Politics shapes evolving global antitrust enforcement landscape

We explore this contrast in the report—concluding that regulators are, on the whole, seeking to enforce rules more efficiently through “soft” enforcement tools and focusing resources on sectors that have direct economic and political impacts, with “hard” fines often reserved for select cases where it is deemed necessary to firmly signal deterrence, punish particularly egregious behavior or set an important legal precedent.

Europe very clearly led the charge on enforcement in 2025, accounting for 91% of global fines. This included the two most significant penalties of the year, which epitomized the tough approach that regulators can take to deter harmful conduct in markets with economic and political importance.

But this does not mean that things were quiet elsewhere. Despite the high fines, Europe accounted for just 29% of total decisions, with significant activity in APAC and the Americas (37% and 17% of decisions, respectively).

The disconnect between fines and activity levels appears to reflect a general trend towards more efficient and cost-conscious enforcement. The average length of investigations declined again this year (948 days, down from 1045 in 2024) and regulators across the world have displayed an increased appetite to use commitments, settlements, and other novel enforcement tools instead of hard fines. We consider this in Beyond fines, soft enforcement rises.

Related to this, our data shows a clear trend towards more targeted enforcement efforts. As explained in Consumer and policy objectives underpin enforcement in key sectors, there was heightened scrutiny on markets that directly impact the cost of living, with food, energy, housing, pharma, and transport all firmly in the spotlight. These efforts were not all punitive—regulators continued to provide guidance on where collaboration between competitors could help to promote policy goals like growth, resilience, and sustainability.

Looking ahead to 2026, it seems inevitable that antitrust enforcement will continue to be shaped by the strategic priorities of the governments that regulators answer to. 

While macroeconomics will undoubtedly continue to play an important role, we may increasingly see priorities shaped by geopolitics, with national security aims, industrial policy objectives, and related trade tariffs already affecting case selection and timing. As the European Commission (EC)’s president, Ursula Von der Leyen, recently put it, antitrust policy needs to be “fit for a new age” with an increasingly hostile and fragmented political environment forcing countries to use antitrust as a way of forging greater economic independence.