發改委派3個調查組查價格戰。 2012年09月05日
電商展開價格戰之後，線下實體店，一度跟進，促銷
國家發改委價監局，近期已經對電商“價格戰”展開調查，發改委價監局初步調查認為，價格戰過程中，有電商的促銷宣傳行為，涉嫌虛構原價、欺詐消費者。
“電商價格戰”已經引發政府監管部門高度重視。從國家發改委價格監督檢查和反壟斷局了解到，發改委價監局，近期，已經對電商“價格戰”展開調查，發改委價監局初步調查認為，價格戰過程中，有電商的促銷宣傳行為，涉嫌虛構原價、欺詐消費者。
發改委將對此行為，依法懲處，但，目前，未有具體結論及罰款數額。
價格戰，被指“光打雷不下雨”
8月中旬，京東、國美、蘇寧三大電商發起價格戰。
8月14日，京東CEO劉強東率先在微博上稱，京東大家電“三年內，零毛利”，所有大家電，保證比國美蘇寧連鎖店便宜10%以上，將派員進駐蘇寧國美店面。並直接將國美、蘇寧圈定為對手。
此後，蘇寧、國美紛紛應戰，蘇寧易購執行副總裁李斌，下午4點回應，“蘇寧易購所有產品價格，必然低於京東，任何網友發現蘇寧易購價格高於京東，會即時調價並賠付。 ”
國美副總裁何陽青晚上10點，表態，加入價格戰，表示“國美不迴避任何形式價格戰，從8月15日9點開始，國美電器網上商城全線商品價格，將比京東商城低5%。 ”
此舉，引起輿論廣泛關注。但，此後，多家媒體報導證實，電商的所謂價格戰，是“光打雷，不下雨”、“忽悠消費者”。
三路調查組被派出調查
從權威渠道獲悉，在事件發生並引發各界高度關注後，相關部門派出了三個工作組對三家企業都進行了調查。
發改委仍在向幾家電商了解價格戰的情況。
據了解，此次，發改委調查三大電商在“價格戰”中，存在的主要問題有：虛構原價即促銷價高於原價、沒有履行價格承諾以及商家實際有貨，但，卻在網店上，顯示無貨，欺詐消費者。
據了解，按照中國相關法規規定，所謂商品原價是在促銷前7日內，產品交易的最低價格，相關部門的調查顯示，有電商在價格戰過程中，存在虛構原價的行為，也就是說，實際的促銷價，高於之前7日內交易的最低價。
另外，京東CEO劉強東曾在微博上稱，所有大家電,將在未來三年內,保持零毛利。但是，相關部門抽查15種產品顯示，這些產品的毛利率最低達4%，最高達22.43%，即使促銷後最高的毛利率,達到10%。
此外，有的電商承諾低價出售商品，但,在網店上,標明無貨，而實際的調查結果顯示,商家倉庫實際有存貨。另外,有的電商促銷的產品,是獨家經營，其他商家根本沒有，因此,無從比較其此前承諾價格究竟是否為最低價。
具體結論及罰款數額,尚未確定
據了解，此事短時間內,不會有具體結論，依據調查程序,要經歷聽證、告知等程序。目前,未有具體結論及罰款數額。不過,相關部門已表示,將依法辦事。
上述相關政府人士表示，正常的市場競爭應當鼓勵，但,網上銷售,要符合規範不能欺詐消費者。
商務部對電商價格戰,首先,表示關注
針對此次轟轟烈烈的電商價格戰，商務部是首個表態的政府監管部門。
8月16日，商務部新聞發言人沈丹陽就表示，商務部已經註意到個別大型電子商務企業競相採取降價方式,開展銷售活動，以及,由此引發的市場熱議和消費者,以及供貨廠商的關切。商務部將繼續關注此事的進展。判斷這場“價格戰”是否違法，需要有法律法規做依據。
目前,與降價促銷相關的法律規定,包括《反不正當競爭法》、《反壟斷法》及《價格法》，價格主管部門、工商執法部門等執法主體依法調查取證後，才能下結論。
8月17日，商務部流通發展司副司長王德生表示，電子商務交易各方的權責、義務，除了在相關法規裡進行完善外，在相關標準中,要進行細化和補充，《電子商務營銷運營規範》等標準,已列入製定計劃。
為適應電子商務、網絡購物發展的需要，商務部,今後,將加大這方面標準的製定力度，比如,已經列入計劃的《網店信用評價指標》、《網絡團購企業管理規範》、《網絡團購企業信用評價體系》、《電子商務營銷運營規範》。
相關法律細則
《價格法》第十四條經營者不得有下列不正當價格行為：
(一)相互串通，操縱市場價格，損害其他經營者或者消費者的合法權益；
(二)在依法降價處理鮮活商品、季節性商品、積壓商品等商品外，為了排擠競爭對手或者獨占市場，以低於成本的價格傾銷，擾亂正常的生產經營秩序，損害國家利益或者其他經營者的合法權益；
(三)捏造、散佈漲價信息，哄抬價格，推動商品價格過高上漲的；
(四)利用虛假的或者使人誤解的價格手段，誘騙消費者或者其他經營者與其進行交易；
(五)提供相同商品或者服務，對具有同等交易條件的其他經營者實行價格歧視；
(六)採取抬高等級或者壓低等級等手段收購、銷售商品或者提供服務，變相提高或者壓低價格。
說法
罰款金額難以判斷
從行政職權的角度出發，發改委確實有權對於價格欺詐,進行調查和罰款，以此保證消費者的權益。
此前的京東、國美、蘇寧的價格戰,把話說得太滿，比如說,銷售零毛利，理論上,是根本無法做到的。 “商業宣傳必須保證最起碼的真實性，這件事情,提醒所有的商家,炒作,宣傳,一過頭,就可能違法。目前,中國整個商業環境,都不是很誠信，通過這個調查,有利於警醒商家。 ”
至於可能的處罰金額,這個案件,具有復雜性，不好判斷具體數量,以及罰款金額。因為,一方面,這幾家電商確實沒有按照宣傳的力度執行;但,另一方面，這幾家電商在某些商品上,確認履行了承諾，因此,難以判斷具體每家的數額，可能最終的罰款額度,就是幾十萬元。
按照2010年修訂實施的《價格違法行為行政處罰規定》的第七條規定，“利用虛假的,或者使人誤解的價格手段，誘騙消費者,或者其他經營者與其進行交易的，責令改正，沒收違法所得，並處違法所得5倍以下的罰款；沒有違法所得的，處5萬元以上,50萬元以下的罰款；情節嚴重的，責令停業整頓，或者,由工商行政管理機關吊銷營業執照。 ”
发改委派3个调查组查价格战。2012年09月05日
电商展开价格战之后，线下实体店，一度跟进，促销
国家发改委价监局，近期已经对电商“价格战”展开调查，发改委价监局初步调查认为，价格战过程中，有电商的促销宣传行为，涉嫌虚构原价、欺诈消费者。
“电商价格战”已经引发政府监管部门高度重视。从国家发改委价格监督检查和反垄断局了解到，发改委价监局，近期，已经对电商“价格战”展开调查，发改委价监局初步调查认为，价格战过程中，有电商的促销宣传行为，涉嫌虚构原价、欺诈消费者。
发改委将对此行为，依法惩处，但，目前，未有具体结论及罚款数额。
价格战，被指“光打雷不下雨”
8月中旬，京东、国美、苏宁三大电商发起价格战。
8月14日，京东CEO刘强东率先在微博上称，京东大家电“三年内，零毛利”，所有大家电，保证比国美苏宁连锁店便宜10%以上，将派员进驻苏宁国美店面。并直接将国美、苏宁圈定为对手。
此后，苏宁、国美纷纷应战，苏宁易购执行副总裁李斌，下午4点回应，“苏宁易购所有产品价格，必然低于京东，任何网友发现苏宁易购价格高于京东，会即时调价并赔付。 ”
国美副总裁何阳青晚上10点，表态，加入价格战，表示“国美不回避任何形式价格战，从8月15日9点开始，国美电器网上商城全线商品价格，将比京东商城低5%。 ”
此举，引起舆论广泛关注。但，此后，多家媒体报道证实，电商的所谓价格战，是“光打雷，不下雨”、“忽悠消费者”。
三路调查组被派出调查
从权威渠道获悉，在事件发生并引发各界高度关注后，相关部门派出了三个工作组对三家企业都进行了调查。
发改委仍在向几家电商了解价格战的情况。
据了解，此次，发改委调查三大电商在“价格战”中，存在的主要问题有：虚构原价即促销价高于原价、没有履行价格承诺以及商家实际有货，但，却在网店上，显示无货，欺诈消费者。
据了解，按照中国相关法规规定，所谓商品原价是在促销前7日内，产品交易的最低价格，相关部门的调查显示，有电商在价格战过程中，存在虚构原价的行为，也就是说，实际的促销价，高于之前7日内交易的最低价。
另外，京东CEO刘强东曾在微博上称，所有大家电,将在未来三年内,保持零毛利。但是，相关部门抽查15种产品显示，这些产品的毛利率最低达4%，最高达22.43%，即使促销后最高的毛利率,达到10%。
此外，有的电商承诺低价出售商品，但,在网店上,标明无货，而实际的调查结果显示,商家仓库实际有存货。另外,有的电商促销的产品,是独家经营，其他商家根本没有，因此,无从比较其此前承诺价格究竟是否为最低价。
具体结论及罚款数额,尚未确定
据了解，此事短时间内,不会有具体结论，依据调查程序,要经历听证、告知等程序。目前,未有具体结论及罚款数额。不过,相关部门已表示,将依法办事。
上述相关政府人士表示，正常的市场竞争应当鼓励，但,网上销售,要符合规范不能欺诈消费者。
商务部对电商价格战,首先,表示关注
针对此次轰轰烈烈的电商价格战，商务部是首个表态的政府监管部门。
8月16日，商务部新闻发言人沈丹阳就表示，商务部已经注意到个别大型电子商务企业竞相采取降价方式,开展销售活动，以及,由此引发的市场热议和消费者,以及供货厂商的关切。商务部将继续关注此事的进展。判断这场“价格战”是否违法，需要有法律法规做依据。
目前,与降价促销相关的法律规定,包括 《反不正当竞争法》、《反垄断法》及《价格法》，价格主管部门、工商执法部门等执法主体依法调查取证后，才能下结论。
8月17日，商务部流通发展司副司长王德生表示，电子商务交易各方的权责、义务，除了在相关法规里进行完善外，在相关标准中,要进行细化和补充，《电子商务营销运营规范》等标准,已列入制定计划。
为适应电子商务、网络购物发展的需要，商务部,今后,将加大这方面标准的制定力度，比如,已经列入计划的《网店信用评价指标》、《网络团购企业管理规范》、《网络团购企业信用评价体系》、《电子商务营销运营规范》。
相关法律细则
《价格法》第十四条 经营者不得有下列不正当价格行为：
(一)相互串通，操纵市场价格，损害其他经营者或者消费者的合法权益；
(二)在依法降价处理鲜活商品、季节性商品、积压商品等商品外，为了排挤竞争对手或者独占市场，以低于成本的价格倾销，扰乱正常的生产经营秩序，损害国家利益或者其他经营者的合法权益；
(三)捏造、散布涨价信息，哄抬价格，推动商品价格过高上涨的；
(四)利用虚假的或者使人误解的价格手段，诱骗消费者或者其他经营者与其进行交易；
(五)提供相同商品或者服务，对具有同等交易条件的其他经营者实行价格歧视；
(六)采取抬高等级或者压低等级等手段收购、销售商品或者提供服务，变相提高或者压低价格。
说法
罚款金额难以判断
从行政职权的角度出发，发改委确实有权对于价格欺诈,进行调查和罚款，以此保证消费者的权益。
此前的京东、国美、苏宁的价格战,把话说得太满，比如说,销售零毛利，理论上,是根本无法做到的。“商业宣传必须保证最起码的真实性，这件事情,提醒所有的商家,炒作,宣传,一过头,就可能违法。目前,中国整个商业环境,都不是很诚信，通过这个调查,有利于警醒商家。 ”
至于可能的处罚金额,这个案件,具有复杂性，不好判断具体数量,以及罚款金额。因为,一方面,这几家电商确实没有按照宣传的力度执行;但,另一方面，这几家电商在某些商品上,确认履行了承诺，因此,难以判断具体每家的数额，可能最终的罚款额度,就是几十万元。
按照2010年修订实施的《价格违法行为行政处罚规定》的第七条规定，“利用虚假的,或者使人误解的价格手段，诱骗消费者,或者其他经营者与其进行交易的，责令改正，没收违法所得，并处违法所得5倍以下的罚款；没有违法所得的，处5万元以上,50万元以下的罚款；情节严重的，责令停业整顿，或者,由工商行政管理机关吊销营业执照。 ”
Development and Reform Commission sent three investigation team to check the price war. September 5, 2012
Electricity to start a price war after the line the store, once follow-up, promotion
The price monitoring bureau of the National Development and Reform Commission, the recent electricity supplier “price war” investigation, the NDRC price monitoring bureau preliminary investigation that the price war in the process, the electrical behavior of the promotional, suspected of original fiction, consumer fraud.
“Electricity price war” has led to government regulatory authorities attach great importance to. Learned from the NDRC price supervision and inspection and anti-monopoly Bureau, NDRC price monitoring bureau, recently, of the electric supplier price war, “to investigate, the NDRC price monitoring bureau preliminary investigation that the process of price war, the electricity supplier promotional behavior suspected of original fiction, consumer fraud.
NDRC will this act punishable by law, but, at present, no concrete conclusions and the amount of the fine.
The price war, accused of “talk and no action”
In mid-August, Jingdong, Gome, Suning three major electricity supplier initiated a price war.
August 14, Jingdong CEO Liu Qiang East took the lead on the microblogging said, Jingdong large appliances “within three years, zero gross profit”, all appliances, to ensure more than 10% cheaper than Gome Suning chain, will deploy staff Suning GOME store. And directly Gome, Suning delineated as opponents.
Since then, Suning, Gome have to fight Suning Tesco executive vice president Li Bin, 16:00 respond, “Suning Tesco prices of all products, and certainly less than Jingdong, any users found Suning Tesco price is higher than Jingdong immediate price adjustment and Peifu . ”
Gome vice president Ho Yang Qing 22:00 position, joined the price war, the country the United States does not evade any form of price war, at 9 o’clock on August 15th, Gome online mall full range of commodity prices, than Jingdong Mall low 5%. ”
This caused widespread concern in public opinion. But, after several media reports confirmed that the electricity supplier of the so-called price war, “light thunder, it does not rain,” Fudge consumers.
The three investigation team was dispatched to survey
Learned from authoritative sources, the incident sparked a high degree of concern, the relevant departments sent three working groups have carried out a survey of the three companies.
Development and Reform Commission, the price war is still to a few appliances supplier to understand the situation.
It is understood that the three major electricity supplier in the Development and Reform Commission investigating the “price war”, the main problems are: original fiction promotional price higher than the original price, and did not fulfill the actual stock price guarantee as well as merchants, but it was in the shop on goods, consumer fraud.
It is understood that, in accordance with the relevant regulations in China, the so-called original price of goods is a promotion within the first seven days, the lowest price of the product transactions, the relevant departments of the investigation, there is electricity in the process of price war, the existence of original fiction behavior, that is, The actual promotional price higher than the lowest price before the 7 days of the transaction.
Addition, Jingdong CEO Liu Qiang East microblogging said all large appliances, in the next three years to maintain zero gross profit. However, the sample of 15 kinds of products related departments, these lowest gross profit margin of 4%, up 22.43%, even if the promotional highest gross profit margin reached 10%.
In addition, some electric commitment to sell cheap merchandise, but indicate no goods in the shop on actual survey results show that the actual merchant warehouse inventory. In addition, some electricity providers promotional products, exclusive dealing, no other businesses, therefore, are not comparable to its previous commitment whether the price is the lowest.
Specific conclusions and the amount of the fine has not been determined
It is understood that this short period of time, there will be no specific conclusions, according to the investigation procedures, to undergo procedures such as hearings, inform. Currently is no specific conclusions, and the amount of the fine. However, the relevant departments have been said, and will act in accordance with the law.
The government said, the normal market competition should be encouraged, but online sales, compliance can not be consumer fraud.
The Ministry of Commerce of the electricity supplier price war, expressed concern
The electricity supplier for the vigorous price war, the Ministry of Commerce is the first position of the government regulatory authorities.
On August 16, the Ministry of Commerce spokesman Shen Danyang, said the Ministry of Commerce has noted that individual large-scale e-commerce enterprises competing to cut prices, sales activities, and the consequent market heat Negotiation consumers, as well as supplier the concern of the manufacturers. The Commerce Department will continue to monitor the progress of this matter. Determine whether this “price war” illegal, laws and regulations need to do basis.
Currently, with the price reduction promotion related to the legal provisions, including the “Anti-Unfair Competition Law, the AML and the Price Law, price departments, industrial and commercial law enforcement agencies and other law enforcement body in accordance with the law to investigate and collect evidence in order to draw conclusions.
On August 17, the the Circulation Development Division of the Ministry of Commerce, Deputy Director Wang Desheng said that e-commerce powers and responsibilities, and obligations of the parties to the transaction, in addition to perfect the relevant laws and regulations in the relevant standards, to refine and supplement “electronic Business Marketing Operations norms “standard has been included in the plan.
In order to meet the needs of the development of e-commerce, online shopping, the Ministry of Commerce, in the future, will increase its efforts to the development of standards in this area, for example, has been included in the plan “shop credit evaluation index”, “network buy corporate governance practices”, Buying Online enterprise credit evaluation system “,” e-commerce marketing operations specifications. ”
Relevant laws and rules
“Price Law” Article 14 An operator shall have the following unfair price behavior:
(A) colluding to manipulate the market price to the detriment of the legitimate rights and interests of other operators or consumers;
(B) those which are fresh goods, seasonal goods, the backlog of goods and commodities such, in order to exclude competitors or monopolize the market at below cost price dumping, disrupt the normal order of production and operation, damage to national interests or other operating the legitimate rights and interests;
(3) fabrication spread prices, driving up prices, promote high commodity prices rise;
(D) the use of false or misleading pricing as a means to entice consumers or other operators to the transaction;
(E) to provide the same goods or services, other operators on the same trading conditions to price discrimination;
(F) adopt the elevation or lowering grades and other means to acquire or sell goods or provide services, disguisely raise or depress prices.
Statement
The penalty amount is difficult to judge
Starting from the point of view of the administrative functions and powers, The NDRC is indeed the right for price fraud investigation and fines, in order to ensure that the interests of consumers.
Previous Jingdong, Gome, Suning price war, the words too full, for example, sales of zero gross profit, in theory, is simply unable to do so. “Commercial promotion must ensure that at least the authenticity of this thing, a reminder to all businesses, speculation, propaganda too far, may be illegal. Currently, the overall business environment in China is not very good faith, through this investigation, is conducive to the wake-up call businesses. ”
As for the amount of punishment possible, this case has the complexity of the specific number of bad judgment, as well as the amount of fines. Because, on the one hand, these appliances supplier does not perform in accordance with the propaganda efforts; but, on the other hand, a few appliances operators on certain goods, confirm to fulfill commitments, and therefore, it is difficult to determine the specific amount, you may end up fine lines is a few hundred thousand dollars.
“The price of illegal administrative penalties” in accordance with the 2010 amendments to the implementation of the provisions of Article VII, “the use of false or misleading price means to entice consumers, or other operators to transactions shall be ordered to make corrections, confiscate the illegal income, impose a fine of not less than five times the illegal income; illegal income, at more than 50,000 yuan, a fine of not less than 500,000 yuan; circumstances are serious, shall be ordered to suspend business for rectification, or, by the administrative department for industry and commerce shall revoke its business license. ‘