Went to the rescue: fines for consumer deception may increase 10 times
In Russia, they want to tighten the responsibility of businesses for misleading consumers and increase fines by 10 times. We are talking about providing false information about the properties of goods, for example, when products claimed to be beef sausage actually turn out to be pork. Such a proposal was sent to the Cabinet of Ministers by the Federation Council Committee on Regulations. The amount of penalties has not been reviewed since 2014. The senators note that today it is more profitable for unscrupulous businesses to pay fines of 100-500 thousand rubles and earn money from counterfeiting than to comply with the requirements of the law. Rospotrebnadzor generally supported the initiative, but Opora Russia suggests justifying it.
Why do they want to increase the punishment for counterfeiting
Russians are increasingly faced with a situation where the product characteristics stated on the packaging or in the documentation do not correspond to its actual physico-chemical and biological composition. Such cases not only undermine confidence in domestic manufacturers, retail, and government institutions, but also carry potential, including deferred— risks to public health. This is stated in the document of the Federation Council Committee on regulations following a meeting of the commission for monitoring legislation in the field of state control, which was held with the participation of the Ministry of Agriculture, the Ministry of Industry and Trade, Rospotrebnadzor and other departments (Izvestia has it).
Thus, according to Roskachestvo, the largest amount of counterfeit by the end of 2025 was detected in honey, cheese used in pizza preparation, olive oil and biologically active additives (dietary supplements). At the same time, violations are also recorded in other categories of food products. For example, last year, the Rosselkhoznadzor found pork DNA in samples of poultry sausage products produced by JSC Tsaritsyno and Sochi Meat Processing Plant. And in the products of the Dubki plant, an undeclared vegetable component, carrageenan, was found in the finished food product during laboratory tests. Izvestia sent requests to manufacturers asking them to comment on the violations identified, as well as to evaluate the senators' proposal to increase penalties.
"People with food allergies, orphan diseases, intolerance to certain components (such as lactose or gluten), as well as citizens who adhere to therapeutic and preventive or dietary nutrition are particularly vulnerable," the document emphasizes.
Currently, the control system of the Eurasian Economic Union is primarily focused on checking the microbiological and toxicological safety of products. At the same time, a significant part of modern counterfeits — for example, using substitutes for milk fat, vegetable proteins and other ingredients — formally do not pose an immediate threat and do not cause acute poisoning, but they have significantly reduced nutritional value, the authors of the initiative note. This, in their opinion, causes long-term damage to the health of citizens, and also allows manufacturers to reduce the cost of goods and dump, creating an environment for unfair competition.
Among the reasons for the spread of such violations, insufficient control over the turnover of products in the field of social (schools, hospitals) and public catering (cafes, bars, restaurants), as well as in online commerce is also indicated. An additional factor is the disproportionality of the current administrative sanctions to the economic benefits that unscrupulous businesses receive.
"The sanctions for misleading consumers, established by Article 14.7 of the Administrative Code, have not been reviewed since 2014. Taking into account the accumulated inflation of 130% for the period from 2014 to 2025, fines (from 100 to 500 thousand rubles for legal entities) actually decriminalize consumer deception, making their payment more profitable than compliance with the requirements," the document says.
The senators point to the "urgent need for a multiple (up to 10 times) increase" in sanctions for misleading consumers and providing false information about the properties of goods, including when issuing product conformity declarations.
In addition, it is proposed to consolidate in legislation the mechanism of "automatic fines" and auto warnings, which will be issued on the basis of deviations recorded in the state monitoring system (GIS MT), and the mechanism for terminating declarations if systematic violations are detected.
Izvestia sent requests to the government, the Ministry of Agriculture, the Ministry of Industry and Trade, the Rosselkhoznadzor and other agencies with a request to comment on the prospect of supporting the senators' proposals. The press service of the Cabinet of Ministers reported that the document had been received.
Rospotrebnadzor told Izvestia that increasing responsibility for consumer deception is a long overdue measure.
"The current fines have largely lost their deterrent effect: for some businesses, they are perceived as acceptable costs, especially when it comes to massive and difficult—to-detect violations, such as incorrect labeling or distortion of information about the composition of products," the press service noted.
They added that a multiple increase in sanctions can play a positive role, primarily as a preventive tool. However, it is important to understand that the increase in fines alone will not be a universal solution.
"The inevitability of punishment is of key importance — the effectiveness of control, the practice of inspections and the quality of the evidence base when violations are detected," the department stressed. — As for the prevalence of the problem, it remains high. We are talking not only about gross falsifications, but also about milder forms of misleading the consumer — marketing formulations, incorrect information about the properties of the product, substitution of ingredients. Such violations are regularly recorded both by the supervisory authorities and through appeals from citizens.
Rospotrebnadzor believes that, in general, the initiative can be supported, but on condition that it is implemented in conjunction with increased control and differentiation of responsibility: so that tougher measures are applied primarily to intentional and systemic violations, and not to formal mistakes by bona fide manufacturers.
Pros and cons of increased penalties for businesses
"We consider a possible increase in fines for deceiving consumers and covertly changing product properties primarily as a preventive measure that will encourage businesses to refrain from violations and behave in good faith," Vyacheslav Timchenko, head of the Federation Council Committee on Regulations, explained to Izvestia.
The senator also noted that thanks to the consistent implementation of the labeling system, it was possible to achieve a noticeable decrease in the share of counterfeit products — in some industries it has already dropped below 0.01%.
According to Oleg Pavlov, head of the Public Council at Rospotrebnadzor, sausage products remain the most problematic category this year: in some types, the proportion of samples with signs of adulteration can reach 60-70%.
"The violations are related to the detection of antibiotics, undeclared dyes, preservatives and other undeclared components (starch, gum, carrageenan, pork skin, soy flour, monosodium glutamate), and a lack of protein," he told Izvestia.
As an example, he cited recent violations by the manufacturer of the sausage "Papa can", which was claimed by the manufacturer as beef, but turned out to be pork. Izvestia sent a request to the manufacturer.
— Current fines for large enterprises often pay off with profits from the sale of fakes. It is more profitable for the violator to pay 100-500 thousand rubles. having earned millions by covertly using cheap raw materials," Oleg Pavlov explained.
He noted that in many ways, the current moratorium on business inspections often prevents supervisors from applying full-fledged sanctions and forces them to limit themselves to warnings.
— We are against counterfeiting, but it is difficult to agree with such an increase in fines. First of all, it is unclear why 10 times, and not 100 times? How is this justified? Shouldn't a raise be adequate? Secondly, whether consultations have been held with the business community and whether an assessment of the regulatory impact of this initiative has been given," said Alexander Kalinin, President of Opora Russia.
In addition, it is important to clearly define what kind of deception we are talking about and whether such products pose a real threat to consumers. According to the expert, if the substitution of raw materials is not associated with health risks, it may be more correct to talk about the reclassification of goods rather than tougher penalties, especially in an already difficult business situation.
Переведено сервисом «Яндекс Переводчик»
