Category: Business

Source: Radio New Zealand

The High Court has penalised two companies $420,000 over an acquisition that substantially lessened competition in the wood shavings market.

The Commerce Commission filed proceedings against Alderson Logistics and associated company Supa Shavings, over the acquisition of ABS Carriers in 2022.

Pre-acquisition, ABS and Supa Shavings were the largest suppliers of bulk wood shavings in Waikato.

“The companies were each other’s closest competitors and, when those assets were acquired, that competition was eliminated,” commission chair John Small said.

“The Commission was not notified about the acquisition, so this case is an important reminder that while our clearance regime is voluntary, we can take action against mergers or acquisitions where clearance was not sought.”

The case also marked the first time the commission asked a business to divest the acquired assets.

However, the commission said a deal to sell ABS fell through, meaning the divestment did not happen.

In her judgement, Justice Gardiner noted Alderson and Supa Shavings accepted they gained commercially from the deal for about 13 months, until a shavings supply shock in June 2023 affected their profitability.

Small said it was vital for firms to understand their obligations under the Commerce Act.

“While divestment was unsuccessful in this case, this shows the array of enforcement actions available to us,” he said.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

New Zealand and Asian share markets have tumbled as concerns mount about over the war in the Middle East and its impact on the world economy.

The benchmark NZX 50 fell 3 percent in mid-Monday afternoon trading, while across the Tasman, the ASX 200 fell 4 percent.

In Japan, the Nikkei plunged 6 percent.

It comes as global oil prices surge amid supply concerns, with travel through the vital Strait of Hormuz at a halt.

The benchmark Brent Crude rose to its highest level since 2022, as prices surged past US$100 a barrel, to settle at around $108.

Forsyth Barr investment adviser Mark Fowler said investors were nervous.

“I think the markets are starting to really speculate about how protracted this conflict is going to be in the Middle East,” he said. “And we’ve seen this enormous surge in oil prices.”

Fowler said there was potential for a global economic shock as prices flow through.

“Markets are starting to realise the reality of that sort of inflationary pressure,” he said.

“Everyone thought that this would be a short-term shock, but if it’s more medium-term, what are the wider ramifications for global markets? And you’re really starting to see concerns around that now.”

Kiwibank economists said “things are likely to get worse before they get better”.

“We’re bracing for much higher volatility, with a bigger market reaction in the near term,” they said.

“Our hope [is] that markets rebound quickly once the dust settles, as they did in 2022 following the Russia and Ukraine crisis period.”

Kiwibank said with disruptions to oil, gas and shipping, an immediate lift in inflation was “all but a done deal”.

“But the downside risks to global and domestic growth cannot be ignored either,” they said. “And ultimately, under this kind of supply shock induced inflation, it’s the damage to demand that is likely to dominate.”

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

The Commerce Commission says suppliers are scared to speak up about how they’re treated by supermarkets, so it’s running an anonymous survey to capture their experiences.

The commission’s first survey, held in 2024, revealed suppliers felt they had limited ability to negotiate with the big players.

Commerce Commission head of groceries Alice Hume told Nine to Noon power is tipped heavily in big retailers’ favour, with suppliers afraid to speak out.

“If you think about the dominance of the supermarkets, they’ve got 80 percent of the market.

“If you’re a supplier, and if you’re only dealing with one or two of them, that could be most of your business that’s on the line, so … it is a real valid concern for suppliers.”

There were rules in place to address the power imbalance, Hume said.

“But we still need to know from suppliers the things that they’re really concerned about.”

The 2024 survey revealed concerns about “delisting”: how supermarkets decide whether to pull products from their shelves, Hume said.

The Grocery Supply Code, which governs negotiations between suppliers and supermarkets, now forces supermarkets to be transparent about that, she said.

Suppliers also have a right to appeal through an independent dispute resolution service, Hume said.

The survey would help the Commerce Commission identify the biggest problems it needs to focus on.

Woolworths and Foodstuffs have been approached for comment.

Suppliers pressured, lack power – 2024 survey

The 2024 Grocery Supplier Survey found some suppliers felt pressured into “unfavourable terms”.

They felt there was a lack of transparency and communication about pricing, terms and decision making processes, and smaller suppliers felt “neglected or sidelined” in favour of larger players.

Suppliers rated Woolworths most positively, followed by Foodstuffs North Island.

“Foodstuffs North Island lags behind, with negative ratings outweighing positive across all measures,” the report said.

It said suppliers appreciated suppliers’ responsiveness, and clear communication.

This year’s survey closes on 17 March.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

KiwiRail director Scott O’Donnell will step down from the KiwiRail board of directors on 24 March, cutting short an appointment more than two years ahead of schedule.

Board chair Suzanne Tindal said a new venture will require him to spend more time in Australia.

O’Donnell was appointed to the board in July 2025 on a three year term. He is one of the four directors of Dynes Transport Tapanui, which donated $20,000 to NZ First in July 2024.

When Minister for Rail Winston Peters announced O’Donnell’s appointment he noted that a conflict of interest management plan was in place related to O’Donnell’s business interests.

Peters told RNZ the donation from Dyne’s Transport played no part in O’Donnell’s appointment to the board and that he was aware of the extent of the conflicts of interest.

At the time, Peters said O’Donnell would be effective in his role.

“As Mr O’Donnell has direct experience in the freight sector among other things, a conflict-of-interest management plan has been developed and will be followed while he is a director of KiwiRail,” he said.

Peters said Treasury did not advise against the appointment of O’Donnell.

During Parliament’s ‘scrutiny week’ in December last year, where MPs publicly examine public agency performance, Tindal said O’Donnell’s conflicts of interest affected the board’s capability and efficiency.

She said “more importantly” that directors needed to consider whether they could discharge their duties as required in accordance with the Companies Act.

Documents released under the Official Information Act (OIA) to RNZ show Tindal expressed unease about O’Donnell’s business interests before his appointment and recommended he be removed from a process to make his role official while the conflicts were analysed.

Tindal said Scott’s interest in HW Richardson (HWR), which owns 46 companies, could prove a test of loyalties for him.

The OIA documents showed Tindal checked publicly available information in the Companies Office register and hand-drew what she described as an “interests diagram”, which included 11 companies. This was later redrawn by Treasury staff.

Some of the 10 companies he is involved with supply services to KiwiRail, and the conflicts required Treasury to put a management plan in place.

O’Donnell’s appointment went ahead, but with a slew of measures in place to manage any conflicts between his new role and the 10 companies he is involved in – many of them in transport.

The conflict of interest mitigation plan contained seven measures to manage conflicts, including recusing himself from board meeting discussions where there was a conflict of interest.

O’Donnell attended at least three KiwiRail board meetings and RNZ knows of at least one item O’Donnell had to step aside for in December. He also missed two agenda items at the end of the December meeting as he needed to leave early.

“Mr O’Donnell will be thanked for his service at our Board meeting on 24 March, which will be his last day as a KiwiRail director,” Tindal said in a statement. He leaves after having served fewer than seven months of an appointment that was due to finish on 31 August 2028.

A statement from the HW Richardson Group said O’Donnell brought a strong commercial focus to KiwiRail’s non-freight operation during his time on the board.

The conflict of interest management plan is outlined below.

The mitigations for these companies outlined in the plan include:

• Where appropriate, limiting or eliminating access to sensitive, confidential or restricted information on issues or work relating to KiwiRail, including rail network options or Cook Strait ferries
• Additional scrutiny of board agenda and papers prior to sending to Scott O’Donnell.
• At the beginning of every Board meeting, or prior as necessary, Scott O’Donnell would be required to declare if any item on the agenda could create a conflict for which he feels recusal is necessary. Such instances would need to be documented.
• Where appropriate recusal from any meeting or part meeting/agenda item with the Board or Ministers on these issues where confidential information giving rise to the conflicts discussed, (noting that this may impact on quorum arrangements)
• At the Board’s discretion Scott O’Donnell would be recused or refrain from participating in, any discussions and decisions, where a personal interest is determined.
• The Board reserves the right to invite Scott O’Donnell to recuse himself if the Board feels it is inappropriate to include him in discussions and decisions.
• Advising KiwiRail, the Minister for SOEs of these actions

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

Dairy co-operative Fonterra says the $4.22 billion sale of its Mainland Group to Lactalis is unconditional, with the sale expected to be completed by the end of the month.

Fonterra said all required regulatory approvals and sale conditions had been satisfied in order to separate from Mainland Group and its global consumer and associated businesses from the co-op.

“Fonterra and Lactalis will now proceed to complete the transaction,” Fonterra said in a market statement.

In February, Fonterra shareholders voted to approve a capital return of $2.00 per share to shareholders and unit-holders following completion of the transaction.

The capital return to shareholders was expected to be 9 April, with a payment date of 14 April, based on the completion of the transaction by the end of the month.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

Niki Bezzant says that when her cat was dying of cancer, she was relieved to have taken out pet insurance to help with the vet costs.

“I was able to claim for a lot of her very expensive treatment in the last months of her life.”

But she said she was caught out by a feature of the policy that she had not fully understood.

“The excess on the premium in my case was $1000. This is per condition, per policy period. I assumed this meant – per condition – i.e. the jaw cancer that took Lily – per the period I held the policy, which seems fair enough.

“But no, this actually means per condition, per policy year. As it happened, my policy renewed in January, in the middle of Lily’s illness, and with that, another $1000 excess kicked in. So I ended up $2000 down.”

She said she had complained and been offered a small refund as a goodwill gesture.

All up, she said the vet bills totalled $6649 and she was reimbursed $3501.

“That’s not nothing, I paid about $1300 of premiums over the policy life. I suppose it was worth it to know that I didn’t have to weigh up treating my beloved puss with whether I could afford it or not – I knew I’d be reimbursed for most of it. Vet bills are super expensive and I know I’d have really struggled to cover that $6000 if I had not had the insurance. But there are fishhooks.”

She said on balance she thought it was worth having the insurance, which had been in place for a year. “But you could go either way.”

Consumer NZ insurance expert Rebecca Styles said the clause that caught Bezzant out was used across pet and health insurance.

“Insurance contracts are annual, so in the case of pet insurance, an insurer can alter the condition of cover when renewing it and can even decide not to renew it. We think these aspects should be clearly explained before people buy the product and be clearly communicated in the policy documents.”

She said whether it was worth taking out pet insurance was something owners would need to weigh up for themselves.

“When I looked into the prices a few years ago, the cheapest monthly premium for a six-month-old cat was $27.45 and the most expensive $78. For a 6-month-old puppy, monthly premiums ranged from $55 to $106.

“On top of those premiums, if you make a claim, you’ll need to pay an excess – which could be around 20 percent or a fixed amount of $100 to $200 – and in some cases a co-payment as well between 10 percent and 30 percent.”

She said it was also important to look at exclusions.

“Pet insurance won’t cover everything. It’s not often that routine check-ups and vaccinations are included. And some breeds aren’t covered because of known health conditions.”

She said a study in 2019 found most dog owners spent less than $500 a year at the vet and for cat owners, $200.

“Even allowing for inflation, what you pay in premiums may be more than that.”

Canstar said the average cost across all policies was $821 a year, but this could vary a lot depending on the animal insured. It found just over half of respondents had claimed on their insurance.

Southern Cross paid out $15,000 for a dog with immune-mediated haemolytic anaemia in 2025, and $11,000 for a ragdoll cat with pneumonia.

Styles said there were more brands entering the pet insurance market, such as Mighty Ape.

“However, I do think self-insuring – popping some money away regularly to have access to if the worst happens is a good option.”

She said it could be easier for people to work out whether it was worth buying insurance if vets were more transparent about their fees.

“I know when I take my cat or dog it’s hard to guess how much it will cost.”

Moneyhub founder Christopher Walsh said vet costs could quickly add up because treatment and medication was not funded in the same way as for human healthcare.

He said self-insuring was an option for some pet owners but there was also a large range of different pet insurance policies available.

“There are so many options out there… if you want to consider an accident-only pet insurance because you are worried about a dog or cat being run over, rather than the long-term costs that dogs and cats can pick up, it comes down to pricing and getting quotes for what you can afford.”

He said people who chose to self-insure needed to make sure they really were putting aside enough money to cover eventual vet bills.

Research by Leena Awawdeh, now at Charles Sturt University, said pet insurance offered several advantages, including making people more willing to pay for vet care and a reduced likelihood of pre-surgical euthanasia.

“Insured pet guardians tend to spend more on veterinary services, potentially improving access to care. However, pet insurance has limitations, particularly for owners with limited financial resources who struggle to afford premiums or veterinary costs.

“The uptake of pet insurance remains relatively low, with only a minority of pet owners utilising it. Factors influencing insurance adoption include education about treatment costs and disease risks. While pet insurance can reduce the costs associated with veterinary clinics, its uptake has been slow.”

Southern Cross said it insured about 65,000 pets and last year paid out 78,000 claims worth $30.2 million.

Sign up for Money with Susan Edmunds, a weekly newsletter covering all the things that affect how we make, spend and invest money

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

A woman who did not realise that her KiwiSaver was mistakenly in a cash fund for more than a decade is taking her complaint to the Banking Ombudsman.

Amanda Pringle said she was contacted by her bank, Westpac, in 2014, after she received $17,000 in back payments she was owed in child support.

She went to an appointment with her bank and was signed up to KiwiSaver for the first time.

It was only this year when a friend suggested she look at switching her KiwiSaver that she found she was in a cash fund, with a total balance of about $50,000, despite increasing her contributions to 6 percent of her income.

Morningstar data shows Westpac’s cash fund has returned 2.8 percent a year over the past 10 years, compared to 4.2 percent for its conservative fund, which Pringle thought she was in.

If she had not made a choice and had joined KiwiSaver the next time she changed jobs, she would have been placed in a default fund.

Westpac’s default fund has returned 10.9 percent a year over three years.

Pringle said the staff member who enrolled her in KiwiSaver did not explain how different funds might perform. “I trusted that she had my best interests at heart – I also had minimal life insurance and she upped that, and sort of talked about you know, you’ve got two children it’s important to do that.

“I didn’t really understand the terminology that well because I do struggle to process things along those lines, with a car accident I had when I was 16.

“I haven’t had anyone helping me to understand the terminology financially and I thought they would have my best interests at heart.”

She said even if she was given information noting she was in a cash fund, she would not have known what that meant. “I just thought our verbal discussion was enough to know that she had my best interests at heart and I was signing there because I felt like she was basically trying to help me out.”

When she was able to, she increased her contribution rom 3 percent of her pay to 6 percent, thinking it was the right thing for her retirement. “I was doing what I could and I did receive letters but to be honest I wouldn’t have understood how it worked.”

When she understood what happened, she said, she was “absolutely gutted”.

“I’ve just started online banking in the last few years when I got a new phone and so I didn’t really know, [a friend] said to go in and have a look and see because he thought that it was strange that I had worked so long and not made a lot of interest on it and he said oh my god you’re in a cash fund. I wouldn’t have known what it meant but I felt really annoyed because they had rung me out of the blue to come in and see them.. they’ve done me no favours whatsoever, it’s cost me big money.”

She said if she had been left to default in, she would have been much better off. “I just felt really, really upset.”

Westpac said it would not uphold her complaint.

It said it had looked at how KiwiSaver accounts were set up for Pringle in 2014.

It said when staff helped customers join KiwiSaver their role was to explain how it worked and provide the relevant information and paperwork. “They are there to help customers understand their options however they cannot choose a KiwiSaver fund or tell a customer which fund to select as this is formal financial advice.”

The bank said a recommendation could only be given if a customer chose to receive formal financial advice.

“Where formal financial advice is not being provided the choice of KiwiSaver fund is made by the customer and recorded on the application form. Customers can also review and change their KiwiSaver fund at any time after their account has been set up.

“Regular KiwiSaver statements were sent to you over the years which clearly showed that your savings were invested in the cash fund. The statements also include contact details and explained that you could get in touch with us if you had any questions or needed help reviewing the information.”

It said it had not identified a bank error in how the account was set up or managed.

Pringle said she felt that even if the bank had acted according to its rules, someone should have contacted her about the decision and explained the potential impact.

Sign up for Money with Susan Edmunds, a weekly newsletter covering all the things that affect how we make, spend and invest money

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

Got questions? RNZ has launched a new podcast, [ https://www.rnz.co.nz/podcast/no-stupid-questions No Stupid Questions’], with Susan Edmunds.

We’d love to hear more of your questions about money and the economy. You can send through written questions, like these ones, but even better, you can drop us a voice memo to our email questions@rnz.co.nz.

You can also sign up to RNZ’s new money newsletter, [ https://rnz.us6.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=211a938dcf3e634ba2427dde9&id=b4c9a30ed6 ‘Money with Susan Edmunds’.]

With all the talk about the country not being able to support the pension scheme I am at a loss as to why pensions are paid out to people who continue to work fulltime after they turn 65. I stopped work because of ill health but would otherwise have happily worked another 10 years. I would not have expected a pension and I have many working friends who take it simply because it is given to them, but don’t need it. Am I missing something here?

I don’t think so. While there is no shortage of people who argue that they are entitled to it no matter what, I think there is a growing number who question the fairness of people on very high incomes being paid NZ Super.

Last year, I reported on the fact that more than 9000 people aged over 65 earn more than $200,000 and are eligible to claim NZ Super, too.

While they would pay tax on their pension, and some of it would go back to the government that way, the retirement commissioner said it was fair to question the fairness of it.

Some people may be working because they have to – I know some people use the years when they might be getting the pension and a salary as an opportunity to shore up their savings so they can afford to retire.

It might be less desirable to reduce their entitlement. But I personally think it would serve us all to be more willing to at least have the conversation.

Sir Ian Taylor has been promoting Share My Super, an organisation that allows pensioners to donate part or all of it to charity, if they do not need the money.

Can a KiwiSaver account be used to fund a first home outside New Zealand?

If you are planning to leave New Zealand to go and live in another country, then probably – unless you’re going to Australia.

Once people have been out of New Zealand for more than a year, they can apply to withdraw all their KiwiSaver money, apart from the government contribution, by saying they have permanently emigrated. You could then use it to buy a house or for whatever purpose you liked.

If you’re moving to Australia, it’s more tricky. You can only move your KiwiSaver to an Australian superannuation savings account. There isn’t the same ability to withdraw for a first home there, although there is a “first home super saver scheme” that allows people to withdraw voluntary contributions to help buy their first home.

From what I understand, not all Australian super schemes offer this and you can only use $15,000 of your KiwiSaver money in this way.

If you’re staying in New Zealand then you can’t use the money to buy a house anywhere else because you need to be planning to live in it.

Sign up for Money with Susan Edmunds, a weekly newsletter covering all the things that affect how we make, spend and invest money.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

New Zealand’s love affair with property could be in the break-up stage, with no shortage of houses and investors turning to the share market.

It’s been a national obsession for decades – buying property and creating wealth through soaring capital gains.

But the days of making huge, untaxed profits on such investments are likely over.

The Reserve Bank’s chief economist says we may be seeing a “structural change” in the housing market; there are too many empty townhouses failing to sell; prices are going sideways; and the prospect of a capital gains tax being introduced is becoming more certain.

First home buyers are making a comeback.

But is it too early to say we’re seeing the end of the housing crisis?

On this episode of The Detail we look at where we’re sitting, with experts saying while there’s no shortage of homes available now, that doesn’t necessarily make them affordable.

There are several factors behind the shift.

Younger investors who know they can’t afford to get a foot on the property ladder are turning to KiwiSaver and managed funds – they’re the “Sharesies” generation. The ASB’s latest Investor Confidence Survey says traditional property investment is losing ground to options that provide better returns.

New intensification rules have seen developers replace traditional single-home sections with townhouses – so much so that the market is now awash with them.

Rents are falling – it’s now a tenants’ market – meaning returns on property are less certain. Rock bottom interest rates, which encouraged debt, are unlikely to ever return.

And the ANZ’s chief economist, Sharon Zollner, says there’s an inevitability of new taxes that would dent profit margins in property.

She says maybe a Capital Gains Tax is not on our doorstop, but it will come eventually.

“How long can New Zealand really remain such an outlier internationally, and refuse to have that conversation?” she says.

“I do wonder if people are starting to think that perhaps there’s an inevitability around tax change.”

Zollner says first home buyers have got the field to themselves and some of them are taking advantage of it.

“But then the immediate question is – why have they got the field to themselves? Where are the investors? And I think that’s where it gets interesting.”

She says investors seem to be wary. Adding to the uncertainty has been a very strong outflow of Kiwis to Australia, and they are putting their own houses on the market.

“While interest rates have come down a long way, they’re nowhere near the lows we saw in the boom, and now it’s a question of when they’ll be hiked.”

But Zollner says there are bigger structural issues.

“Can we expect similar returns from the next 10 years say, in the housing market, that we’ve seen over the last decades? And there I think more people are realising, probably not.”

BusinessDesk property editor Maria Slade believes we are on the cusp of a change.

“Perhaps people are starting to see houses as something you live in, and not necessarily an investment,” she says.

“Successive governments have tightened the rules around property investment. It’s not quite as attractive as it used to be. And also the costs have made it less attractive – insurance has gone up, rates have gone up … you’ve got to be getting pretty good rents to get a good yield out of an investment property now. So that’s also, I think, changed the mindset a wee bit.

“I think the tide has turned in terms of how New Zealanders are looking at property.”

Slade says that’s a good thing.

“We have way too much wealth tied up in property – it’s unproductive wealth, it just sits there on a 700 square metre section … it’s not doing anything for the country.

“We definitely need to get over that one if the country’s going to become more prosperous going forward.”

As an example of change, Slade has been looking at what commentators are saying is a glut of townhouses, and the consequences of that. Some are sitting on the market for so long they’re no longer considered ‘new builds’, which means favourable lending for first home buyers doesn’t apply.

In spite of the stagnant market, new data from Infometrics shows consents for townhouses grew by 14 percent from the year to January.

In today’s podcast, Slade talks about some possible reasons for that, including a possible move away from cookie-cutter style homes without car parks to less crowded buildings.

Kelvin Davidson, the chief Property Economist at Cotality, hedges his bets when asked if the housing crisis is over.

“It depends what you mean by ‘housing crisis’,” he says.

“I suppose what people think about … over the past 20 or 30 years is an affordability crisis where house prices have been too high in relation to incomes and it’s been a stretch for people to get onto the housing ladder.

“I don’t think it’s ever been easy to buy your first house. It’s been a challenge through time.

“So is that crisis over? Maybe.

“I think we may be reaching a turning point in the market now, where the mindset is shifting and people are starting to realise that actually, ever-rising house prices isn’t necessarily the best thing for a country.”

Check out how to listen to and follow The Detail here.

You can also stay up-to-date by liking us on Facebook or following us on Twitter.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

There is concern that Artificial Intelligence could be used to get customers to pay more, with one expert calling for legislation to block the use of dynamic pricing in supermarkets.

The government’s amendment to the Commerce Act, which is expected to pass in the middle of the year, includes giving the Commerce Commission more powers in combating predatory pricing.

But University of Sydney researcher Lisa Asher said the legislation was not explicit enough in stating that retailers must be held accountable for price changes made by Artificial Intelligence (AI) monitoring.

She told Nine to Noon that supermarkets in the United States are using data about customers to change pricing in online shopping.

Asher said the incoming legislation here does not go far enough to stop the same from happening in New Zealand.

“Pricing algorithms is when there is monitoring that is happening via systems and they are looking at competitive pricing, web-scraping or looking through the internet and adjusting pricing based on that for a particular retailer,” Asher said.

Dynamic pricing strategies could take advantage of consumers and the information they have about their purchasing habits. For example, they could charge a customer more if they know the customer always buys the same product.

“You’ve got your loyalty card, your purchase history, whether you bought on-or-off promotion, whether you tend to buy lower-value products or higher-value products – that sort of mix – to then adjust the price based on what is the maximum price they think you can charge, which is, in essence, price gouging,” Asher said.

AI can exacerbate this.

Asher said this sort of conduct has been seen on online platforms like Amazon in the US.

But it’s not just online stores. US law makers have raised the alarm over dynamic pricing in grocery stores via electronic shelf labels that allow stores to adjust prices instantly. They fear AI could be used to price-gouge customers at check-out.

Asher said the UK and European Union markets are moving to put into law that a company is held accountable for any changes in pricing done by AI.

“They need to be held accountable for any systems or programmes that they decide to implement in their business,” she said.

Woolworths New Zealand told Nine to Noon it does use electronic shelf labelling in almost all stores, but it does not use dynamic or any personalisation in pricing.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand