Accuracy in a merger review is not something companies can afford to overlook. On 8 October 2026, the European Commission (the EC) fined Kingspan €40 million for providing incorrect and misleading information during the review of its proposed acquisition of Trimo. What makes the case even more striking is that the EC pursued the procedural breach even though Kingspan had already abandoned the transaction.

The decision is an important reminder of the care required when providing information in merger proceedings and offers several practical lessons for businesses:

• Abandoning the deal does not end the risk. Kingspan abandoned the transaction in April 2022, but the EC opened its investigation into the information provided during the merger review seven months later.

• Think twice before saying “it doesn’t exist”. The EC identified assertions that certain key documents did not exist and claims that certain information could not be provided among the conduct that obstructed its investigation. 

• Know what your business knows. The infringements concerned information relating to matters within the company’s own knowledge, including bidding data, board involvement and R&D. 

• Separate inaccuracies can mean separate fines. The EC found four distinct infringements and imposed a separate €10 million fine for each. 

• Intent to mislead is not required. The EC found that Kingspan could not have been unaware of its obligations under the EU Merger Regulation and that the infringements were therefore at least negligent. 

The deal and the merger review process

Kingspan, an Irish manufacturer of insulation and building envelope solutions, notified its proposed acquisition of Trimo, a Slovenian competitor, to the EC in March 2021. Both companies produce and distribute mineral fibre sandwich panels used in industrial and commercial buildings. The EC opened an in-depth investigation in April 2021 over concerns that the transaction could negatively affect competition in certain building materials markets. It issued a Statement of Objections (SO) in March 2022, and the parties abandoned the transaction the following month.

That was not, however, the end of the story. Seven months later, in November 2022, the EC opened a separate investigation into the information Kingspan had provided to the EC during the merger review. In March 2024, it issued a SO alleging six instances of incorrect and/or misleading information. After considering Kingspan’s response and further refining its objections in a supplementary SO, the EC dropped two of the six allegations and ultimately found four infringements in its October 2026 decision.

The four infringements

According to the EC, the incorrect or misleading information was provided either in the Form CO or in Kingspan’s replies to requests for information under Articles 11(2) and 11(3) of the EU Merger Regulation. The four infringements concerned:

• Penetration rates. Providing misleading information about how Kingspan tracked penetration rates for mineral fibre sandwich panels, a metric used to show how much a product is used compared with other products. 

• Bidding data. Providing incorrect and/or misleading information about the availability of records of bids Kingspan had won and lost, data that is generally used in merger investigations to assess competitive dynamics.

• Board involvement. Providing incorrect information about Kingspan’s board members’ involvement in the proposed Trimo acquisition, other contemplated acquisitions, industry trends and business strategy.

• R&D. Providing incorrect and/or misleading information about Kingspan’s R&D relating to mineral fibre sandwich panels.

The EC considered each of the four infringements as serious because they obstructed its investigation and made it more difficult to properly assess the transaction. It also found that Kingspan could not have been unaware of its obligations under the EU Merger Regulation and that the infringements were therefore at least negligent. 

What is particularly noteworthy is the nature of the information involved. The infringements did not concern market share estimates or other information prepared specifically for the transaction. Instead, they related to information generated or maintained by the business in the ordinary course of business, such as the metrics it monitors, bidding records, board involvement in strategic matters, and R&D activities. The EC expressly noted that this type of information, generally available only from the company itself, can be key to understanding its position in the market.

At €40 million, the Kingspan fine is a significant addition to the EC’s enforcement record for incorrect or misleading information in merger proceedings. It follows other substantial penalties for similar infringements, including fines of €110 million on Facebook in 2017 and €52 million on General Electric in 2019, amongst others.

Conclusion

The Kingspan decision is a strong reminder that accuracy is an integral part of managing merger control risk, not simply an administrative aspect of the filing process. Given the authorities’ reliance on notifications and responses to requests for information, submissions need to be both accurate and complete.

For businesses, this means looking beyond the deal team when gathering and verifying information for regulatory filings. This may require checking internal records and consulting individuals with the relevant knowledge, particularly before concluding that documents do not exist or that requested information cannot be provided. As Kingspan demonstrates, the consequences of getting this wrong may persist even if the transaction itself does not proceed, underscoring the need for care at every stage of the regulatory process.