EU Accuses CEMEX, Chemical Firms of Price Coordination

The European Commission has accused CEMEX and other construction chemical companies of coordinating price increases in France, Germany, and Spain between 2021 and 2022.

The European Commission has formally notified CEMEX and several construction-chemical manufacturers and industry associations of its preliminary view that they participated in anticompetitive practices affecting the supply of additives used in cement, concrete and mortar across France, Germany, and Spain.

The allegations cover conduct between 2021 and 2022, when the companies and associations allegedly coordinated price increases for construction chemicals. These products are used to modify properties such as strength, durability, setting time, and workability, making them an important input for construction and infrastructure projects. The Commission believes the suspected coordination may have contributed to higher construction costs in the affected markets.

The regulator issued statements of objections following an investigation that began with unannounced inspections in several European Union member states in October 2023. A statement of objections represents a formal stage in an antitrust investigation, but it does not constitute a final finding that the companies violated competition law.

CEMEX Named in France and Germany Investigations

In France, the Commission sent objections to CEMEX, Chryso, Mapei, Master Builders Solutions, MC Bauchemie, Sika, and TAM, as well as the industry association SYNAD. The investigation into the German market covers CEMEX, Ha-Be, Mapei, Master Builders Solutions, MC Bauchemie, Liesen, Remei, and Sika, together with the trade association Deutsche Bauchemie. For Spain, the companies named were Chryso, Mapei, Master Builders Solutions, MC Bauchemie, and Sika, alongside the industry association ANFAH.

CEMEX is therefore involved in the Commission’s preliminary allegations concerning France and Germany, but not those related to Spain.

According to the Commission’s preliminary assessment, the companies and associations may have exchanged or coordinated information concerning future price increases. Such practices can reduce uncertainty among competitors and limit independent price-setting, potentially breaching Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

If the Commission ultimately confirms an infringement, the companies and associations could face fines of up to 10% of their total worldwide annual turnover. The size of any penalty would depend on factors including the seriousness and duration of the conduct, market impact and each company’s participation.

The companies now have the right to examine the evidence in the Commission’s file, submit written responses, and request an oral hearing before a final decision is adopted. The procedure has no predetermined deadline.

Investigation Began With 2023 Inspections

The current case follows coordinated inspections conducted by European competition authorities on Oct. 17, 2023. At the time, the Commission said it was examining possible cartel conduct and restrictive business practices involving chemical additives for cement and admixtures for concrete and mortar.

The inspections were carried out with national competition authorities in the countries concerned and coordinated with the United Kingdom’s Competition and Markets Authority and the Turkish Competition Authority. The Commission also contacted the Antitrust Division of the US Department of Justice.

The regulator emphasized during the initial inspections that the action was only a preliminary investigatory measure and did not mean that the inspected companies were guilty. The same presumption applies to the statements of objections issued in the latest stage of the case.

Construction chemicals can represent a relatively small share of a project’s overall material volume, but they can influence project performance, execution times and maintenance needs. Price coordination involving these inputs could therefore affect contractors, ready-mix concrete producers, cement manufacturers, and infrastructure developers throughout the supply chain.

The case also comes as European authorities increase scrutiny of industrial markets exposed to rising input costs and supply-chain disruptions. Construction companies across Europe faced significant volatility in energy, raw-material, and transportation costs during and after the COVID-19 pandemic, creating a greater regulatory focus on whether price increases reflected market conditions or coordination among competitors.

For CEMEX, the proceeding adds regulatory uncertainty in two European markets. However, no financial penalty has been imposed, and the Commission must still evaluate the companies’ responses before determining whether EU competition rules were breached.

CEMEX had not issued a public response to the European Commission’s latest allegations as of publication. In previous financial disclosures, the company said it was fully cooperating with the investigation and emphasized that the proceedings did not mean European authorities had concluded that it violated competition law. CEMEX also said it was unable to estimate the investigation’s outcome or potential financial impact.