India fined HP $14.4 million for rigging government bids and fixing ink and toner prices

[Skye Jacobs]

Cutting corners: India's antitrust regulator has fined HP's local unit and a group of resellers after finding they coordinated bids and pricing for government technology contracts. The Competition Commission of India said HP India worked with its channel partners to influence bids for computer procurements while controlling prices for ink cartridges, toner, and other printing supplies. The penalties total 1.4 billion rupees, or about $14.4 million.

The case centers on how bids were handled on the Government e-Marketplace, the country's main public procurement platform. According to the regulator, HP India and five resellers coordinated their bids to increase the likelihood that one of them would win government contracts.

In its order, the commission said, "[C]ertain resellers approached HP India to help facilitate an arrangement that would enhance their chances of securing Government supply contracts against other competing HP India resellers."

It said those efforts included limiting which resellers could participate in certain tenders, dividing contracts among themselves, and controlling the issuance of manufacturer authorization forms required to submit bids.

The regulator also pointed to practices such as intervening when bids came in below the platform's pricing guidelines and arranging "cover" bids designed to make a preferred bidder appear more competitive.

The conduct extended beyond hardware. The commission fined HP India 119.8 million rupees for what it described as cartelization in the sale of consumables such as toner and cartridges. Another 21 resellers were fined a combined 35.2 million rupees.

The findings draw in part on WhatsApp messages exchanged between HP India and its Tier-2 reseller partners. In a separate order, the commission said those chats showed the companies operating "in a collusive arrangement" involving "bid rigging, including cover bidding, price fixation, and customer allocation during 2017 – 2020." It said HP India played a central role in the scheme.

HP India pushed back against that characterization. The order notes that the company "humbly objects to HP India's role being characterized as a 'kingpin' of the entire collusive arrangement." It also argued that pressure in the printing supplies market played a role, saying high prices led some resellers to consider switching to counterfeit products in order to remain competitive.

"HP India was commercially forced into a position where it had to support the collusive arrangement adopted by the Tier-2 resellers," the order reads.

The case highlights the economics of the printer business, where hardware sales are closely tied to recurring revenue from proprietary ink and toner. HP has faced criticism for restricting the use of third-party cartridges, including through firmware updates, as part of a strategy designed to keep customers within its ecosystem.

In India, those pressures appear to have extended into the reseller channel, where margins and pricing are closely linked to HP's supply chain.

The Competition Commission has ordered HP India and its partners to stop the conduct and implement competition compliance programs within 60 days. HP has not publicly commented on the fines.

Permalink to story:

India fined HP $14.4 million for rigging government bids and fixing ink and toner prices

 

[MasterMace]

If a business commits a crime and the penalty is a fine it's just the cost of doing business.

 

[yRaz]

If a business commits a crime and the penalty is a fine it's just the cost of doing business.

We need to start charging people with conspiracy to commit fraud. So long as people can be shielded by criminal charges behind a corporate shield this is just going to keep happening. People have become so accustomed to these practices that its almost like some sort of Stockholm syndrome where they actively defend this behavior.

 

[Endymio]

If a business commits a crime and the penalty is a fine it's just the cost of doing business.

Factitiously puerile statements like this obscure the reality here: when only civil laws were broken, not criminal, the only possible penalty is a civil fine.

We need to start charging people with conspiracy to commit fraud.

We need to start charging people with libel when they improperly use terms like "fraud", even when they do so on anonymous Internet forums.

 

[yRaz]

Factitiously puerile statements like this obscure the reality here: when only civil laws were broken, not criminal, the only possible penalty is a civil fine.


We need to start charging people with libel when they improperly use terms like "fraud", even when they do so on anonymous Internet forums.

What Is Fraud? | Colorado General Assembly

content.leg.colorado.gov

an intentional misrepresentation of fact, whether by words or conduct, by false or misleading allegations, or by concealment of what should have been disclosed;
made by one person to another;
with knowledge of its falsity;
for the purpose of inducing the other person to act, and upon which the other person relies;
resulting in injury or damage

 

[Anton Longshot]

OMG $14.4 million - that's BANKRUPCY money!

Goodbye HP it was nice knowing you.

sarcasm/joke tag - the people who clean HP's offices probably find a lot more than that amount of cash on the floor every day.

 

[Endymio]

(fraud link omitted)

What intentional misrepresentation did HP itself -- and not the Tier 2 vendors to whom actually sell to India's government -- perform?

 

[yRaz]

What intentional misrepresentation of fact did HP itself -- and not the Tier 2 vendors to whom actually sell to India's government -- perform?

after finding they coordinated bids and pricing for government technology contracts. The Competition Commission of India said HP India worked with its channel partners to influence bids for computer procurements while controlling prices for ink cartridges, toner, and other printing​

Im not going to go internet lawyer on you, but this is pretty basic stuff legally. Go look up the legal definition of a fact and how it is applied to pricing. There's also plenty of precedent that this is fraud

 

[Endymio]

Im not going to go internet lawyer on you, but this is pretty basic stuff legally. Go look up the legal definition of a fact and how it is applied to pricing. There's also plenty of precedent that this is fraud

You're not fooling anyone with this vague double-talk. You claimed fraud: now support that with a specific example. "Working with channel partners to influence bids" is a great example of anti-competitive business practices. But It Is Not Fraud. Learn what words mean.

There's little doubt that certain vendors in India -- who purchase products from HP -- committed fraud, but not HP itself. Why not admit the truth: "I have zero facts or evidence, I just wish to virtue-signal my hatred for large corporations"?

 

[yRaz]

You're not fooling anyone with this vague double-talk. You claimed fraud: now support that with a specific example. "Working with channel partners to influence bids" is a great example of anti-competitive business practices. But It Is Not Fraud. Learn what words mean.

There's little doubt that certain vendors in India -- who themselves purchase products from HP -- committed fraud, but not HP itself. Why not simply admit the truth: "I have zero facts or evidence, I just wish to virtue-signal my hatred for large corporations"?

Youre just as bad as the libs on here who call me a MAGA anytime I say something they dont like it. Youre going to disagree with anything I say regardless of facts. I post the little AC bit in the other thread just to see if you would reply and you took the bait, hook line and sinker. I never replaced my AC unit, it was new when I got the house. You trot around the forums looking for arguments.

So im going to leave you with a question, why would I put in the work when you wouldn't do the same for me?

 

[Endymio]

Youre going to disagree with anything I say regardless of facts.

First you must use a fact. I'm perfectly willing to be proven wrong, but nothing in this story suggest fraud, and even India itself didn't accuse HP of fraud.

So im going to leave you with a question, why would I put in the work when you wouldn't do the same for me?

Whoa, what? You already claimed fraud -- now you're admitting you'd have to "put in work" to actually find any evidence of it? Seems you made my point for me.

 

[yRaz]

First you must use a fact. I'm perfectly willing to be proven wrong, but nothing in this story suggest fraud, and even India itself didn't accuse HP of fraud.


Whoa, what? You already claimed fraud -- now you're admitting you'd have to "put in work" to actually find any evidence of it? Seems you made my point for me.

I wouldn't have to put in work to find it, but to word it and edit posts with links and for what? You are such a contrarian I could say blu, you'd say red, I say left you say right. And it's not just me, you have one of the most negative posting ratios I've ever seen on the forum which is all that much more amazing because we have significantly more members than we did 10 years ago. I mean, you derailed an entire thread over AC refrigerant

 

[Anton Longshot]

Youre just as bad as the libs on here who call me a MAGA anytime I say something they dont like it. Youre going to disagree with anything I say regardless of facts. I post the little AC bit in the other thread just to see if you would reply and you took the bait, hook line and sinker. I never replaced my AC unit, it was new when I got the house. You trot around the forums looking for arguments.

So im going to leave you with a question, why would I put in the work when you wouldn't do the same for me?

These days places like TS are full of people who only join so they can f*** with other members. They don't care about tech or science at all.
As most if not all of these guys are American I suspect it's because of the adminstration that works hard to inflict the maximum amounts of damage on the country, perhaps irreversible. Many feel powerless and angry and lash out at everyone they can reach from the anonymous safety of their homes. Not the most admirable course of action...resisting the govt makes a lot more sense to me.

I'm getting fed up with it but before I leave the sites they ruin I'll tell it like it is and also poke fun at and mock the worst of them.

 

[JMGuy]

The legal system draws a sharp line between cheating a customer and cheating the market.

@Endymio is right because fraud requires a specific lie—like selling empty boxes or misrepresenting what a product can do to trick someone into a purchase. HP didn't lie about what they were selling. Instead, they rigged the bidding system behind the scenes with their partners to artificially inflate prices.

@yRaz while you are correct that corporations often treat civil fines as a mere tax on profits, calling it "fraud" is legally incorrect. Price-fixing and bid-rigging are severe antitrust violations handled by civil regulatory watchdogs, not criminal fraud charges handled by prosecutors.

Using incorrect legal definitions completely derails arguments.

Y’all need to simmer and try and find more civility—it’s ok to be correct, it’s ok to be incorrect, it’s ok to be partially correct, and it’s ok to disagree with each other.

 

[yRaz]

The legal system draws a sharp line between cheating a customer and cheating the market.

@Endymio is right because fraud requires a specific lie—like selling empty boxes or misrepresenting what a product can do to trick someone into a purchase. HP didn't lie about what they were selling. Instead, they rigged the bidding system behind the scenes with their partners to artificially inflate prices.

@yRaz while you are correct that corporations often treat civil fines as a mere tax on profits, calling it "fraud" is legally incorrect. Price-fixing and bid-rigging are severe antitrust violations handled by civil regulatory watchdogs, not criminal fraud charges handled by prosecutors.

Using incorrect legal definitions completely derails arguments.

Y’all need to simmer and try and find more civility—it’s ok to be correct, it’s ok to be incorrect, it’s ok to be partially correct, and it’s ok to disagree with each other.

If three construction companies secretly agree on who will win a public contract and submit fake, uncompetitive bids to make the process look real, they are committing price-fixing (by colluding). However, because they are actively lying to the government by signing certifications stating their bids were arrived at independently, they can also be charged with mail or wire fraud.

There is definitely fraud going on here and going off on technicalities just to make someone else look like a complete fool is foolish. There is often lots of overlap between anti trust cases and fraud. So much so that to derail a casual discussion on the nuances of legal definitions is silly. Anyone who read my post understood the concepts I was trying to convey. This is the comments section not a court room

 

[JMGuy]

If three construction companies secretly agree on who will win a public contract and submit fake, uncompetitive bids to make the process look real, they are committing price-fixing (by colluding). However, because they are actively lying to the government by signing certifications stating their bids were arrived at independently, they can also be charged with mail or wire fraud.

There is definitely fraud going on here and going off on technicalities just to make someone else look like a complete fool is foolish. There is often lots of overlap between anti trust cases and fraud. So much so that to derail a casual discussion on the nuances of legal definitions is silly. Anyone who read my post understood the concepts I was trying to convey. This is the comments section not a court room

Recognize the disconnect.

Yes, there is legal overlap, @yRaz—certifying a rigged bid as "independent" absolutely crosses into fraudulent misrepresentation in many jurisdictions. But it’s a gray area where antitrust violations and criminal fraud meet.

The disconnect in this is that you're looking at corrupt behavior of actors involved, while @Endymio is looking at the specific regulatory ruling issued against HP.

Both perspectives hold truth.

Sure, a comment section is not a courtroom, but when definitions get blurry, the debate turns into a fight over words instead of a conversation about corporate accountability. It loses the thread in arguing who is “right”—which is pretty useless all around.

 

[yRaz]

Recognize the disconnect.

Yes, there is legal overlap, @yRaz—certifying a rigged bid as "independent" absolutely crosses into fraudulent misrepresentation in many jurisdictions. But it’s a gray area where antitrust violations and criminal fraud meet.

The disconnect in this is that you're looking at corrupt behavior of actors involved, while @Endymio is looking at the specific regulatory ruling issued against HP.

Both perspectives hold truth.

Sure, a comment section is not a courtroom, but when definitions get blurry, the debate turns into a fight over words instead of a conversation about corporate accountability. It loses the thread in arguing who is “right”—which is pretty useless all around.

But everything doesn't have to get derailed into a debate. Noone has actually talked about HP or what they did in this thread yet. Noone is actually talking about the article, it went straight to rules of engagement when noone was looking for a fight.