After more than six months of work, the Senate committee of enquiry into the margins of manufacturers and supermarkets presented its conclusions earlier this week. Set up on December 10th, 2025, at the initiative of Antoinette Guhl, senator for Paris, the committee’s aim was to shed light on the practices of the various players involved, retailers in particular.

The tone was set at the opening of the press conference. “Our committee has uncovered some extremely worrying practices in the retail sector,” declared Antoinette Guhl. The report paints a rather alarming picture, pointing to a major imbalance between the various players in the food chain, against a backdrop of price wars. At the end of its work, the committee made a number of recommendations. The report specifically targets supermarkets and their central purchasing bodies, denouncing “predatory practices” and a lack of transparency in commercial relations.

© Capture d’écran Sénat In total, the committee held 73 hearings and heard from almost 190 people: consumer associations, retail specialists, supermarket chains, representatives of agricultural sectors, farming unions, the DGCCRF, purchasing managers from distributors, and food manufacturers.

A climate of fear
Gone is the charter of good conduct signed on the eve of the 2026 trade negotiations, designed to calm relations between distributors and suppliers. The chair of the committee, Anne-Catherine Loisier, explained that she was “struck by the atmosphere of fear that prevailed among manufacturers,” as well as by “the reluctance of some distributors to answer questions.”

In particular, the report highlights “illicit practices” such as threats of delisting that can last for several months in order to force suppliers to give in and accept the conditions imposed by distributors. Some of these practices even concerned perishable products, with losses of up to several million euros for the manufacturers concerned.

During the work of the committee of enquiry, Anne-Catherine Loisier also stated that she had noted “the fear expressed by almost all suppliers as well as by representatives of the agricultural sectors of being subjected to retaliatory measures by distributors if they were to make accusations before the committee. In practice, this has resulted in systematic requests for meetings to be held behind closed doors.”

According to the commission, certain distributors also exerted pressure and intimidation on suppliers prior to their hearings, by text messages, for example.

A structural imbalance unfavorable to suppliers
For the senators, the balance of power has become structurally unfavorable to suppliers, due to the hyper-concentration of the distribution sector around a few major purchasing alliances. “By concentrating and creating central purchasing bodies in France and then abroad, and by using brutal methods, supermarkets have deliberately created the conditions for this imbalance,” according to the committee. Today, three alliances dominate food purchasing in France: Concordis (Carrefour and Coopérative U) with a 34% market share, Aura Retail (Intermarché, Auchan, and Casino) with 29%, and E.Leclerc alone with 24%.

The senators also criticized the imbalance in the distribution of value. “Of every €100 [116.2 USD] spent by consumers, 8% goes to farmers, 14% to manufacturers, and over 40% to retailers,” according to the report. “Those who bear the risks are not the ones who are best remunerated.”

As far as manufacturers are concerned, the commission claims to have met companies with low profitability, far from the “delirious margins” sometimes cited by certain distributors. Insufficient margins would severely limit investment capacity. The Eureden cooperative was cited as an example. During its hearing, it explained that it was forced to close its artichoke canning factory because it was not sufficiently profitable. As a result, French producers now have to sell their artichokes abroad before they come back, processed, to the French market. “That is what price wars mean to manufacturers.”

Service centers: Top to Top meeting proposals invoiced at over €350,000
The committee also looked into the operation of distributors’ European service centers, which are accused of keeping financial flows between distributors and suppliers highly opaque.

According to the senators, these structures, which have a turnover of between 400 and 500 million euros [464.9 and 581.1 million USD], are used to invoice services imposed on manufacturers. According to the committee, “this amounts to more than €1 billion [1.2 billion USD] intercepted by retailers in what can only be described as a margin capture mechanism. During on-site inspections, the commission says it discovered proposals for “Top to Top” meetings – meetings between the heads of distributors and manufacturers – invoiced at over €350,000 [406,787.5 USD].

In addition to these European services, there were also services billed by the French central offices. According to a number of manufacturers interviewed, the total cost of these services could represent up to 40% of their sales, an amount equivalent to the investment they could be making in their production facilities.

Circumventing French law
For the committee, the development of European power plants is also enabling certain distributors to circumvent French legislation, more specifically, the provisions of the Egalim law designed to protect farmers’ remuneration. “Distributors have managed to circumvent French law, particularly that which protects farmers,” explains Antoinette Guhl.

The report accuses certain retailers of not respecting the “sanctuarization of agricultural raw materials,” a mechanism designed to protect producers’ remuneration in trade negotiations. “The imagination of retailers knows no bounds,” according to Antoinette Guhl.

Distributors regularly maintain that European plants are only a concern for multinationals. “Not true,” claims Antoinette Guhl. According to the conclusions of the report, these central offices also impose their conditions on French SMEs. And, as the senator points out, “98% of French agri-food businesses are SMEs and SMIs.”

A price war “erected as a dogma to protect purchasing power”
The committee is also critical of the price war model between retailers, which it sees as a tool for protecting purchasing power. “The price war between retailers is currently being promoted as a dogma for protecting purchasing power. But this price war does not always benefit the consumer,” explains Antoinette Guhl. “The most expensive products are often the healthiest. It is the fruit and vegetable section that is going to sponsor Nutella and Coca-Cola.”

According to the report, retailers use certain products as loss-leader products with very low margins, before rebuilding their margins on other references (margin equalization). The senators cite the case of imported tomatoes sold at low prices to attract consumers, while margins are then rebuilt on French tomatoes.

The committee also claims that since 2021, the prices paid by consumers have been rising more than the rates negotiated with suppliers. “The supermarket sector must stop saying that it is sacrificing itself for consumers,” explains Antoinette Guhl. “They have gradually organized a system for transferring margins from manufacturers to stores in order to attract as many customers as possible through price wars.”

What recommendations have been made?
In its final report, the committee of inquiry makes recommendations based on three main themes: strengthening the negotiating power of upstream agricultural and industrial players vs. downstream players, better controlling and regulating commercial relations, and improving transparency throughout the value chain.

One of the priority objectives set out by the senators is to protect French farmers, SMEs, and VSEs working with French agricultural raw materials. In particular, the committee would like companies that produce, process, and market the majority of their products in France to be able to negotiate their contracts in France, under French legislation, and not via European centers. A charter could therefore be proposed to supermarkets and hypermarkets to ensure that any company using at least 80% French raw materials, established in France, and selling in France, must negotiate its prices in France.

Transparency is another key recommendation. The committee proposes that a comparison between changes in consumer prices and the prices negotiated with suppliers should be made public each year, in order to assess the real distribution of value.

The senators are also recommending the compulsory display of margins on unprocessed products, particularly fruit and vegetables. The aim is to enable consumers to see how much is actually paid to producers when they buy a kilo of fruit or vegetables. Along the same lines, the committee wants to require distributors to make an annual declaration of financial flows between chains and European service centers, as well as greater transparency on “back margins.”

Finally, the senators also want to encourage the organization of agricultural producers in order to readjust the balance of power in the face of three dominant central purchasing bodies, despite the fact that the sector comprises some 25,000 agri-food industries and 400,000 farmers.

“The ball is in the retailers’ court,” concluded Antoinette Guhl, calling on retailers to “eliminate these macho practices that have no place in our society today.” The senator also urged public authorities to “break the deadlock,” step up controls, and enforce the law.

What happens next?
Asked about the possible follow-up to this committee of enquiry, Antoinette Guhl said that the senators were not ruling out continuing this work on the legislative front. “We do not rule out the possibility of proposing legislation.”