Operations S.p.A. for engaging in a misleading commercial practice under the Consumer Code, carried out from April 22, 2022, to February 18, 2025.

In particular, the companies made ethical and social responsibility statements that were untruthful and presented in a manner that was unclear, unspecific, inaccurate, and equivocal.

Such statements are contained in the companies’ Code of Ethics, as well as in documents published on the Armani Values (www.armanivalues.com) and Armani (www.Armani.com) websites, which include a link redirecting users to the Armani Values website.

The investigation conducted by the Authority revealed, on the one hand, that the companies emphasized their commitment to sustainability—particularly social responsibility, including toward workers and their safety—which became a marketing tool used to meet growing consumer expectations. The very name of the corporate website (Armani Values) reflects this strategy, as do certain documents obtained during inspections, which clearly show the objective of “enhancing the positive perception of the brand in terms of sustainability … and, from a commercial perspective … leading the customer to make purchasing decisions that are also informed by the ‘values’ conveyed through our products”.

On the other hand, the companies chose to outsource a substantial portion of their production of leather bags and accessories to suppliers who, in turn, relied on subcontractors. At several of these subcontracting facilities, it was found that safety devices had been removed from machinery in order to increase production capacity, thereby placing workers’ health and safety at serious risk. Furthermore, sanitary and hygiene conditions were inadequate, and workers were frequently employed either wholly or partially off the books.

In this context, it is evident that the protection of workers’ rights and health did not align with the content of the ethical and social responsibility statements disseminated by Giorgio Armani S.p.A. e G.A. Operations S.p.A..

The companies’ awareness of this situation—seriously detrimental to the workers producing Armani branded leather bags and accessories—is further demonstrated by the fact that, during an inspection by the Judicial Police, an employee of G.A. Operations responsible for quality control was present at the subcontractor’s facility and stated that he had been “visiting that workshop on a monthly basis for approximately six months”.

Finally, in an internal document of Giorgio Armani S.p.A. dated 2024—prior to the initiation of judicial administration proceedings requested by the Public Prosecutor’s Office of Milan—it is even stated that “in the best of the situations observed, the working environment is at the limit of acceptability; in other cases, there are serious concerns regarding its adequacy and health standards”.

Rome, 1 August 2025

• Testo del provvedimento

In March 2025, Meta, which holds a dominant position in the market for consumer communications apps, decided to pre-install its artificial intelligence service on the WhatsApp app. In doing so, Meta may be “imposing” the use of its chatbot and AI assistance services on its users

The Italian Competition Authority, acting in close cooperation with the competent departments of the European Commission, has decided to launch an investigation into Meta Platforms Inc., Meta Platforms Ireland Limited, WhatsApp Ireland Limited and Facebook Italy S.r.l. – referred to as Meta – over a suspected abuse of dominant position in violation of article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).

As of March 2025, Meta – which holds a dominant position in the market for consumer communications apps – decided to pre-install its artificial intelligence service, named Meta AI, by combining it with its WhatsApp service, without any prior request from users. Furthermore, Meta AI is placed in a prominent position on the screen and integrated into the search bar.

Meta AI is a Chatbot or AI Assistant service that uses artificial intelligence technology to respond to general-purpose queries of various kinds and to offer forms of interaction similar to virtual assistants.

By combining Meta AI with WhatsApp, Meta appears capable of channelling its customer base into the emerging market, not through merit-based competition, but by “imposing” the availability of the two distinct services upon users, potentially harming competitors.

According to the Authority, there is thus a risk that users may become “locked in” or functionally dependent on Meta AI, not least because, by using the information provided over time, it appears that the responses generated by the service become increasingly useful and relevant.

An inspection at the premises of Meta’s Italian subsidiary, Facebook Italy S.r.l., was carried out yesterday by the Authority’s officials, assisted by the Special Antitrust Unit of the Italian Financial Police (Guardia di Finanza).

Rome, 30 July 2025

Testo del provvedimento

During its teleshopping broadcasts, the company advertised mattresses as discounted compared to a price that was never actually charged and persuaded consumers to arrange home visits to purchase the mattresses at the advertised discount. During subsequent home visits, sales representatives pressured consumers into buying alternatives items at significantly higher prices

The Italian Competition Authority has imposed a 3 million euro fine on Emme Group S.p.A., owner of the Materassi Marion trademark, over a complex unfair commercial practice that was both misleading and aggressive in the promotion and sale of Marion-branded mattresses.

The company spread misleading claims about pricing, perceived savings on the advertised product and the availability of tax incentives during its frequent teleshopping broadcasts on leading national and local TV networks, to induce consumers to schedule a home visit with a Marion sales representative. As a matter of fact, the teleshopping promotions consistently advertise a special offer and a steep discount compared to a strike-out price (or market value) – which, however, is never actually charged. Moreover, the lowest price from the previous 30 days is not shown, even though the offers are advertised as promotions. While the conduct dates back to 2024, the company’s recent adjustments to its advertising communications do not seem to have addressed the concerns raised.

During subsequent home visits, sales representatives pressured consumers –some of whom elderly – into purchasing alternative mattresses at significantly higher prices, also using misleading or disparaging claims about the features and delivery times of the teleshopping-promoted mattresses. This conduct allowed the company Emme Group to sell a significantly higher number of mattresses at prices up to 3,000 euros above those promoted in its teleshopping broadcasts, which had been advertised as discounted offers.

Rome, 23 July 2025

Testo del provvedimento

According to the Authority, Revolut spread misleading information about its investment services and employed aggressive methods in the management of banking services.

The Italian Competition Authority has launched an investigation into Revolut Group Holdings Ltd, Revolut Bank UAB and Revolut Securities Europe UAB.

In connection with its investment services, Revolut seemingly promoted stock investment opportunities by placing emphasis on the absence of fees and failing to clearly disclose the additional costs and limitations involved in commission-free investments. Furthermore, it appears that Revolut neglected to mention an important aspect, namely that “commission-free” investments include fractional shares, which – when compared to full shares – involve significant differences, particularly in terms of voting rights and transferability of shares. With regard to cryptocurrency investments, which are inherently high-risk, it seems that Revolut did not make clear that once the investment is underway, stop-loss and take-profit settings – key risk management tools – can no longer be modified.

With respect to its banking services, it appears Revolut omitted or disclosed in an unclear manner essential information regarding the terms and procedures for suspending, limiting or blocking an account. The companies are believed to have adopted aggressive methods in the suspension or blocking of accounts, without providing clients with sufficient advance notice, a chance to respond or adequate assistance. This seems to have prevented users – also for extended periods – from accessing their funds and related services, thus hindering the exercise of their contractual rights. Lastly, Revolut seemingly failed to provide clear and exhaustive information on the requirements for obtaining an Italian IBAN (starting with IT) instead of a Lithuanian IBAN (starting with LT).

On Tuesday, 8 July, the Authority’s officials carried out inspections at the premises of the Italian branch of Revolut Bank UAB, with the support of the Special Antitrust Unit of the Italian Financial Police (Guardia di Finanza).

Rome, 10 July 2025