Corporate report

Annual report on concurrency for 2026

Published 2 June 2026

Introduction

This is the 12th annual concurrency report to be published by the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) in accordance with the CMA’s statutory obligation since the enhanced concurrency arrangements came into effect on 1 April 2014.^{[footnote 1]}

Under the concurrency arrangements, competition law is applied in the regulated sectors not only by the CMA, the UK’s principal competition authority, but also by the relevant sector regulators.

Table 1: Sector regulators and their areas of concurrent jurisdiction

Civil Aviation Authority (CAA)	Airport operation and air traffic services in the UK
Office of Communications (Ofcom)	Broadcasting, electronic communications and postal services in the UK
Gas and Electricity Markets Authority (Ofgem)	Electricity and gas in Great Britain
Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)	Financial services in the UK and the provision of claims management services in Great Britain
Payment Systems Regulator (PSR)[footnote 2]	Participation in payment systems in the UK
Office of Rail and Road (ORR)	Railway services in the UK
Water Services Regulation Authority (Ofwat)[footnote 3]	Water and sewerage services in England and Wales
Northern Ireland Authority for Utility Regulation (NIAUR)	Electricity, gas, water and sewerage services in Northern Ireland

Like the CMA, the sector regulators can, in the sectors for which they are responsible:

• apply the UK prohibitions on undertakings engaging in anti-competitive agreements or on the abuse of a dominant market position (respectively, the Chapters I and II prohibitions contained in Part 1 of the Competition Act 1998, which are referred to in this report as the ‘Chapter I prohibition’ and the ‘Chapter II prohibition’ respectively)

• conduct market studies under Part 4 of the Enterprise Act 2002, and if appropriate, make a market investigation reference under which the CMA conducts an in-depth investigation into whether any feature, or combination of features, of a market in the UK for goods or services prevents, restricts, or distorts competition

The CMA is required by law to prepare and publish a report after the end of each financial year, containing an assessment of how the concurrency arrangements have operated during the year.^{[footnote 4]} For this purpose, Parliament defined the concurrency arrangements as the arrangements for co-operation between the CMA and the sectoral regulators in respect of functions which are exercisable concurrently by the CMA and one or more of the regulators under Part 1 of the Competition Act 1998 and Part 4 of the Enterprise Act 2002.^{[footnote 5]}

This report assesses the operation of the concurrency arrangements over the reporting period of 1 April 2025 to 31 March 2026.

To support the CMA’s strategy – which centres on promoting competition and protecting consumers with a clear end goal in mind: to drive economic growth and improve household prosperity – the CMA has been undertaking a comprehensive programme of work to transform 4 important aspects of how we operate: Pace, Predictability, Proportionality and Process (the ‘4Ps’).^{[footnote 6]} Consistent with the approach of embedding the CMA’s 4Ps framework across all areas of our work, we have aimed to streamline this year’s report to focus on the core components of competition concurrency.

Overview of the year

2 of the 8 sector regulators with concurrent powers exercised their Competition Act 1998 enforcement powers during the reporting period, alongside the CMA. The overall number of ongoing Competition Act cases in the regulated sectors has been lower than in most previous years.^{[footnote 7]} Cooperation on public enforcement of the Competition Act 1998 has therefore been mainly concentrated on a relatively small number of open cases. Engagement between regulators continues to be effective, with the CMA and sector regulators in regular dialogue as cases have progressed.

The CMA and sector regulators have also cooperated effectively on wider Competition Act 1998 matters, including guidance to businesses on prioritisation, and considering complaints about potential infringements. This included cooperation between the FCA, the PSR and the CMA on the prioritisation of Competition Act 1998 investigations regarding commercial Variable Recurring Payments (cVRPs). The CMA and Ofcom also responded to letters from the Minister of State for Creative Industries, Media and Arts related to public service media and the wider television ecosystem. In responding, the CMA and Ofcom explained how they work together, including how the CMA engages with Ofcom in relation to CMA merger reviews, and how they cooperate in respect of enforcement of the Competition Act 1998, under the concurrency arrangements.

Alongside public enforcement, private enforcement of the Competition Act 1998 in the regulated sectors has continued to play an important role. Both Ofwat and the PSR have intervened in private enforcement cases:

• in the water sector, a proposed class representative brought a claim that 6 water companies had abused dominant positions by misleadingly understating the number of incidents of water pollution in their areas, which she said was a breach of the Chapter II prohibition of the Competition Act 1998.^{[footnote 8]} Ofwat acted as an intervener in proceedings before the Court of Appeal, in which the proposed class representative was appealing against the decision of the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) that the case was excluded by the Water Industry Act 1991

• in respect of payment systems, the PSR intervened in Trial 3 of the ‘Merchant Interchange Fee Umbrella Proceedings’. These proceedings concern whether Visa and Mastercard infringed the Chapter I Prohibition of the Competition Act 1998, in respect of default multilateral interchange fees applicable to domestic, interregional and commercial card transactions within their card payment systems; Trial 3 covers issues related to exemption under section 9 of the Competition Act 1998^{[footnote 9]}

The concurrency arrangements should continue to support best practice on how public and private enforcement interact, including through the sharing of know-how between the CMA and the concurrent regulators.

As regards markets work in the sectors where the CMA shares jurisdiction with the sector regulators, only the CMA has actively used its markets powers under the Enterprise Act 2002 during the reporting period. This has comprised a market investigation into the cloud services market and a market study into the civil engineering market; the CMA has cooperated closely with Ofcom and ORR respectively when undertaking this markets work. No other regulators opened or closed Enterprise Act 2002 market studies during the reporting period.^{[footnote 10]}

Legislative reforms to the competition regime

In January 2026, the UK government consulted on a set of measures to refine the UK’s competition regime, which included proposals to replace the existing market study and market investigation procedures under the Enterprise Act 2002 with a single-phase market review tool.

In respect of concurrency, the UK government has proposed reforms to how the CMA and sector regulators would work under the proposed new single-phase market review process. In particular, the UK government has proposed to recast the ability of sector regulators to make a market investigation reference following a market study and replace it with the power to recommend that the CMA launches a market review under the new proposed single-phase model that can result in remedies. In addition, the UK government has proposed to allow concurrent regulators, by mutual consent, to take responsibility for monitoring and enforcing market remedies imposed or accepted by the CMA in their sectors.

The consultation on these proposals invited responses by 31 March, and the UK government is currently analysing the feedback received. The UK government has established a working group with the CMA and the sector regulators to discuss the proposed reforms that relate to the concurrency framework.

Multilateral cooperation

UKCN

The UK Competition Network (UKCN) brings together the CMA and each of the regulators with concurrent powers. It acts as a forum for the sharing of best practice and know-how for its members. Through the UKCN, the CMA and sector regulators hold regular discussions on current topics of interest and give presentations based on their experiences of specific issues from their competition work.

A specific output of the ten-year concurrency review was the recommendation that UKCN members convene a workshop to consider best practice in case identification and development, summarised as ‘pipeline’ work. In line with the recommendation, this ‘pipeline’ workshop was held at Ofcom’s offices in October 2025. Various regulators presented to the group on topics including the sources of information for potential Competition Act 1998 investigations and approaches to the question of prioritising potential cases against alternative resource uses. The CMA presented on its pipeline process, including the use of data science techniques to screen procurement data for bid-rigging.

More generally, the UKCN has continued to meet at working- and senior-levels. Topics covered this year have included presentations by the sector regulators and the CMA on various concurrent cases, including presentations by ORR on its series of Enterprise Act 2002 markets studies; the PSR on its cross-border interchange fees case; Ofgem on its Competition Act 1998 case in the gas distribution network; and the CMA on its investigation into anti-competitive arrangements in UK government bonds. The CMA has also presented on a range of topics with relevance to the regulators, including the CMA’s work on ‘scale-ups’ and competition policy and explaining the revisions it has made to the CMA’s markets guidance. Officials from the Department of Business and Trade have also presented to the UKCN on the UK government’s proposed reforms to the competition regime.

Secondments

Secondments continue to be a way of sharing expertise and transferring knowledge between the CMA and the sector regulators to facilitate the exercise of the concurrent powers. During the period of this report, there were 3 active secondments between the sector regulators and the CMA which related to projects covered in this report.^{[footnote 11]} In addition to secondments to and from the CMA, there were also a number of active secondments between the concurrent regulators.

Cooperation between the FCA and PSR

In light of the forthcoming PSR consolidation into the FCA, the 2 organisations have been working closely together on a range of work. For example, the FCA and PSR have been assisting each other on current competition case and markets work. Examples of assisting with casework include the PSR assisting the FCA with its investigations into Mastercard, PayPal and Visa under the Competition Act 1998.

Competition enforcement in the regulated sectors

This section of the report sets out the competition enforcement work that has been carried out by the CMA and the sector regulators during the current reporting period (1 April 2025 to 31 March 2026).

Competition prohibitions

Table 2: Use of powers by the CMA and sector regulators under the Chapter I and Chapter II prohibitions in the Competition Act 1998 for the period 1 April 2025 to 31 March 2026 in the regulated sectors

	2025 to 2026	2024 to 2025	2023 to 2024	2022 to 2023	2021 to 2022	2020 to 2021	2019 to 2020
Number of cases ongoing at start of reporting period	5	10	9	7	8	9	9
Number of investigations launched under the Competition Act 1998	4[footnote 12]	1	4	5	4[footnote 13]	3	3

	2025 to 2026	2024 to 2025	2023 to 2024	2022 to 2023	2021 to 2022	2020 to 2021	2019 to 2020
Number of those cases in the year to date in which:
- information gathering powers and powers to enter premises/conduct dawn raids were used	7	4	10	11	5	3	8
- a Statement of Objections was issued	0	1	1	1	0	3	2

	2025 to 2026	2024 to 2025	2023 to 2024	2022 to 2023	2021 to 2022	2020 to 2021	2019 to 2020
Number of those cases in the year to date that resulted in:
- an infringement decision	0	2	1	1	1	2	2
- the giving of commitments	1	0	2	1	3	0	1
- an exemption or clearance decision (or equivalent)	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
- case closure without full resolution	0	4	0	1	1	2	0

	2025 to 2026	2024 to 2025	2023 to 2024	2022 to 2023	2021 to 2022	2020 to 2021	2019 to 2020
Number of cases that are ongoing	8	5	10	9	7	8	9
Number of cases in the year to date in which the decision was appealed to the Competition Appeal Tribunal	0	0	0	0	0	1	0
Decisions taken to use direct regulatory powers instead of competition prohibition powers where those competition prohibition powers could have been exercised	0	0	0	1	0	2	0

Digital

Chapter II investigation in relation to Google’s practices in advertising technology intermediation services

In May 2022, the CMA launched an investigation into Google’s conduct in advertising technology intermediation services (also known as the ‘ad tech stack’) which facilitate the sale of online advertising space between sellers (like online newspapers and other content providers) and buyers (advertisers). In March 2023, this investigation was combined with the CMA’s investigation into whether Google has abused its dominant position through its conduct in relation to header bidding services.

In September 2024, the CMA issued a statement of objections provisionally finding that Google has abused its dominant positions through the operation of both its publisher ad server and buying tools to restrict competition in the UK. The provisional findings relate to how Google ‘self-preferences’ its own ad exchange – harming competition and, as a result, advertisers and publishers.

During this reporting period, the CMA has been considering the written and oral representations received on the statement of objections. The CMA is now considering next steps in the investigation, while monitoring international developments.  

Financial services

Chapter I investigation in the financial services sector

In July 2023, the FCA launched an investigation into a suspected infringement of the Chapter I prohibition of the Competition Act 1998 in the financial services sector. The investigation has involved the use of formal information gathering powers in the reporting period. No Statement of Objections has been issued. The investigation is ongoing.

Chapter I and II investigations in connection with low latency connectivity services

In June 2023, the FCA launched an investigation into a suspected infringement of the Chapter II prohibition into the supply of low latency connectivity services.

Low latency connectivity services enable rapid transmission of information between trading venues. The investigation relates to the supply of low latency connectivity services between the London Stock Exchange trading venue in London and

1) the Cboe Europe trading venue in Slough

2) the ICE trading venue in Basildon

respectively.

In April 2024, the FCA opened an investigation into a suspected infringement of the Chapter I prohibition in respect of lease arrangements between the London Stock Exchange and the landlord of the building housing its data centre. The FCA is concerned that exclusive rights granted under the lease allow only the London Stock Exchange Group to locate its equipment for providing low latency connection services on the building’s rooftop.

In August 2025, the London Stock Exchange Group and the landlord of the data centre building proposed commitments to resolve the FCA’s competition concerns in relation to both investigations. In September 2025, the FCA published a notice that it proposed to accept these commitments to resolve its competition concerns, and invited representations from persons likely to be affected by this course of action.

Chapter I and II investigations related to digital payment wallets

In March 2026, the FCA opened investigations into suspected breaches of the Chapter I and Chapter II prohibitions. In a statement published in May 2026, the FCA identified the suspected breaches as relating to the funding and usage of PayPal’s digital wallet. The FCA also, exceptionally, named the parties under investigation as: Mastercard and Visa (for suspected breaches of the Chapter I and Chapter II prohibitions) and PayPal (for suspected breaches of the Chapter I prohibition).^{[footnote 14]}

Access fee pricing for commercial variable recurring payments

In January 2026, the FCA and the PSR released a joint statement that they would not at this stage prioritise an investigation under the Competition Act 1998 into the centralised ‘access fee’ pricing model being developed by the UK Payments Initiative for commercial variable recurring payments.

Commercial variable recurring payments are an emerging open banking technology that allow consumers to give trusted third parties secure, recurring access to manage payments on their behalf. They have the potential to offer consumers and businesses control and convenience, while enabling lower-cost, more flexible payment options for businesses.

The FCA and the PSR consulted with the CMA on preparing a statement on prioritisation. The CMA confirmed that, on the basis of the information set out by the PSR and FCA in their prioritisation statement, it did not intend to take a different position on prioritisation of an investigation under the Competition Act 1998.

In reaching this position, the CMA took as its starting point that the FCA and PSR were better placed under the concurrency arrangements to consider whether to prioritise an investigation. Relevant considerations included:

• the FCA’s and PSR’s sector expertise

• the fact that the FCA, working in collaboration with the PSR, has taken on the leading role in Open Banking, including the PSR and FCA working closely to deliver Phase One of the introduction of commercial variable recurring payments

• that both the FCA and PSR have engaged closely with industry in respect of the pricing model developed by the UK Payments Initiative

The CMA is also keen to ensure that businesses are not being deterred from collaborating in ways that may be beneficial to consumers or the wider economy because of uncertainty about how competition law applies. Therefore, given the potential benefits of the Phase One industry-led model for cVRPs described in the FCA and PSR’s prioritisation statement, the CMA recognised the importance of providing sufficient certainty as to the CMA’s prioritisation position on those arrangements (pending the expected legislative changes referred to in the FCA and PSR’s statement), in addition to that of the FCA and PSR, so as not to deter these arrangements.

Energy

Chapter II investigation in the energy market

In March 2024, Ofgem launched an investigation into whether Scotia Gas Networks (SGN) had infringed the Chapter II prohibition by abusing a dominant position in the gas distribution market in the areas where it holds gas transporter licences – namely, the distribution network for Scotland and part of Southern England (which encompasses South London and the Southeast of England).

Ofgem’s investigation concerned ‘connection services’, meaning the supply and lay of new pipework to make an extension to the gas distribution network, allowing the offtake of introduction of gas. New connections may be built by the owner of the distribution network, such as SGN, or by third parties. The operator of a distribution network can adopt or refuse to adopt connections built by third parties.

Ofgem’s concern related specifically to gas connections which operated above 7 bargs of pressure. SGN is active in the supply of above 7 barg connections to its own network, and Ofgem was concerned that a policy by SGN since 2018 not to adopt such connections from third party suppliers would foreclose its rivals.

In April 2025, SGN proposed commitments to resolve Ofgem’s competition concerns. Following discussions with Ofgem, SGN proposed a revised set of commitments in July 2025. The commitments included SGN maintaining and promoting a published framework setting out the process it will follow to assess whether it will adopt a gas connection above 7 bargs of pressure, which has been supplied by a third party.

In September 2025, Ofgem provided notice of its intention to accept these commitments, on the basis that they would address its competition concerns regarding access to SGN’s distribution networks for third parties supplying above 7 barg connections. Ofgem invited views from persons likely to be affected. Following this consultation, Ofgem accepted the commitment in December 2025, bringing its investigation to a close with no decision made on whether SGN had infringed the Chapter II prohibition.

Interventions in private proceedings

Alongside public enforcement in the regulated sectors, the reporting period has seen a continuation in the trend of private enforcement of competition law in the regulated sectors. Over the duration of the reporting period, the PSR and Ofwat both intervened in private enforcement actions involving the application of the Competition Act 1998 in the regulated sectors.

Payment systems

The PSR was given permission to intervene in Trial 3 of the ‘Merchant Interchange Fee Umbrella Proceedings’ in February 2026. The Umbrella Proceedings are a set of linked cases brought by multiple UK and EEA merchants before the CAT. The claims relate to Mastercard and Visa default domestic and interregional multilateral interchange fees in the UK and Ireland for both personal and commercial cards. The claimants allege these fees infringe Chapter I of the Competition Act 1998 and give rise to damages. The proceedings consider the lawfulness of multilateral interchange fees across different payment corridors, including cross-border EEA-UK transactions for historical and ongoing transactions. The claims have a combined value in excess of £1 billion.

The proceedings have been divided into several separate trials to deal with distinct issues. The PSR was granted permission to intervene in Trial 3, which concerns whether multilateral interchange fees may be exempt under section 9 of the Competition Act 1998 on the basis of efficiencies, and if so at what level.^{[footnote 15]}

The PSR intervened in the proceedings in order to:

• provide independent, sector specific expertise to assist the CAT, including by sharing relevant analysis, evidence and experience from the PSR’s work on interchange fees and payment systems

• engage appropriately in the proceedings, including on disclosure, in a controlled and proportionate manner consistent with the CAT’s procedural framework and the PSR’s statutory responsibilities

• support the PSR’s ongoing analytical and regulatory work by engaging with issues that may have implications for its approach to interchange fee interventions and its wider strategy

‘Trial 3’ of the proceedings is listed to start in October 2027.

Water

A proposed class representative brought a claim that 6 water companies had abused dominant positions by misleadingly understating the number of incidents of water pollution in their areas, which the proposed representative said was a breach of the Chapter II prohibition of the Competition Act 1998. 

Ofwat intervened in the proceedings in the previous reporting period against 6 water companies. In September 2024 (in the previous reporting period), Ofwat provided the Tribunal with an account of the regulatory regime and made oral submissions, both by counsel and its in-house solicitor in answer to questions from the Tribunal.

In March 2025, the Competition Appeal Tribunal did not certify the proceedings based on an exclusion against certain types of private claims contained in section 18(8) of the Water Industry Act 1991. The CAT’s judgment refusing certification was appealed, and Ofwat made written and oral submissions to the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal dismissed this appeal in March 2026.  

Use of advisory and warning letters

The CMA and sector regulators can issue advisory and warning letters in situations where there are concerns that certain practices may be restricting competition. Letters are an important part of an enforcer’s toolkit and can be an effective route to delivering meaningful impact as quickly as possible. For example, during the reporting period, the CMA issued 39 letters in relation to potential breaches of competition law, combining use of this tool with pursuit of the full legal process where that was appropriate. No warning or advisory letters were issued in the regulated sectors in the reporting period.

Decisions taken since 1 April 2025 to use direct regulatory powers instead of competition prohibition powers

Under Schedule 4 to the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013, the CMA has a duty to report on any decision taken by a regulator in which the regulator is satisfied that its functions under Part 1 of the Competition Act 1998 in a case are exercisable, but that it is more appropriate for it to proceed by exercising functions other than those that it has under Part 1 of the Competition Act 1998. There were no cases during the reporting period in which the reporting obligation was triggered.

In addition to the above, the sector regulators have a duty to consider whether, before exercising certain specified powers under their respective sector-specific legislation, it would be more appropriate to proceed under the Competition Act 1998 (referred to as the ‘primacy obligation’). During the reporting period, the primacy obligation was triggered for the regulators listed below. All other regulators reported nil returns.

FCA

The FCA reported that in the cases where the primacy obligation was triggered during this reporting period, Competition Act 1998 powers could not have addressed the relevant concerns. Therefore, the FCA did not consider further whether it was more appropriate to proceed under the Competition Act 1998 than under its regulatory powers in the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000.

Ofwat

Ofwat has a duty to consider, before exercising specified regulatory powers under the Water Industry Act 1991, whether it would be more appropriate to proceed by exercising its competition powers under Part 1 of the Competition Act 1998.

In May 2025, Ofwat concluded 2 enforcement cases against Thames Water using its powers under the Water Industry Act 1991. Ofwat considered that it was more appropriate to proceed under the Water Industry Act 1991, rather than the Competition Act 1998, as the findings related to specific sectoral legal and regulatory obligations, and the investigation did not raise specific competition law concerns.

During the reporting period, Ofwat also accepted a number of undertakings from other water companies in lieu of imposing an enforcement order, which in practice also required it to be satisfied that an enforcement order or penalty would have been more appropriate than the Competition Act 1998.^{[footnote 16]} Again, Ofwat considered that the use of its powers under the Water Industry Act 1991 would have been a more appropriate basis if an enforcement order and/or a penalty were to have been imposed, on the grounds that the findings in these cases related to specific sectoral legal and regulatory obligations rather than to competition law concerns.

ORR

ORR has a duty to consider, before exercising specified regulatory powers under the Railways Act 1993, whether it would be more appropriate to proceed under the Competition Act 1998.

In March 2026, ORR found that Northern Trains Limited had breached its regulatory obligations in connection with its provision of disability awareness training for staff under Condition 5 (Accessible Travel Policy) of its licence obligations. ORR considered whether it would be more appropriate to proceed under the Competition Act 1998 but did not consider that Northern’s failure could amount to an infringement of the Competition Act 1998.

PSR

The PSR has a duty to consider, before exercising specified regulatory powers under Part 5 of the Financial Services and Banking Reform Act 2013 Act, whether it would be more appropriate to proceed by exercising its competition powers under Part 1 of the Competition Act 1998.

During the reporting period, the PSR has only exercised these specified regulatory powers to revoke previous specific directions requiring the operators of Bacs and FPS (now Pay.UK for both systems) and LINK (Link Scheme Holdings Ltd) to competitively procure central infrastructure contracts by a specified date.^{[footnote 17]} The PSR concluded that it would not be more appropriate to proceed under the Competition Act 1998 to effect these revocations. The PSR is also actively considering its primacy duty in the context of its market review into card scheme and processing fees. Following the final report published in March 2025, the PSR consulted in December 2025 on 2 draft specific directions under section 54 of the Financial Services and Banking Reform Act 2013. The PSR is also planning to consult on a further specific direction in the course of 2026. Whilst the issuance of specific directions would trigger the PSR’s primacy obligation, the PSR has indicated that it considers its regulatory powers to be the most appropriate tool to address the issues identified in the final report in a targeted and timely way.

Other sector regulators

The CAA, Ofcom, Ofgem, and the NIAUR reported that there were no cases in which the primacy obligation was triggered during the reporting period.

Market studies and market investigations

The CMA and the sector regulators also have powers to conduct market studies and to make market investigation references to the CMA under the Enterprise Act 2002. This section focuses on developments in market studies and market investigations under the Enterprise Act 2002 relating to the regulated sectors during the period covered by the report.

Market studies active during the reporting period
CMA market study into civil engineering in the rail and road sector

Market investigations active during the reporting period
CMA market investigation into cloud services

Market studies under the Enterprise Act 2002

Civil engineering in the rail and road sector

In June 2025, the CMA launched a market study into the design, planning and delivery of railway and public road infrastructure by the civil engineering sector across the UK. The aim of the market study was to examine whether there are opportunities to improve interactions in this market so both the public sector and industry are incentivised to build more cost-effective infrastructure and enable economic growth.

In December 2025, the CMA published an interim report, which outlined a number of ways in which the market appears to be delivering poor outcomes, and provisionally identified several possible options for improvements including in relation to pipeline uncertainty, public procurement policy, capacity constraints and regulatory barriers.

Although outside the reporting period for this year’s report, the CMA published the final report in May 2026. The report sets out the CMA’s findings and recommendations for driving better outcomes to the UK, Scottish and Welsh governments, and Northern Ireland Executive. The CMA has found that costs are high; project overruns are common; quality is variable; and innovation is limited. Alongside other recommendations, the CMA said that government should embrace a more strategic and coordinated approach to delivering road and rail infrastructure with a clear plan for the sector. The package of remedies is aimed at improving delivery, supporting innovation and business dynamism, and securing better value for money from public investment.

The CMA engaged with ORR during the course of the study to ensure awareness of the CMA’s work and to support appropriate engagement as the scope of the study developed. ORR submitted a written response to the CMA’s interim report, and the CMA benefitted from subsequent discussions to inform its consideration of emerging issues and potential recommendations relevant to ORR’s remit ahead of the publication of the final report.

Market investigations under the Enterprise Act 2002

Cloud services

In October 2023, Ofcom referred the supply of public cloud infrastructure services in the UK to the CMA for a market investigation, following its own market study under the Enterprise Act 2002. Public cloud infrastructure services give customers access to shared computing resources on demand so that the customers do not need to own the underlying hardware and software.

The market investigation concluded in July 2025, and found that Amazon and Microsoft have positions of significant market power. The investigation identified limits to customer choice as a result of data egress fees and barriers to interoperability restricting switching and multi-cloud, as well as licensing of Microsoft’s main business software on the cloud.

The market investigation, which was led by an ‘inquiry group’ of CMA panel members acting independently from the CMA’s Board, recommended that the CMA Board use its digital markets powers under the Digital Market Competition and Consumers Act 2024 to prioritise investigations to consider designating Microsoft and Amazon with strategic market status (SMS) in relation to their respective digital activities in cloud services.

After the investigation closed in July 2025, the CMA engaged participatively with UK customers, Amazon, Microsoft and their competitors on the issues identified. In consultation with the CMA, both firms are taking material steps to lower egress fees and improve interoperability.

In March 2026, the CMA Board decided to take a range of actions to address, in aggregate, issues across cloud and business software:

• the Board decided that the CMA will continue active engagement with Microsoft and Amazon to ensure that they take further meaningful steps to promote choice for UK cloud customers, and that the Board can fully assess the extent to which their actions on egress fees and interoperability truly benefit UK customers. The CMA will seek views from UK customers and competitors to inform this dialogue, and the Board will review progress in 6 months. The CMA will also work with government to support competition in cloud procurement

• the CMA will launch an SMS investigation into Microsoft’s business software ecosystem, commencing in May. An SMS finding would allow the CMA to act on the remaining major area from the cloud market investigation: Microsoft’s use of software licensing to affect competition in cloud. It would also provide a route to ensuring a level playing field among providers as AI-driven innovation reshapes competition in productivity software

Enterprise Act 2002 Remedies

Heat networks

The CMA’s market study into heat networks (systems providing heat to multiple properties from a central source) concluded in July 2018. The UK government responded to the market study in December 2018, accepting the CMA’s recommendations that a new regulatory framework should be established to ensure consumer protection for all heat network customers and consulting on high level options for implementation. 

In January 2026, Ofgem’s regulatory role formally began, with the initial set of rules, standards and guidance in place. Initially, Ofgem’s focus is on creating a reliable, trustworthy environment, which it considers will encourage investment in heat networks, and also give customers confidence in what they have a right to expect. Existing heat network operators and suppliers have until January 2027 to register with Ofgem, using the digital service which became available in April 2026.  

CMA remedy reviews

In July 2025, the CMA committed to reviewing the markets remedies ‘backbook’, to ensure that longstanding remedies that are no longer needed can be removed as part of its wider commitment to proportionality. In January 2026, the CMA consulted on whether 33 existing remedies remain appropriate, including a number of remedies in the regulated sectors, such as a remedy from 1992 applying to the BBC on the promotion of its magazines during its programming, a remedy from 2007 applying to lenders in the home credit market, and a remedy from 2010 applying to consultation by Aberdeen airport on its capital expenditure programme. The CMA has engaged with relevant sector regulators to understand their views as it continues to review the remedies ‘backbook’.

Review of the SME Banking Undertakings 2002

In December 2025, the CMA published its final decision regarding 4 provisions of the SME Banking Undertakings 2002, described as the Limitation on Bundling Provisions (LOBP). These undertakings were put in place following a market investigation by the Competition Commission in 2002.

Under the LOBP, the banks which gave the undertakings were prevented from requiring, as a condition of granting a business loan or approving the opening of a business deposit account, that a small or medium-sized enterprise (SME) customer should open or maintain a business current account with that bank.

The CMA opened a review into the LOBP in April 2025. The CMA found that:

• there had been changes to the competitive landscape in relevant SME banking markets in the 23 years since the banks had given the LOBP as undertakings in 2002

• there had been changes to customer behaviour in relevant SME banking markets

• there had been regulatory changes that had enabled the granting of more banking licences, including the introduction of Open Banking and the introduction of the Small and Medium Sized Business (Credit Information) Regulations 2015, which had had positive effects on the competitive landscape and customer behaviour in relevant SME banking markets

Taken together, the CMA found that these changes to the competitive landscape and customer behaviour indicated a greater degree of competition and availability of choice for consumers in relevant SME banking markets than in 2002. It found that the banks bound by the undertakings did not have sufficient market power in the relevant markets, which, in turn, would prevent them from materially adversely affecting competition in the relevant markets if the undertakings were released. The CMA’s final decision was therefore to release the undertakings.

Railway rolling stock remedy review

In 2025, ORR conducted a review of a transparency remedy – made via an order under the Enterprise Act 2002 – which was put in place by the Competition Commission in order to address a number of issues that it found with the railway rolling stock market during its 2009 review. The remedy included a requirement on current and future leasing companies to provide train operating companies with a set list of information when making any lease rental offer for incumbent or alternative used rolling stock to operate on franchised passenger services.

The powers to revoke or vary the order are reserved to the CMA, as the Competition Commission’s successor. ORR’s role is to advise the CMA on possible courses of action based on the CMA’s review of the market and industry engagement.

Following its review, ORR considered the order would continue to be appropriate and proportionate to address the issues it was originally designed to address, such that it would not be appropriate for the order to be revoked. ORR recommended that the terms of the order be brought up to date in the light of legislative changes to ensure that it continues to be fit for purpose. A draft amendment to the order was developed by ORR in cooperation with industry stakeholders before its recommendation was passed to the CMA; the CMA is currently considering this recommendation. ORR will continue to work together with the CMA in supporting the remedy review. 

Market reviews and other markets work

As noted above, certain sector regulators have also used their sectoral powers – rather than their powers under the Enterprise Act 2002 – to carry out work to consider competition issues affecting their sectors. A summary of this type of work carried out during the reporting period is included for each sector regulator.^{[footnote 18]}

Airports

Heathrow regulatory model

The CAA launched a review of regulatory models for Heathrow in the context of potential significant expansion of airport capacity. As part of this review, among other things, the CAA is considering interventions to facilitate competition in the delivery of infrastructure. In November 2025, the CAA published a consultation setting out: 

• the case for changing the current regulatory framework at Heathrow airport

• a framework for evaluating whether different regulatory models would be likely to further the interest of consumers

• a ‘long-list’ of possible alternative regulatory models and how these models might, in principle, apply to capacity expansion at Heathrow airport

Traffic distribution rules

In December 2025, the CAA commenced a review of the Traffic Distribution Rules 1991 and published a call for inputs. Under these rules, whole plane cargo services, or general or business aviation services, cannot be operated at Heathrow or Gatwick airports during periods of peak congestion declared for each scheduling season by the CAA, without permission from the airport operator. The CAA plans to consult on draft advice to the Secretary of State in the Spring 2026 and provide final advice in the Summer 2026.

Water

Rules for ‘new appointees’ bulk charges

New appointees are companies which provide a water and/or sewerage service to customers in an area which was previously provided by the incumbent monopoly provider. Bulk charges are a critical part of a bulk agreement between a new appointee and the incumbent water company where they provide bulk supply or discharge services to serve the site.

In May 2025, Ofwat published a consultation on the introduction of new rules for incumbent English water companies to comply with in setting their bulk charges for supplying water to or discharging wastewater from NAV sites. Following that consultation, in September 2025, Ofwat published its decision to introduce charging rules, which came into force in April 2026. Ofwat’s aim in introducing charging rules is to improve standards of setting and communicating charges, alleviate any potential competition law concerns, and make it easier to check and compare charges and resolve charging disputes. Ofwat also established a NAV and incumbent working group to further improve the charging rules prior to 1 April 2027, in particular through the addition of common terms and worked examples. Alongside this, Ofwat has implemented changes to the NAV licensing policy and application guidance, with the intention of substantially reducing the time it takes to process licence applications, thereby supporting the market for NAVs.

Financial services

Pure protection market study

Pure protection products include term assurance, critical illness cover, income protection insurance and whole of life insurance. In March 2025, the FCA launched a market study using its powers under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, publishing its interim findings in January 2026. The FCA found that while distribution of pure protection works well in many respects, many consumers would likely benefit from pure protection but do not currently have it; the FCA termed this a ‘protection gap’. The FCA said it would work with stakeholders on measures to close this gap, which its research suggests primarily exists because consumers are not aware of their needs, and are not prompted to consider them. The FCA is aiming to publish its final report in Q3 2026, which will consider both the ‘protection gap’ issue described above, as well as a range of smaller issues it has identified.

Premium finance market study

‘Premium finance’ enables consumers to spread the cost of insurance via monthly payments. It was used for around 48% of motor and home policies in 2023.

Using its powers under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, the FCA launched a market study in October 2024 because it was concerned that some customers were not getting fair value and that competition was not functioning effectively. In February 2026, the FCA issued its final report, which found that regulatory attention, fair value assessments and base rate reductions meant that interest rates for premium finance have fallen by an average 4.1 percentage points since 2022, saving consumers £8 on a typical motor policy and £3 on a typical home policy per year. The FCA decided against any market-wide changes, noting that where it has found issues, it has used its ‘Consumer Duty’ to provide consumers with fairer value without needing to write new rules.

Later-life mortgages market study

The FCA launched a market study to examine whether change is needed to enable lifetime and retirement interest only mortgages to meet consumers’ changing needs, driven by effective competition in the market. The FCA published its Terms of Reference in March 2026, setting out its rationale and plans for this study.

Credit information market study

In December 2023, the FCA published its final report in its market study of the credit information market. The final report set out a package of remedies, such as the creation of an Interim Working Group to produce recommendations for the inauguration of a new Credit Information Governance Body.

The FCA has continued to implement relevant remedies during the reporting period. Notably, the FCA published feedback on the Interim Working Group’s final proposals for the new governance body in July 2025, ahead of the Credit Information Governance Body’s formal creation in October 2025. In February 2026, the FCA also published a consultation on its proposed approach to improving how consumer credit information is shared and used across retail lending markets.

Motor insurance

The CMA and the FCA both participated as members of the UK Government’s motor insurance taskforce, which reported in December 2025. The final report of the taskforce set out a number of actions the UK government, the FCA and the industry would be taking to continue efforts to address the broader factors that contribute to the cost of claims.

Payment systems

The PSR has 2 ongoing market reviews using its powers under the Financial Services and Banking Reform Act 2013 Act – one on cross-border interchange fees and one on scheme and processing fees.   

Cross-border interchange fees 

Cross-border interchange fees (IFs) are charged on consumer transactions where the card issuer is based in either the UK or the EEA and the merchant’s acquirer and/or point of sale location is in the other location. Following the UK’s departure from the EU, the EU Interchange Fee Regulation caps no longer applied and Mastercard and Visa raised cross-border IFs 5-fold for UK-EEA transactions when the card is not present, such as online sales. The level of cross-border IFs set by Mastercard and by Visa for UK-EEA card-not-present transactions correspond to the levels of the caps in the inter-regional commitments (relating to non-EEA cards) accepted by the European Commission in 2019.    

The PSR published a final report in its cross-border interchange fees market review in December 2024, in which it concluded that Mastercard and Visa have raised these fees to an unduly high level, at the expense of UK businesses. The PSR initially consulted on a two-stage price cap remedy to address the issues and protect businesses, consisting of an interim cap in the short term, to be followed by a longer-term cap after the PSR had carried out further analysis. In October 2025, the PSR published a decision not to proceed with the work on an interim cap; instead the PSR is focusing on how best to assess the level for a longer-term price cap on cross-border interchange fees. At the same time, the PSR published a consultation on an appropriate methodology for developing a price cap; the consultation ended in December 2025.  

The PSR was judicially reviewed by Visa, Mastercard and Revolut in respect of its ability to price regulate such fees, and the High Court confirmed the PSR’s vires to do so.^{[footnote 19]} 

 Scheme and processing fees

Scheme and processing fees are fees paid to Mastercard and Visa for mandatory and non-mandatory services related to participation in the card scheme (scheme fees) and for authorisation, clearing and settlement services for card payments (processing fees). The PSR’s previous work on the Card Acquiring Market Review found that fees paid by acquirers had increased significantly between 2014 and 2018, and stakeholders told us these fees had continued to increase since then.   

The PSR published its final report in the scheme and processing fees market review in March 2025. The final report found that: 

• Mastercard and Visa are subject to ineffective competitive constraints on the acquiring side of the market

• Mastercard and Visa fail to provide sufficiently clear and detailed information for acquirers about their fees, creating poor outcomes for acquirers and merchants

Fees have risen substantially in recent years, with no clear evidence that new fees are set on the basis of detailed cost analysis, competition or innovation. The PSR found evidence of Mastercard’s and Visa’s UK profits that is consistent with a finding that their margins are higher than would be expected in competitive markets. However, in view of the limitations of the data available, the PSR did not consider that it could reach firm conclusions on the schemes’ UK profitability. 

In April 2025, the PSR consulted on 4 potential remedies to address these issues and detriment arising from these. In December 2025, the PSR consulted on the detailed form of the directions it is proposing to make to implement 2 of the remedies:   

• an information, transparency and complexity remedy to ensure that acquirers, and merchants through their contractual relationship, receive better information to understand the fees they are charged. This is to remedy the schemes’ failure to provide sufficient information to acquirers

• a pricing governance remedy to ensure that the evidence showing how pricing decisions are made is displayed

The PSR’s consultation closed in February 2026, and it will consult on a draft direction for a third remedy – regulatory financial reporting – in the course of 2026. 

Energy

Improving the non-domestic consumer experience in Northern Ireland

In February 2026, the Northern Irish Utility Regulator (UR) introduced new measures to strengthen protections for Northern Ireland’s non‑domestic electricity and gas consumers. Important licence modifications include:

• a new requirement for electricity and gas suppliers to provide transparent price information for small business consumers on their websites

• a requirement for suppliers to identify whether there are alternative options to requesting a security deposit from small business consumers, and to provide them with clear information about when their deposit will be returned

• a specification that a deemed contract must not require a customer to give any form of notice before they are able to change supplier

The changes follow the publication in July 2025 of the UR’s ‘Improving the Non-domestic Consumer Experience’ position paper, which proposed the implementation of changes to the non-domestic regulatory framework.

Third party intermediaries in the Northern Irish energy market

In August 2025, the UR published a consultation on ‘Third Party Intermediaries in the Energy Market’. This initiated a programme of work to ensure that non-domestic consumers and micro and small generators engaging with third party intermediaries are appropriately informed and protected. The consultation paper examines potential measures concerning third party intermediaries in the energy retail market and invites views on these options, including:

• improving information and awareness on the role of third party intermediaries

• enhanced monitoring and reporting on the third party intermediary market

• transparency measures on third party intermediaries’ costs

The outcome of this consultation is expected to be published in Q2 2026. 

Communications

Telecoms access review 2026

In March 2026, Ofcom published its decisions for the regulation of fixed telecoms markets that underpin broadband, mobile and business connections, for the period from April 2026 to March 2031. Ofcom reported that people have more choice between broadband providers than ever before – around 3 quarters of the population have access to at least 2 networks, and nearly a third of the country can choose between 3. However, Ofcom found that Openreach still retained significant power in the market and it was not at a point where regulation could be removed entirely. Ofcom explained that it was maintaining rules around Openreach’s discounts and deals where it was concerned they could stifle investment and the development of sustainable competition. However, Ofcom said that as competition develops, there may be future scenarios in which it could relax its position on Openreach offers.

Hull area review 2026 to 2031

For historical reasons, the fixed telecoms markets in the Hull Area are regulated separately from the rest of the UK. KCOM, rather than BT, is the incumbent telecoms provider and the owner of the only universal fixed network in the Hull Area. In December 2025, Ofcom published a consultation on its proposals for the regulation of the fixed telecoms markets in the Hull Area for the 5-year period from November 2026. Ofcom is currently reviewing stakeholder responses and requesting further information to update its analysis of the markets, and plans to publish its final decisions in October 2026.

Reviews of call termination markets and end-to-end connectivity condition (previously Wholesale voice markets review)

Call termination is the service provided by a phone company to connect incoming calls from another network to its customers. Following a market review, Ofcom published its decisions for future regulation in the market. It has decided to regulate call termination services until March 2031. Without regulation, Ofcom was concerned that call termination providers could exploit their significant market power, for example, by charging excessive termination rates to other providers and distorting competition in mobile and landline markets. Ofcom considered that its current regulation had been working well to support effective competition, and that maintaining this targeted form of regulation was necessary for the review period. 

Application to person (A2P) SMS termination market review

Application-to-person (A2P) SMS are automated text messages sent by businesses and public bodies to individuals, for example, appointment reminders, one-time passcodes, and parcel delivery notifications.  

In early 2025, Ofcom launched a market review in relation to the termination services provided by mobile operators to Aggregators to deliver A2P SMS to their subscribers, and consulted on proposals to impose a price cap on termination rates to apply until the end of 2028. In October 2025, Ofcom received voluntary commitments from 4 large mobile operators – BT/EE, Sky, Virgin Media O2 and VodafoneThree – relating to their pricing of A2P SMS termination. These voluntary commitments will remain in place until the end of 2028 and Ofcom estimates that they collectively cover over 90% of the market. 

Ofcom has also taken into account market developments since the publication of its consultation in January 2025, which increase uncertainty over future competitive constraints. This includes recent price reductions by WhatsApp for Business (an alternative business messaging service), and signs of growing interest among some large senders in other business messaging services. Given these developments, Ofcom has taken the administrative policy decision not to continue with the market review, but will continue to monitor the market and can intervene in future if necessary.

1. The report is published in accordance with the CMA’s statutory obligation (set out in section 25(4) of the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013, read together with paragraph 16 of Schedule 4). The concurrency arrangements were introduced in their current form by the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 and took effect from 1 April 2014. They created a framework within which the CMA and sector regulators might more effectively work together to improve competition and competition law enforcement in the regulated sectors. The CMA is required under section 25(4) and paragraph 16 of Schedule 4 of the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 to publish an annual report on the operation of the concurrency arrangements. ↩

2. In April 2026, the government confirmed its plans to consolidate the PSR within the FCA. The announcement does not result in any immediate changes to the PSR’s remit or ongoing programme of work. The regulator will continue to have access to its statutory powers until legislation is passed by Parliament to enact these changes; the Financial Services and Markets Bill 2026, introduced in May 2026, contains the proposed legislative provisions (review clause 13 and Schedule 2; review also the October 2025 joint statement on the consolidation and the April 2026 summary of responses received to the government’s consultation on the changes). ↩

3. In July 2025, the UK government announced its intention to bring together the functions of the Water Services Regulation Authority with other water-related functions currently held by Natural England, the Environment Agency, and the Drinking Water Inspectorate to create a new unified water regulator. As with the PSR, the regulator will continue to have access to its statutory powers until legislation is passed by Parliament to enact these changes. (Review the July 2025 statement on the reforms). ↩

4. Review footnote 1 above. ↩

5. Review the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013, Schedule 4 paragraph 16(2) ↩

6. Review further the CMA’s Annual Plan 2026 to 2027 - GOV.UK ↩

7. Whilst there are 8 ongoing investigations, it should be noted that 4 of these investigations are the investigations relating to the funding and usage of PayPal’s digital wallet that the FCA opened during the reporting period (review further paragraph 3.10 below). ↩

8.  Professor Carolyn Roberts v Various water companies ↩

9. Alongside the Chapter I prohibition of the UK’s Competition Act 1998, the claims also concern whether the Multilateral Interchange Fee infringed Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. ↩

10. To note that, after the end of the reporting period, but before publication of this report, the FCA launched an Enterprise Act 2002 market study into the provision of claims management services in May 2026. ↩

11. Numbers reflect formal secondments and may not capture additional, informal secondments that may have taken place during the period. Further, the figure included in this year’s report only covers secondments directly pertaining to projects covered in this report, whereas previous iterations of the report included a broader range of secondments, including those not directly related to the functioning of the concurrency arrangements. ↩

12. As explained at paragraph 3.10 below, the FCA has opened 4 investigations that all relate to the funding and usage of PayPal’s digital wallet. ↩

13. This figure includes an investigation opened by the FCA under Chapter I of the Competition Act 1998 in which formal powers were not exercised. The case has since been closed. ↩

14. The FCA has opened 4 investigations into the funding and usage of PayPal’s digital wallet. ↩

15. Trial 3 also considers exemption under Article 101(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. ↩

16. Northumbrian Water Limited, Anglian Water Services Limited, South West Water Limited, Wessex Water Services Limited, Southern Water Services Limited and SES Business Water Limited. ↩

17. The PSR revoked Specific Directions SD2 (and 2a) in August 2025, SD3 (and 3a) in May 2025 and SD4 (and 4a) in August 2025. ↩

18. Further, in April 2026 – after the end of the reporting period, but before publication of this report – ORR announced a review of the passenger rolling stock maintenance market in Great Britain. The review will focus on the structure of long-term maintenance arrangements, the transparency of maintenance costs and charges, and the extent to which maintenance arrangements are open to competition at renewal. After gathering and assessing information from market participants and stakeholders, ORR expects to complete the review in autumn 2026. ↩

19. R (Mastercard Europe SA) v Payment Systems Regulator [2026] EWHC 64 (Admin). ↩