How should supermarket competition be fixed?

One consent process for new supermarkets, and overseas food labels accepted by default.ACT would set up a one-stop process so a business opening one or more supermarkets could get its resource consents, liquor licences and other approvals in one place, which ACT says would take "months, not years". Alcohol licence applications would be dealt with earlier. Food labelled for the UK, EU or US could be sold without relabelling, which ACT says would let overseas chains enter without special product runs for Australasia. ACT has not published a cost or start date. It opposes forced break-ups of Foodstuffs or Woolworths and has indicated it would block them in a re-elected coalition. The biggest tradeoff: it relies on a new chain choosing to enter, and a faster consenting route the government announced in 2025 had no supermarket applications by July 2026.

Approaches

Make it easier for new supermarkets to open. One consent process for new stores; accept UK, EU and US food labels.A single point for consents, liquor licences and approvals, and overseas food labels accepted without relabelling.

Move at least 120 supermarkets into a public chain, KiwiMart, and ban excessive prices.The Greens would require Woolworths and Foodstuffs to sell at least 120 stores and distribution centre capacity into public ownership, forming KiwiMart, a publicly owned chain with a mandate to keep prices down. The Commerce Commission would choose the stores based on local market share and set compensation. The party estimates the cost at about $2.8 billion: $1.3 billion to buy the stores and two distribution centres and $1.5 billion to set up the business. It would also ban excessive supermarket prices, require supermarkets to disclose their margins, and give the Commerce Commission more funding, higher fines and power to issue binding directions. No start date or funding source has been published. The biggest tradeoff: taxpayers would carry the commercial risk of running a supermarket chain.

Approaches

Create a public supermarket chain. Move at least 120 stores into KiwiMart, a publicly owned chain.Woolworths and Foodstuffs would sell at least 120 stores and two distribution centres into public ownership, at about $2.8 billion.

Ban excessive prices. Ban excessive supermarket prices and require margin disclosure.An immediate ban on excessive supermarket prices, later extended to energy and fuel.

Give the regulator more power. More funding, higher fines and binding powers for the Commerce Commission.The Commission could issue binding directions and regulate loyalty schemes and store brands.

Separate the chains' wholesale arms from their stores, and ban "price gouging".Labour would require Woolworths and Foodstuffs to run their wholesale businesses separately from their supermarkets, as Foodstuffs Wholesale and Woolworths Wholesale, with pricing firewalled between them. Labour says smaller grocers would get guaranteed wholesale supply on fair terms, Four Square owners would be released from contract rules that stop them cutting prices or going independent, and "junk fees" on suppliers would be banned. A separate law would ban "price gouging" by large firms with market power in groceries and other essentials, with refunds to consumers. Labour aims to pass the legal framework within 100 days; 1News reports the split would follow a Commerce Commission review. No cost has been published. The biggest tradeoff: separating wholesale from retail could lose some of the efficiencies of running them together.

Approaches

Break up the existing chains. Run the chains' wholesale arms separately from their supermarkets.Foodstuffs Wholesale and Woolworths Wholesale would be run independently, with pricing firewalled from the stores.

Ban excessive prices. Make "price gouging" illegal for big firms selling groceries and other essentials.Firms with significant market power that charge prices well above cost could be taken to court and made to repay shoppers.

Support local and Māori-owned sellers. Guarantee small grocers wholesale supply and lift contract limits on Four Square owners.Smaller grocers get supply that cannot be cut off as they grow, and store owners can cut prices or go independent.

Split PAK'nSAVE from New World and Four Square if the Commerce Commission agrees.National would amend the Grocery Industry Competition Act within 100 days, then give the Commerce Commission six months to test whether separating PAK'nSAVE from New World and Four Square would leave shoppers better off. If the Commission says yes, National would legislate the split, creating three national chains alongside Woolworths; if not, it would not go ahead. Owner-operators would keep their stores and brands. A cost-benefit analysis for MBIE, which National's page refers to, estimates prices about 3.5% lower in the first year and a $2.9 billion net benefit over 20 years. The government it leads announced a faster consenting route for new supermarkets in 2025. ACT, its current partner, says it would block the split. The biggest tradeoff: the modelled benefit disappears if supply costs rise by more than about 2%.

Approaches

Make it easier for new supermarkets to open. Keep the faster consenting route for new supermarkets.The government's 2025 "express lane" for supermarket consents, which National has not said it would change. It had received no supermarket applications by July 2026.

Break up the existing chains. Split PAK'nSAVE from New World and Four Square, if the Commerce Commission agrees.Foodstuffs would become two national chains, creating three with Woolworths, only if a six-month Commission test finds shoppers gain.

Split Foodstuffs into two competing co-operatives and toughen competition penalties.NZ First would pass a law splitting Foodstuffs into two nationwide co-operatives by brand: one for New World and Four Square, and one for PAK'nSAVE, both competing with Woolworths. It would raise Commerce Commission penalties for serious breaches to Australian levels (up to $10 million, three times the gain, or 10% of turnover), speed up investigations, give the Grocery Commissioner power to make binding decisions and impose penalties, and allow industry rules under the Commerce Act, including on shelf access for producers. Its policy page does not make the split depend on a Commerce Commission test. NZ First has not published a cost, timeline or details of how the split would work. The biggest tradeoff: the same split was modelled for MBIE as beneficial only if supply costs rise by less than about 2%.

Approaches

Break up the existing chains. Split Foodstuffs into a PAK'nSAVE co-operative and a New World and Four Square one.A law would create two nationwide co-operatives by brand, both competing with Woolworths.

Give the regulator more power. Australian-level penalties and a Grocery Commissioner with binding powers.Fines of up to $10 million, three times the gain or 10% of turnover, and faster investigations.

Let the Commerce Commission break up uncompetitive firms, including supermarkets, through the High Court.Opportunity would give the Commerce Commission more independence, $20 million a year in extra funding, and the legal power to break up duopolies and other uncompetitive markets through the High Court, modelled on EU and UK law. The power would apply across the economy, including supermarkets, banking and electricity, rather than naming a specific split. A $5 million a year consumer advocacy fund would also be set up. Opportunity has made empowering the Commission one of its coalition bottom lines, and says its changes would save families $12 to $31 a week across supermarkets, banks and other sectors. The biggest tradeoff: any split would depend on a Commission investigation and court case, so it is unclear which firms would be affected or when.

Approaches

Break up the existing chains. Let the Commission seek court-ordered break-ups of supermarkets and other duopolies.The High Court could order structural separation of firms in uncompetitive markets, on the Commission's application.

Give the regulator more power. More independence and $20 million a year more for the Commerce Commission.The Commission would get more funding and independence, plus a $5 million a year consumer advocacy fund.

$100 million to set up Māori-owned supermarket chains, and protect local kai sellers.Te Pāti Māori would provide $100 million in seed funding for Māori collectives to set up supermarket chains, and give them access to Crown or council land in commercially viable locations. It would protect whānau selling homegrown, homekill and roadside kai, and work with councils to free up land for growing food. These sit in a $3.1 billion kai sovereignty package, most of which ($2.8 billion) is an income tax kai credit for people earning $60,000 or less. The party's tax plan, which introduced the kai credit, proposes new taxes including a wealth tax and a stamp duty. It has not said how the supermarket funding would be allocated or when. The biggest tradeoff: new chains may struggle to reach the scale of the existing groups.

Approaches

Support local and Māori-owned sellers. $100 million and public land to start Māori-owned supermarkets; protect local kai sellers.Seed funding and Crown or council land for Māori collectives to set up chains, and protection for roadside and homegrown kai sellers.