The release of the Philippine Competition Commission’s (PCC) decision on the onion cartel case shows the extraordinary effort required to go after traders who supposedly gamed the system to increase their profits. (See, ‘Onion cartel’s P1.76-B bill unpaid, still growing-PCC,’ in the BusinessMirror, October 15, 2026). The case first captured the attention of the nation in late 2022, when the price of a kilo of onion skyrocketed to as high as the daily minimum wage of a worker in Metro Manila. The holiday season and the reopening of the economy were cited as among the chief reasons for the spike in the price of a popular ingredient.
It took the government almost four years to conclude that a cartel was behind the unusual rise in the price of onions. PCC defines ‘cartel’ as an association of businesses in the industry colluding with one another to substantially prevent, restrict, or lessen competition. In the decision it issued last October 1, PCC charged that certain importers and distributors colluded to drive up the prices of onion to as much as P800 per kilo in December 2022.
The process undertaken by the PCC is proof of the difficulties faced by the state and other stakeholders in preventing schemes that put the local farm sector and the consumers at a disadvantage. For one, the high retail prices did not translate into extra earnings for farmers. While onions are not as important as rice in the diet of Filipinos, the high prices also contributed to inflation.
Moreover, the case highlighted the support required by concerned government agencies in uncovering such schemes. Protecting farmers and consumers should start at the ports, where imported agricultural products are assessed and examined before they are delivered to end users. Aside from making sure that these products are slapped the correct tariffs and other taxes, those responsible for manning our ports should see to it that the food items are not misdeclared to prevent the importer from paying higher duties.
As for production decisions that would have reduced the country’s reliance on imports, the Department of Agriculture (DA) has activated its own statistics office, which will ‘centralize data for policymaking,’ but this was announced only in August. (See, ‘DA activates statistics office,’ in the BusinessMirror, August 24, 2026). The goal of AgriStat, according to the agency, is to adopt modern technologies to support the agency’s data-driven decision-making. Prior to this, however, there was no mechanism that would have allowed both the national and local governments to monitor the flow of agricultural goods in the country.
This oversight and other loopholes in the domestic food trade have been exploited by unscrupulous businessmen for many years and have certainly contributed to the declining share of the agricultural sector to the country’s GDP. Despite its potential to prop up the economy, the Philippine farm sector could not raise its contribution to GDP partly because of the fragmented agriculture data system and the inability of farmers to get accurate information that would guide their production decisions. It also does not help that the state could not penalize more traders that have been exploiting the weaknesses of the sector for their own gain.