Countries › Uruguay › Guide › 13. Regulation › Cartels and abuse of dominance in Uruguay

Cartels and abuse of dominance in Uruguay

Argentina. For full detail on Argentina, go to The Argentine Thread.

Last verified: 2026-10-27 · Status: Stable

Ley 18.159 bans abuse of a dominant position and any conduct that restricts competition, and since 2019 lists hard core cartels between competitors (price fixing, output limits, market sharing, bid rigging) as expressly prohibited. The Comisión de Promoción y Defensa de la Competencia investigates on its own initiative or on complaint, can seek dawn raid style court orders without notice, and fines up to the highest of UI 20 million (about US$3.3 million), 10 percent of turnover or three times the harm. Conduct abroad, including agreements made in Argentina, is caught when it has effects in Uruguay; claims and sanctions prescribe five years after the conduct.

USD figures use UYU 40.210 per US dollar, the BCU quotation for DLS. USA BILLETE on 27 October 2026; amounts in Unidades Indexadas (UI) use UYU 6.6792 per UI, the BCU quotation for 27 October 2026, both retrieved from the BCU quotations service on 27 October 2026. Amounts in Unidades Reajustables (UR) use UYU 1,940.77 per UR, the value fixed by Decreto 229/026 (IMPO lists it as the latest UR, in force for September 2026). Conversions are rounded and for orientation only.

Key facts

Hard core cartels expressly prohibited	Yes: price fixing, output limits, market or customer sharing, bid rigging, and the same via associations Ley 18.159 art. 4 BIS (Ley 19.833), as of 2026-10-27 · in force
Competition law reaches conduct abroad with effects in the country	Yes Ley 18.159 art. 3, as of 2026-10-27 · in force
Deadline to answer an information request from the competition authority	10 calendar daysLey 18.159 art. 14, as of 2026-10-27 · in force
Minimum fine for failing to cooperate with the competition authority	5000 UILey 18.159 art. 17, as of 2026-10-27 · in force
Leniency for cartel whistleblowers	Special mitigating factor only (no immunity programme in the law) Ley 18.159 art. 17, as of 2026-10-27 · in force
Limitation period for competition infringements and damages claims	5 yearsLey 18.159 art. 28, as of 2026-10-27 · in force
Directors and managers can be fined	Yes, if they actively contributed Ley 18.159 art. 19, as of 2026-10-27 · in force
Suspension to negotiate cease commitments	10 calendar daysLey 18.159 art. 16, as of 2026-10-27 · in force

The rule

1. All markets are governed by the principles and rules of free competition, except limits set by law for reasons of general interest. Abuse of a dominant position is prohibited, as are all practices, conduct or recommendations, individual or concerted, whose effect or object is to restrict, limit, hinder, distort or prevent current or future competition in the relevant market. Gaining the market through greater efficiency is not a restriction of competition, and exercising a right or exceptional prerogative granted by law is not an anticompetitive practice. The law binds every individual or company, public or private, local or foreign, carrying out economic activity in Uruguay, and also those acting abroad insofar as their activity has effects, in whole or in part, in Uruguay.
Cost to do it: No registration or fee; the cost is antitrust review of commercial practices.
Example: A Uruguayan dairy that wins share by cutting costs and prices is not infringing the law, because conquest of the market through efficiency is expressly allowed. / A supply agreement signed in Buenos Aires between two foreign producers that splits the Uruguayan market is reached by art. 3 because its effects are felt in Uruguay.Ley Nº 18.159 (Defence of Free Competition), art. 2 and 3, 2007-07-20 official text · verified 2026-10-27

2. Concerted practices, conduct or recommendations between competitors are expressly prohibited when they: (1) fix, directly or indirectly, prices or other commercial or service conditions; (2) oblige production, processing, distribution or sale of only a restricted quantity of goods or a restricted number, volume or frequency of services; (3) divide, distribute, allocate or impose market shares, zones or segments, customers or supply sources; (4) fix, agree or coordinate bids or abstention in tenders, contests or auctions; and (5) the same practices decided through business associations or trade groups.
Cost to do it: No defence by market size is written into art. 4 BIS; exposure is the art. 17 fine, from UI 100,000 (about UYU 667,920, US$16,611) upward.
Example: Three fuel distributors that agree through their chamber on a common margin infringe art. 4 BIS numerals 1 and 5. / Two foreign bidders that agree who will win a Uruguayan public tender worth US$5 million commit bid rigging under art. 4 BIS numeral 4.Ley Nº 18.159, art. 4 BIS added by Ley Nº 19.833 art. 2, art. 4 BIS, 2019-09-20 official text · verified 2026-10-27 · changed: Ley Nº 19.833 of 20 September 2019 added art. 4 BIS, listing hard core cartels as expressly prohibited, and reworded art. 4.

3. The following practices, listed as examples, are prohibited when they have the anticompetitive object or effect described in art. 2: (A) agreeing or imposing purchase or sale prices or other trading conditions; (B) limiting production, distribution or technological development to the detriment of competitors or consumers; (C) applying unequal conditions to equivalent transactions, putting others at a significant disadvantage; (D) tying contracts to unrelated obligations; (E) blocking competitors' access to essential infrastructure; (F) obstructing market entry; (G) setting exclusive zones or activities; (H) unjustified refusal to sell goods or provide services; and (I) the same practices decided through trade associations. A position is dominant when one or more agents can substantially affect the relevant variables of the market regardless of competitors, buyers or suppliers, and it is abused when they act improperly to gain advantages or harm others in a way that would not be possible without that position. The relevant market is defined by substitute products and geographic scope.
Cost to do it: No fee; the cost is legal review of exclusivity, rebate, tying and refusal to supply policies, especially for companies with high market shares.
Example: A port terminal operator that refuses access to its only berth to a new shipping line without objective reason risks an essential facilities case under art. 4 E. / A US software vendor dominant in a Uruguayan niche that requires customers to buy unrelated services as a condition of licence risks a tying case under art. 4 D.Ley Nº 18.159, art. 4 as reworded by Ley Nº 19.833 art. 1, art. 5 and 6, art. 4, 5 and 6, 2019-09-20 official text · verified 2026-10-27

4. The Commission investigates on its own initiative or on complaint. Before opening a formal investigation it may require information from anyone and may ask the civil courts, confidentially and without notice to the targets, for evidence measures such as inspection and copying of commercial documents, books, minutes and accounting databases. Anyone, local or foreign, may file a written complaint and may ask for confidentiality of identity for good reason. Every person must provide information and documents requested by the Commission within 10 calendar days; if a party under investigation fails to do so, the failure is a presumption against it, though trade secrets need not be disclosed. The Commission may order interim cessation if the conduct may cause serious harm and may seek court interim measures without counter security, which lapse if the administrative case is not opened within 30 calendar days. Failure to cooperate can itself be fined, with a minimum fine of UI 5,000.
Cost to do it: Responding to information requests within 10 days; fines for non cooperation start at UI 5,000 (about UYU 33,396, US$831).
Example: A supermarket chain that receives an information request on 2 November 2026 must answer by 12 November 2026. / A foreign parent that ignores a request about its Uruguayan subsidiary's pricing creates a presumption against the group and risks a separate fine.Ley Nº 18.159, art. 10 as reworded by Ley Nº 19.996 art. 136, art. 11 to 15 and 17, art. 10 to 15 and 17, 2021-11-03 official text · verified 2026-10-27

5. The Commission may suspend the case for up to 10 calendar days to agree with the alleged infringer a commitment to stop or change the conduct, unless the illegality and the author are evident; in abuse of dominance cases where the complainant is the only party harmed, it may also suspend for 10 days for conciliation at the joint request of both. If the conduct is proven, the Commission must order it to stop and sanction those responsible with a warning, a warning published in two national newspapers at the infringer's cost, or a fine from UI 100,000 up to the highest of UI 20,000,000, 10 percent of the infringer's annual turnover or three times the harm caused if determinable. Fines are graded by the harm, the degree of participation, intent, recidivism and conduct during the proceedings. In cartels, reporting the agreement or providing evidence that allows the others to be sanctioned is a special mitigating factor. Resolutions are published on the Commission's website and a final fine is directly enforceable.
Cost to do it: Fine range from UI 100,000 (about UYU 667,920, US$16,611) to the highest of UI 20,000,000 (about UYU 133,584,000, US$3.32 million), 10 percent of turnover or three times the harm.
Example: A cartel member with annual turnover of UYU 3,000,000,000 faces a ceiling of UYU 300,000,000 (10 percent), above the UYU 133,584,000 fixed limb; being first to report is a special mitigating factor. / A US subsidiary with US$10 million of turnover faces a ceiling of about US$3.32 million (the UI 20,000,000 limb), because 10 percent of turnover is only US$1 million.Ley Nº 18.159, art. 16, 17 (inciso 5 as reworded by Ley Nº 19.355 art. 205), 18 and 20, art. 16, 17, 18 and 20, 2015-12-19 official text · verified 2026-10-27

6. Besides fining the company, the Commission may fine members of the board and representatives who actively contributed to the conduct. Conduct of a company controlled by another is also attributable to the controlling company, and the liability of the controlled company's directors may be imputed to those holding the same positions in the controlling company.
Cost to do it: Personal exposure of directors and managers to fines in the same art. 17 range; D&O insurance and compliance training are the usual mitigants.
Example: The general manager of a Uruguayan distributor who negotiated a price agreement with rivals can be fined personally. / A US parent can be held responsible for its Uruguayan subsidiary's abuse of dominance, and its own directors can be reached through art. 19.Ley Nº 18.159, art. 19, 2007-07-20 official text · verified 2026-10-27

7. Actions arising from prohibited practices prescribe five years after the conduct, both for the public power to investigate and sanction and for the right of those directly harmed to obtain compensation for damages. Prescription is interrupted by the act opening an investigation on the Commission's own initiative or by the act ordering that the complaint be served on the alleged infringer. Where matters not covered by the law or its regulation arise, the general administrative procedure rules of Decreto Nº 500/991 apply.
Cost to do it: Litigation cost for damages claims before the ordinary courts; no specific fee in Ley 18.159.
Example: A customer overcharged by a cartel that ended in March 2023 has until March 2028 to claim damages, unless prescription is interrupted. / A foreign buyer harmed by a Uruguayan cartel can claim damages within the same five year period.Ley Nº 18.159, art. 28 and art. 29 as reworded by Ley Nº 20.212 art. 191, art. 28 and 29, 2023-11-06 official text · verified 2026-10-27

8. In markets regulated by the BCU, URSEC or URSEA, the Commission remains competent for conduct cases but must notify the sector regulator when it decides on the admissibility of a complaint or opens an own initiative investigation. The Commission is a decentralized body within the Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas with three members appointed by the Executive in Council of Ministers for six year terms, and may issue general rules, market studies and non binding recommendations to public bodies.
Cost to do it: No fee; firms in regulated sectors should expect coordination between the Commission and their regulator.
Example: A complaint about bank card fees is handled by the Commission, which informs the BCU when it rules on admissibility. / A US telecom investor should expect URSEC to be informed when a conduct case against it is opened.Ley Nº 18.159, art. 10 as reworded by Ley Nº 19.996 art. 136, art. 21, 22 and 26, art. 10, 21, 22 and 26, 2021-11-03 official text · verified 2026-10-27

Sanction	Rule	Approx. UYU	Approx. USD
Warning	Art. 17 A
Published warning	Two national newspapers, at infringer's cost
Minimum fine	UI 100,000	667,920	16,611
Minimum fine for non cooperation	UI 5,000	33,396	831
Maximum fine, fixed limb	UI 20,000,000	133,584,000	3.32 million
Maximum fine, turnover limb	10% of annual turnover
Maximum fine, harm limb	3 times the harm, if determinable

Sanctions under Ley 18.159 art. 17 (UYU and USD at the rates in the FX note)

Tool	Term	Article
Information request	10 calendar days to answer	art. 14
Court ordered evidence measures without notice	Before or during the case	art. 11
Interim cessation	Any time, if serious harm	art. 13
Court interim measures	Lapse if case not opened within 30 calendar days	art. 15
Cease commitment or conciliation	Suspension up to 10 calendar days	art. 16

Investigation tools

Worked example

Cartel fine: a distributor with annual turnover of UYU 1,500,000,000 (US$37.30 million) joins a price agreement. Ten percent of turnover is UYU 150,000,000, above the UI 20,000,000 limb of UYU 133,584,000, so the ceiling is UYU 150,000,000 (US$3.73 million) unless three times the harm is higher (Ley 18.159 art. 17).
Information request: a request served on Monday 2 November 2026 must be answered by Thursday 12 November 2026 (10 calendar days from the day after service, art. 14).
Prescription: a bid rigging scheme that ended on 30 June 2022 can be sanctioned and sued for damages until 30 June 2027 unless the Commission opens a case earlier (art. 28).

Step by step

Map competitor contacts, trade association meetings and information exchanges; stop any discussion of prices, margins, capacity, customers or bids.
Review distribution, exclusivity, rebates, tying and refusal to supply policies if your share is high in any Uruguayan market.
Keep a document retention and response protocol so information requests can be answered within 10 calendar days.
Prepare for court ordered evidence measures without notice: designate who receives inspectors and calls counsel.
If you discover a cartel, assess early reporting to the Commission, which is a special mitigating factor under art. 17.
Train directors and managers, who can be fined personally, and align group policies because parents are liable for controlled companies.

Common traps

Art. 4 BIS has no efficiency defence written in: competitors agreeing prices or bids are infringing regardless of size.
Uruguay has no immunity leniency programme in the law; reporting only mitigates the fine.
Recommendations by a trade association count as concerted practices of its members.
Failure to answer an information request is presumed against the investigated party and can itself be fined.
The five year limitation period also covers private damages claims, which follow ordinary court rules.
A merger clearance does not shield later conduct from investigation.

Sources

← Merger control in UruguayPersonal data protection in Uruguay →