California 2023-2024 Regular Session

California Senate Bill SB697

Introduced
2/16/23  
Introduced
2/16/23  
Refer
3/1/23  
Report Pass
4/20/23  
Report Pass
4/20/23  
Refer
4/20/23  
Report Pass
5/18/23  
Report Pass
5/18/23  
Engrossed
5/26/23  
Engrossed
5/26/23  
Refer
6/8/23  
Refer
6/21/23  
Refer
6/21/23  
Refer
5/20/24  
Refer
6/10/24  
Refer
6/10/24  
Report Pass
7/2/24  
Report Pass
7/2/24  

Caption

Conspiracy against trade: punishment.

Impact

This bill represents a considerable shift in the punitive landscape surrounding trade violations in California. By imposing heavier financial and legal repercussions for conspiracy-related offenses, the legislation aims to deter corporations and individuals from engaging in practices that restrict competition and harm market integrity. The increased maximum penalties signify the state's commitment to upholding fair trade and encouraging ethical business practices. Furthermore, the bill includes provisions for the reimbursement of local agencies and school districts for costs incurred due to these changes, should they be determined as state mandates.

Summary

Senate Bill 697, introduced by Senator Hurtado, aims to amend Section 16755 of the Business and Professions Code, with a focus on enhancing the punishment for conspiracy against trade, as outlined in the Cartwright Act. The proposed changes include significant increases to fines and terms of imprisonment for individuals and corporations found guilty of trade conspiracies. Specifically, the bill raises the maximum fine for corporations from $1,000,000 to $100,000,000 and extends the potential prison time for individuals from a maximum of 3 years to 10 years, effective from January 1, 2026.

Sentiment

The general sentiment surrounding SB 697 appears to be one of support from consumer advocacy groups and agencies that oversee trade regulations, who view the bill as a necessary step towards creating a more equitable marketplace. However, advocates for businesses have expressed concerns, arguing that such significant penalties may lead to unintended consequences, such as discouraging legitimate business operations and stifling entrepreneurship. The polarized views highlight the ongoing debate between protecting market competition and fostering a business-friendly environment.

Contention

Notable points of contention include the feasibility and ethical implications of imposing such severe penalties. Critics argue that while the intention to address trade conspiracies is commendable, the punitive measures may excessively target business practices that do not significantly impair competition. There is also concern regarding the potential for these changes to lead to overreach in regulatory enforcement, disproportionately impacting small businesses and start-ups that lack resources to navigate complex legal challenges. The bill's implications on economic growth and job creation may continue to fuel discussions as legislators weigh its prospective benefits against its punitive nature.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA SB763

Conspiracy against trade: punishment.

CA AB535

Threatening a witness: assisting a prosecution.

CA AB578

Threatening a witness: threats to report immigration status.

NJ A3046

Restores the death penalty for certain murders.

NJ A1260

Restores the death penalty for certain murders.

NJ A2435

Reinstates the death penalty for certain murders.

NJ S1672

Reinstates the death penalty for certain murders.

CA SB1094

Wrongful convictions.