Foodstuffs-commissioned review criticises break-up modelling
Foodstuffs has commissioned an independent review that challenges government-backed modelling suggesting that breaking up the supermarket chain would lower consumer prices. The review argues that the projected benefits are economically implausible and could lead to industry-wide losses.
Why it matters
This debate impacts national economic policy and the cost of living for consumers in New Zealand.
<p>Foodstuffs has come out swinging against proposals to split it up, releasing a review it commissioned that criticises modelling of the benefits as "economically implausible".</p> <p><b>By Giles Dexter of </b><a href="https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/politics_election-2026/1672665/foodstuffs-commissioned-review-criticises-split-modelling" target="_blank"><b>RNZ</b></a><b></b></p> <p>National is proposing to get the Commerce Commission to review whether severing Pak'nSave from New World and Four Square would leave shoppers better off, and if the conclusion finds it would, then National would legislate the separation.</p> <p>When announcing the proposal last month, National's finance and economic growth spokesperson Nicola Willis said the proposal followed a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis written for the Ministry of Business, Innovation, and Employment by Sense Partners, as well as two peer-reviews she commissioned as finance minister.</p> <p>Sense Partners' modelling estimated prices would be about 3.5% lower on average in the first year of separation, with gains growing as the new chains bedded in.</p> <p>By 2035, the estimated annual household benefit ranged from $200…
Get smarter about the news
Sign up free for a feed built around what you actually care about, Dive Deeper research on any story, and the full text of every article.
Create free accountAlready have an account? Sign in