The Missing Subjects on Korea’s Antitrust Report Card
The Korea Fair Trade Commission (KFTC) keeps getting high marks. Consumers are entitled to ask what’s being graded.
The agency has earned a “Very Good” assessment in Global Competition Review’s (GCR) annual competition-authority ratings for 13 consecutive years. The latest assessment, based on its 2025 performance, praised its increased cartel decisions, shorter investigations, and merger remedies—conditions imposed on deals—in digital markets. But did those decisions benefit consumers? Did the agency enforce the law evenhandedly and give firms a fair chance to challenge its evidence?
Those questions drive critiques by market-oriented law & economics scholars and policy organizations. They raise concerns about the KFTC’s proposed expansion of merger review, digital rules aimed at preventing hypothetical harms, its treatment of foreign firms, and longstanding limits on access to evidence. Each bears on whether enforcement protects competition, encourages innovation, and treats firms fairly.
The KFTC has legitimate responsibilities, and some investigations have involved serious allegations. An agency can be capable and internationally respected while applying overly aggressive legal standards or hampering firms’ defense. South Korea’s competition policy should earn its marks through sound, fair decisions that protect consumers. Closing files is the easier test.