Starkist Agrees to Plead Guilty in Tuna Price-Fixing Scheme, Faces $100 Million Fine

(San Francisco) - According to the authorities, StarKist agreed to allow pricing as part of extensive research of the tuna canned industry.

The federal prosecutor announced a defense agreement Thursday and stated that the company would face a fine of up to $ 100 million. Last year Bumble Bee Foods pleaded guilty to the same claim and paid a fine of $ 25 million.

The prosecution did not submit the prosecution because the company stated that the plan was revealed and cooperated in the investigation.

Two former executives of Bumble Bee and two former executives of StarKist also admitted price setting cost respectively.

Former Bumble Bee CEO Christopher Lischewski insisted that pricing is innocent.

Three companies were blamed for planning to artificially maintain high canned tuna prices between 2010 and 2013.

In March 2009, Hitachi Display acknowledged LCD pricing from LG Display, CPT and Sharp. According to the US Justice Department, Hitachi will pay a penalty of $ 31 million to repair the LCD price of LCD and notebook applications sold to Dell.

On 3 January 2013, the US Department of Justice said, "Trans Ocean Deepwater Company has agreed to acknowledge violations of the Water Purification Law and agreed to pay civil criminal fines and penalties totaling $ 1.4 billion. The fund will pay $ 300 million to the oil spill relief trust, $ 150 million to the National Wild Turkey Federation, $ 150 million to the National Academy of Sciences and $ 45 million to the oil spill relief fund in 2007 The state paid 25 million dollars for ancillary environmental projects and pays 20 million dollars

The US judge who reviewed the case approved the terms under DeBeers' agreement to comply with the US antitrust law. After the settlement in 2004, DeBeers acknowledged the price of industrial diamonds and agreed to a fine of $ 10 International companies and ethics business ethics issues are increasingly fascinating companies at home and abroad. This trend is highlighted by prominent examples of violations of recognized ethical conduct criteria. For example, with recent internal inspections and balancing with Enron's checks, unethical behavior occurred, external auditors were not able to properly perform their duties, and development became easier. Ethics and business assumptions are inevitably influenced by fundamental beliefs about business role in society. On the other hand, some people think that the company's only social responsibility is to generate profits.

Price monopoly violates federal and state competition laws by impeding fair competition in free markets. If the price is fixed at premium, raising profits gains higher profits than companies that did not participate in the plan. Likewise, if the price is fixed at a discount, companies that do not participate in collusion lose market share and sales. Violations of prices are illegal under federal laws of the Sherman Antitrust Act, as they are forbidden to compete against each other, which is a violation of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) civil violation and state antitrust law. Companies that are found guilty of price violations in Canada can declare sentences of up to 5 years, up to 10 million dollars, or both.