This paper focusses on issues related to competition law enforcement and specificities of LAC jurisdictions, while building on previous OECD discussions on the broader topic of competition policy and the informal economy (OECD, 2010[3]; 2018[2]). It highlights that informality is widespread, economically significant, and can distort competition in the LAC region. As a natural consequence, informal markets account for a substantial share of economic activity across the LAC jurisdictions and increasingly interact with formal markets in many ways (e.g. direct competition at the horizontal level, buyers or suppliers of inputs in vertical supply chains, and labour markets). Competition authorities should be mindful of the role of informal players in market dynamics, avoiding the risk of missing relevant competitive forces (the so-called “blind spot”), improving the quality of competition analysis and increasing the effectiveness of competition law enforcement.
Building on a dataset of 25 selected cases from 10 jurisdictions of the LAC region, the paper also reveals a number of analytical and procedural challenges for competition authorities when addressing informal markets, such as difficulties in identifying market participants, obtaining reliable economic data, serving process, collecting evidence and calculating proportionate fines, which can complicate investigations and weaken deterrence. Although competition enforcement in informal markets is significantly hindered by data gaps and institutional constraints, practical solutions exist: the use of official statistical datasets, market studies, proxy indicators, digital evidence and closer co-operation with public institutions can substantially improve competition assessments while preserving procedural safeguards and legal certainty.
At the same time, enforcement actions in informal markets should remain proportionate, pragmatic and targeted. Competition authorities should calibrate their interventions according to the characteristics of the market and the conduct under investigation, combining traditional enforcement tools with advocacy, guidance and institutional engagement where appropriate. Such an approach helps protect the competitive process while contributing to a stronger culture of competition among businesses that may have limited familiarity with competition law – as seen in a recent cartel case in Chile (FNE, 2025[27]).
Looking ahead, strengthening institutional frameworks and supporting the transition towards greater formalisation will remain essential for improving both market functioning and the effectiveness of competition enforcement. Competition authorities cannot address informality alone, but they can make an important contribution by promoting regulatory reforms that reduce unnecessary barriers to formalisation, improving inter-institutional co-operation and supporting evidence-based public policies – the proposed the “Observatory of Competition and Informal Economy” in the Dominican Republic emerges as a positive example.
Lastly, and as digitalisation continues to reshape informal markets by simultaneously expanding their reach and increasing the availability of market information, competition authorities will also have new opportunities to monitor competitive dynamics and detect anti-competitive conduct. Adapting enforcement tools to these evolving market realities will be increasingly important to ensure that competition policy remains effective, inclusive and responsive to the full spectrum of economic activity in the LAC region.