Following temporary caps on profit margins, Serbia has adopted its first Trading Practices Act, aiming to systematically regulate relations between retailers, suppliers, and producers. Unlike previous measures that directly impacted prices, the new regulation bans unfair trading practices, restricts certain rebates and fees, and grants new powers to the Commission for Protection of Competition. The goal is to establish more predictable business rules.
Modelled after the European Union (EU) Unfair Trading Practices Directive, the new Trading Practices Act covers a much broader spectrum of products than is the case in most European countries. The new regulations introduce limits on trade rebates, prohibit certain fees charged to suppliers, ban “grey” and “black” trading practices, and establish whistleblowing mechanisms.
“For the first time in Serbia, this Act codifies unfair trading practices, placing them on a so-called black list, whilst there is also a grey list of practices—meaning cases that will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis,” economist Saša Đogović told Bloomberg Adria.
The new Trading Practices Act “is not necessarily bad news for retailers, but it changes the investment logic in the Serbian retail sector,” Tanja Tanzier, a retail consultant at Colliers International House Austria, told Bloomberg Adria. She explained that the additional regulation of the Serbian market should not deter investors, but rather introduce a degree of predictability. “Investors do not run away from regulation; they run away from sudden political interventions and rules that change overnight,” Tanzier noted.
It is crucial that the implementation of the Act be “clear, uniform for all market participants, and enforceable in practice,” Univerexport stated in a written response to Bloomberg Adria. “At this moment, it is too early to talk about specific effects on individual arrangements with suppliers, as much will depend on how the regulations are applied and on additional interpretations by competent institutions,” they added.
A shift in the balance of power
For years, the strongest link in Serbia’s supply chain has been the retail chains. “The Act should help restore balance,” pointed out Veljko Mijušković, a professor at the Faculty of Economics in Belgrade. By passing it, Serbia has created the conditions to move away from ad-hoc interventions, such as the Regulation on Retail Margins, which capped margins for certain types of groceries and hygiene products at a maximum of 20 per cent. The regulation was in force from 1 September 2025 to 1 March 2026. “We faced serious resistance from retail chains; one even sued Serbia, and the matter is heading to international arbitration,” Mijušković recalled.
Ahold Delhaize, the owner of Delhaize Serbia – which operates the Maxi and Shop&Go supermarket chains – sued Serbia in February over the margin caps imposed by the regulation. They claim that due to financial losses, Delhaize was forced to close 25 stores. The request for arbitration, submitted to the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) under the World Bank Group in Washington, is still pending.
After the margin regulation expired, Serbia transitioned to a legislative solution. “The difference between the margin regulation and this Act is that the regulation directly hits prices and profitability, whereas the Act attempts to regulate relationships within the supply chain. From an investor’s perspective, this is far more acceptable,” Tanzier evaluated.
Tanzier believes the new Trading Practices Act should be interpreted as an attempt by Serbia to move past ad-hoc interventions, calling it a “positive signal”. However, it remains to be seen how the law will be enforced. “If the Commission for Protection of Competition acts transparently, with clear criteria and a practice that stabilises over time, the risk for retail chains will decrease,” Tanzier emphasised. Nonetheless, she warned, “if the regulation is applied selectively, as an instrument of political control, it will introduce additional risk for investors.”
A new weapon for the Commission for Protection of Competition
The Trading Practices Act could also become the most powerful weapon in the arsenal of the Commission for Protection of Competition. It has expanded the Commission’s jurisdiction, making it the primary regulator in the supply chain not only for food products but also for agricultural goods. In 2024, under the Law on Protection of Competition, the Commission launched antitrust proceedings against four major retail chains (Delhaize, Mercator-S, Univerexport, and DIS) over suspicions of price-fixing. The findings have not yet been published.
Now, alongside its existing powers under competition law, the Commission can initiate ex officio proceedings to determine whether the Act has been breached. The penalties the Commission can impose under the new law range from 0.1 to 0.2 per cent of the total annual turnover of the non-compliant retail chain.
Suppliers, many of whom are small-scale producers, can now appeal directly to the Commission if they suspect retail chains are imposing unfair terms or abusing their bargaining power. “They stand to benefit the most from this Act,” Mijušković noted. He pointed out that the law should protect them from delayed payments as well as from “extremely high costs” related to getting products onto shelves.
“One of the greatest impacts of the Act is its effort to neutralise the coercive leverage of retailers, which is now classified as an unfair practice between business partners,” Saša Đogović observed. He stressed that a particularly vital innovation is the introduction of a whistleblowing framework. “This encourages manufacturers and suppliers to provide the competent authorities with information regarding pressure, fees, and disputed contracts,” he highlighted.
“Until now, suppliers rarely reported large chains because they feared losing shelf space. The introduction of an institutional channel reduces that fear,” Đogović said. However, the issue of shelf placement or reduced order volumes is now explicitly addressed under the new Act. “I don’t expect a wave of reports immediately, but I do expect it to influence the behaviour of all actors in the retail sector,” Đogović added.
Modelled on the EU Unfair Trading Practices Directive, the passing of this Act indicates that Serbia is trying to align a portion of its market rules with European standards, including competition and supply chain relations. However, merely passing the law will not suffice to change the perception of investors or Brussels. “For Serbia’s negotiations under the competition chapter, what matters more is whether institutions can enforce the rules independently, consistently, and free from political pressure,” Tanzier assessed.
Unlike similar European laws in this field, Serbia’s Trading Practices Act does not apply solely to food products, but also encompasses cosmetics, household detergents, and agricultural goods. “This was done to mitigate the risk of rebates and other fees, which are restricted on food, being shifted over onto other product categories,” Đogović concluded.
Will the trading practices act lead to cheaper food?
The Act should contribute to more transparent price formation, according to the Ministry of Trade. “Although the law does not directly bring down prices, it creates the room for reductions to occur,” Mijušković said.
While the new law caps import duties and rebates, food prices depend on more than just these factors. “Logistics costs, wages, and energy costs also influence prices, so an automatic drop in prices should not be expected, but this Act provides the foundation to contribute to that,” Mijušković pointed out.
Two months since the Act was passed, food prices in Serbia have decreased slightly. In May, annual inflation recorded a year-on-year increase of 3.5 per cent, but the food and non-alcoholic beverages segment as a whole saw a 1.5 per cent year-on-year price drop. All subcategories within food recorded lower prices, except for the Fruit and Nuts subcategory – though even there, the increase was minimal (0.2 per cent).
(Bloomberg Adria, 02.07.2026)