C-level insights regarding awareness and optimal design of the European Commission’s leniency programme

The European Commission’s leniency programme is central to EU cartel enforcement, yet little evidence exists on whether senior decision-makers understand the programme or which features they consider most effective. This article presents exploratory evidence from a survey of 70 C-level managers in Belgium, France and Luxembourg. 70% were unaware of leniency options, and only 6% knew the conditions for applying. After receiving a brief explanation of the programme, respondents identified reputation as the principal consideration when contemplating disclosure. 57% regarded protection against follow-on damages claims and exposure to sanctions in other jurisdictions as more important than immunity from fines. Moreover, 73% considered that fine reductions should depend on the quality of the evidence provided, while 74% supported some form of leniency after an investigation had begun. The findings indicate that awareness is a prerequisite for effective leniency policy and should be strengthened through training.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
European Competition Journal
Published
2026-08-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/17441056.2026.2711570
Primary Topic
Merger and Competition Analysis
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

C-level insights regarding awareness and optimal design of the European Commission’s leniency programme

Stan Maes, Caroline Buts, Jil Theis
European Competition Journal
Merger and Competition Analysis
article

C-level insights regarding awareness and optimal design of the European Commission’s leniency programme

Stan Maes, Caroline Buts, Jil Theis
article en

Abstract

The European Commission’s leniency programme is central to EU cartel enforcement, yet little evidence exists on whether senior decision-makers understand the programme or which features they consider most effective. This article presents exploratory evidence from a survey of 70 C-level managers in Belgium, France and Luxembourg. 70% were unaware of leniency options, and only 6% knew the conditions for applying. After receiving a brief explanation of the programme, respondents identified reputation as the principal consideration when contemplating disclosure. 57% regarded protection against follow-on damages claims and exposure to sanctions in other jurisdictions as more important than immunity from fines. Moreover, 73% considered that fine reductions should depend on the quality of the evidence provided, while 74% supported some form of leniency after an investigation had begun. The findings indicate that awareness is a prerequisite for effective leniency policy and should be strengthened through training.

European Competition Journal
Vrije Universiteit Brussel (BE)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Merger and Competition Analysis
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.