Our Key Milestones

Establishment of the Competition Commission of Singapore

We were established as the Competition Commission of Singapore under the Ministry of Trade and Industry in January 2005.

In December 2005, we issued a set of guidelines for businesses to understand how the Competition Act would be enforced.

Pest Control Operators Fined for Bid-rigging

Our first infringement decision was issued in 2008 against six pest control companies that were caught colluding in their tender submissions. One of the companies with existing customer relationships would coordinate with competitors by sharing their intended bid prices. The other companies would then deliberately submit higher quotes, ensuring the first company would win the contract.

SISTIC Fined $989,000 for Abusing its Dominant Position

The first abuse of dominance case saw SISTIC* fined for abusing its dominant position in Singapore’s ticketing service industry. SISTIC had entered into  exclusive agreements with venue operators and event promoters, requiring them to use SISTIC as their sole ticketing service provider. In 2010, SISTIC was fined $989,000 and directed to remove all exclusive clauses from their agreements.

Supply of Formula Milk: Promoting Competition in the Industry

The average retail price of formula milk more than doubled between 2007 and 2016. To find out the reasons, an in-depth market inquiry was conducted in 2015 and 2016.

Uncovering Singapore's First International Cartel Case

Singapore’s first international cartel case — in 2014, four Japanese ball and roller bearings manufacturers and their Singapore subsidiaries were penalised for price fixing.

These companies were fined $9.3 million for unlawful exchange of information and secretly coordinating prices using code names.

This is the third image

Administering the Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act

Since April 2018, we were renamed the Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore to reflect our expanded role and mandate, when we  took on the additional function of administering the Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act 2003 (CPFTA).

As the appointed administering agency of the CPFTA, we are empowered with investigation and enforcement powers against errant businesses who persist in unfair trade practices.

Grab and Uber: First-Ever Anti-Competitive Merger Case

The first infringement decision against an anti-competitive merger in 2018 against Grab and Uber, which were each other’s closest competitors in the ride-hailing platform service space.

The merger involved Uber selling its Southeast Asian business to Grab in exchange for a 27.5% stake in Grab. This reduced Grab’s incentive to compete after the sale, resulting in higher prices for Grab’s ride-hailing services and Grab holding an 80% share of the market.

Competition in the ride-hailing platform services market in Singapore was substantially lessened. Financial penalties totalling $13 million and remedial directions were imposed to restore market competitiveness and protect consumer interest.

Fresh Chicken Distributors Fined more than $20 Million for Price Fixing

In 2020, CCCS imposed its highest-ever financial penalties, totalling  over $26 million, on 13 fresh chicken distributors for price fixing. These distributors engaged in anti-competitive behaviour by meeting multiple times weekly to discuss and coordinate prices of chicken products in Singapore.

20 Years of Protecting Competition in Singapore's Aviation

In our 20-year journey, we have assessed more than 20 airline agreements!

The aviation industry fuels growth across various sectors including retail and tourism, creating jobs and opportunities.

As regional economies become more interconnected, our work in ensuring fair competition in aviation becomes increasingly important.

Protecting Consumers in the Beauty Industry: Know Your Rights!

Pressure sales tactics, unsubstantiated claims and hidden charges are considered unfair trade practices under the CPFTA. Find out how we took enforcement actions against beauty & hair salons.

Know your rights: ✅ Clear pricing ✅ No hidden fees

Jail for Business Director who Failed to Comply with Court Orders

Mr Kaiden Cheng, the director of Nail Palace, and two Nail Palace outlets were found guilty of contempt of court in 2024. Each outlet was fined $15,000.

The director’s appeal to replace his jail term with a fine was rejected. He was given a 3-month imprisonment due to “continuing, egregious, and persistent” disregard of court orders.

This is the first time we obtained a substantial fine and imprisonment sentence against parties that had infringed the CPFTA.

Taking over Consumer Product Safety and Legal Metrology Functions

Since July 2025, our mandate has expanded to include consumer product safety and legal metrology functions.

Businesses and consumers may now approach us for matters relating to fair trading practices, consumer product safety requirements, and weights and measures compliance.

Visit us at Our Journey: Fostering Competition, Protecting Consumers to discover more.