In July 2024, Spain’s National Commission on Markets and Competition (CNMC) imposed a €413.24 million fine on Booking.com for abusing its dominant position in the online hotel booking market (La CNMC multa a Booking.com con 413,24 millones por abusar de su posición de dominio durante los últimos 5 años | Centro Europeo del Consumidor en España – Ministerio de Consumo).

This was the largest competition fine ever issued in Spain for abuse of dominance (La CNMC multa a Booking.com con 413,24 millones por abusar de su posición de dominio durante los últimos 5 años | Centro Europeo del Consumidor en España – Ministerio de Consumo).

The penalty was split into two equal fines of €206.62 million each, corresponding to two types of abuse the CNMC found (exploitative conditions on hotels and exclusionary practices against rival agencies) (La CNMC multa a Booking.com con 413,24 millones por abusar de su posición de dominio durante los últimos 5 años | CNMC).

Booking.com held an estimated 70–90% market share in Spain’s online hotel reservations during the infringement period, which contributed to the CNMC treating the case as a “very serious” violation of competition law.

Methodology for Determining the Amount

Spanish competition law (Law 15/2007, Defense of Competition) sets fines based on a percentage of the offending company’s turnover, up to a maximum of 10% of total business volume (usually worldwide turnover) for very grave infringements (La CNMC investiga a Booking por posible abuso de posición dominante con los hoteles | Economía | EL PAÍS) (Competencia investiga a Apple por posible abuso de posición de dominio y le amenaza con una multa de hasta 35.000 millones). In this case, the CNMC followed a multi-step approach to calculate a proportionate and deterrent fine:

• Relevant Turnover as Base: Regulators first identified Booking.com’s revenue in the affected market in Spain (essentially the commissions earned from hotel bookings in Spain) during the infringement period (). Using this Spanish market turnover as the base ensured the fine reflected the economic scale of the violation in Spain (i.e. the illicit gains or impact in the Spanish hotel sector) (). This approach aligns with EU and Spanish fining guidelines, which use affected-market sales to set a base fine before adjustments.

• Percentage “Sanction Rate”: The CNMC then applied a percentage to that Spanish turnover to derive a preliminary fine. Although the exact percentages are confidential, the CNMC’s internal calculations indicate it considered single-digit percentages of Booking’s Spanish revenues. Notably, the CNMC appears to have increased the percentage for the period after April 2021, treating continued conduct (after Booking was likely aware of the investigation) as more egregious (). For example, the investigating authority had proposed a 3.5% rate for 2019–April 2021 and 7% for April 2021 onward for one of the abuses (). This scaling up suggests the duration and persistence of the offense (from 2019 through 2023, over 4½ years) was factored in – longer, ongoing infringements warranted a higher rate.

• Deterrence Factor: The CNMC also added an increment to ensure the fine was high enough to deter future violations (). Given Booking’s size and profits, the fine needed to be significant to have a punitive and deterrent effect. (For context, Booking Holdings provisioned $530 million in anticipation of this fine (Multa a Booking ¿Qué escenarios se abren para hoteles y competidores?), and still earned over $4.2 billion profit in 2023.

• Proportionality Check: Crucially, the CNMC cross-checked the resulting figure against legal limits and the actual gravity of harm. If they had simply applied the maximum percentages to Booking’s global turnover in 2023, the fine could have been disproportionately high relative to the Spanish market impact (). (Spanish law allows up to 10% of worldwide turnover (Competencia investiga a Apple por posible abuso de posición de dominio y le amenaza con una multa de hasta 35.000 millones), which for Booking Holdings could exceed €1.3 billion, far above €413M.) To avoid over-penalization, the CNMC capped the fine at a “proportionate” level tied to the Spanish market impact (). In the final decision, the CNMC explicitly noted it adjusted the fine downward from the initially signaled amount (approximately €486 million in a draft decision) to ensure the sanction was commensurate with “the effective scale of the infringement” in Spain () (La CNMC multa a Booking con 413 millones de euros: la mayor sanción de la historia de España por abuso de posición de dominio). They determined that €206.62 million per infringement was the maximum needed to be effective yet proportionate (). This yielded the total €413.24 million fine.

In summary, the fine was calculated by applying a percentage (below the 10% legal cap) to Booking’s Spain-derived revenues, accounting for the infringement’s duration and severity, and then calibrating the sum to be proportionate and dissuasive () ().

Revenue Base: Spain vs. Worldwide

Although the legal limit for the fine is defined in terms of the company’s worldwide turnover (Competencia investiga a Apple por posible abuso de posición de dominio y le amenaza con una multa de hasta 35.000 millones), the calculation itself was grounded in Booking.com’s revenues from its Spanish operations. Official statements emphasize that the reference point was the “turnover in the affected market during the infringement” () – in this case, the online hotel booking intermediary market in Spain. By using Spanish market revenue, the CNMC aimed to tie the fine to the economic harm/local gains from the anti-competitive conduct.

However, the CNMC also ensured the final penalty did not exceed what is permissible against Booking’s global revenue. Under Spanish law (harmonized with EU rules), an abuse of dominance is a very serious infringement potentially punishable up to 10% of the firm’s total worldwide turnover in the preceding year (Competencia investiga a Apple por posible abuso de posición de dominio y le amenaza con una multa de hasta 35.000 millones). For Booking Holdings (Booking.com’s parent), that 10% threshold is in the billions of euros, so the €413M fine was well within the cap (roughly 2%–3% of Booking’s 2023 global turnover). In effect, Booking.com’s massive global sales set an upper bound, but the CNMC chose an amount linked to Spanish revenues to reflect local impact ().

It’s worth noting that the CNMC’s decision was made shortly after a legal clarification in 2021 that fines could be imposed “per infringement” up to the 10%-turnover limit () (). In this case the authority identified two distinct infringements and theoretically could have fined up to 10% for each. But as noted, they moderated the rate so that each abuse drew ~5–7% of the relevant Spanish turnover (not the full 10%), yielding €206.6M + €206.6M (). This indicates the fine was primarily based on Booking’s Spain-generated revenue, while staying compliant with the global-turnover ceiling.

Role of Number of Accommodations in Spain

The breadth of affected hotels and accommodations in Spain was an important factor in assessing the gravity of the offense, though not a direct formula in the fine calculation. Booking.com’s practices impacted a huge swath of the Spanish hospitality sector. According to industry reports, Booking had contracts with nearly 200,000 hotels and lodging establishments in Spain (Multa a Booking ¿Qué escenarios se abren para hoteles y competidores?). This dominance meant that tens of thousands of Spanish businesses were subject to Booking’s contractual restrictions (e.g. price parity clauses) and potentially harmed by its conduct. In fact, the investigation was triggered by complaints from Spanish hotel associations, and after the CNMC’s decision, over 10,000 hotel operators considered joining forces to claim damages for the harm suffered (El fallo europeo contra Booking da alas a los hoteleros españoles afectados que decidieron demandar tras la sanción de la CNMC).

While the fine itself was calculated from revenue figures, the CNMC’s decision explicitly recognized that Booking’s abuses “affected hotels located in Spain” and distorted their commercial conditions (La CNMC multa a Booking.com con 413,24 millones por abusar de su posición de dominio durante los últimos 5 años | CNMC). The sheer number of accommodations reliant on Booking.com underscored the scope of the anti-competitive effects, justifying a heavy sanction. In other words, the wider the impact (more hotels affected), the more serious the infringement was deemed – which would naturally call for a larger fine within the allowable range. The CNMC likely took into account that the practices were nationwide and systematic (not an isolated incident), harming a broad segment of Spain’s hotel industry. This broad impact would be an aggravating element when setting the fine’s magnitude.

Thus, although there isn’t evidence of a formula like “€X per hotel,” the nearly 200,000 Spanish properties dependent on Booking illustrate the market power being abused (Multa a Booking ¿Qué escenarios se abren para hoteles y competidores?). The fine’s size reflects that market-wide harm. It sends a message that undermining thousands of Spanish businesses through unfair terms is unacceptable. As the CNMC noted, the aim was to impose “behavioral obligations” on Booking alongside the fine to ensure it stops those practices (La CNMC multa a Booking.com con 413,24 millones por abusar de su posición de dominio durante los últimos 5 años | CNMC) – highlighting concern for all affected hotels going forward.

Influence of Spain’s Tourism Sector and Economic Impact

Spain’s tourism and travel sector – a cornerstone of its economy – provided crucial context for this decision. Online travel agencies and hotel bookings make up a significant share of Spain’s digital economy. In 2023, Spanish e-commerce turnover exceeded €84 billion, and the “travel agencies and tour operators” category (which includes online hotel booking) accounted for €8.893 billion – about 10.6% of all Spanish e-commerce (Multa a Booking ¿Qué escenarios se abren para hoteles y competidores?). Booking.com is a dominant player in this arena, so its practices have a major economic impact. By foreclosing competition and squeezing hotels, Booking’s conduct could affect pricing, innovation, and revenues in a sector that is vital to Spain (tourism traditionally contributes around 12% of Spain’s GDP).

While the CNMC’s fine was grounded in legal criteria (market dominance, abusive conduct, turnover-based calculation), the importance of the tourism sector likely amplified the urgency and scale of the enforcement. The CNMC explicitly remarked that Booking’s actions hindered other online agencies from entering or growing in the market (La CNMC multa a Booking.com con 413,24 millones por abusar de su posición de dominio durante los últimos 5 años | CNMC), which ultimately harms the health of Spain’s tourism distribution ecosystem. Protecting competition in such a strategic industry – one that employs many and generates substantial income – is a priority. This broader economic significance likely influenced the CNMC to impose a record-breaking fine, as a strong deterrent. It’s no coincidence that the fine was described as “unprecedently high”, signaling how seriously Spain views anti-competitive abuses in tourism (La CNMC multa a Booking con 413 millones de euros: la mayor sanción de la historia de España por abuso de posición de dominio).

In essence, Spain’s tourism-heavy economy set the stage for a tough response. An abuse impacting Spanish hotels and travelers isn’t just a minor regulatory issue; it strikes at a key economic sector. The need to safeguard competition in travel and maintain fair online markets for hotels gave the CNMC additional impetus to levy a heavy sanction. Even though the fine amount came from turnover calculations, the sectoral impact (hotel industry nationwide) was very much on the CNMC’s mind when deciding to enforce to the fullest extent (La CNMC multa a Booking.com con 413,24 millones por abusar de su posición de dominio durante los últimos 5 años | CNMC).

Other Factors Contributing to the Final Sum

Several additional factors and considerations played a role in arriving at the €413 million figure:

• Nature of the Violations (Exploitative and Exclusionary): The CNMC found two distinct abuses of dominance: (1) “exploitative” abuse against hotels (unfair conditions like narrow price parity, forcing Dutch law/forum, etc.) and (2) “exclusionary” abuse against rival agencies (using its ranking and programs to favor hotels that gave Booking more business, thus impeding other OTAs) (La CNMC multa a Booking.com con 413,24 millones por abusar de su posición de dominio durante los últimos 5 años | CNMC) (La CNMC multa a Booking.com con 413,24 millones por abusar de su posición de dominio durante los últimos 5 años | Centro Europeo del Consumidor en España – Ministerio de Consumo). Each was treated as a separate infringement, meriting its own fine of €206.62M. By “stacking” two fines, the CNMC effectively doubled the financial penalty (since both abuses occurred concurrently). This indicates the authority weighed both the harm to hotels and the harm to market competition. If only one type of abuse had been present, the fine total might have been roughly half. But because Booking engaged in multiple anti-competitive behaviors, the CNMC saw a need to penalize each one to fully address the wrongdoing (La CNMC multa a Booking.com con 413,24 millones por abusar de su posición de dominio durante los últimos 5 años | CNMC).

• Duration and Continuation Despite Warnings: The abuses persisted from January 1, 2019 through mid-2024 (“the last 5 years”) (La CNMC multa a Booking.com con 413,24 millones por abusar de su posición de dominio durante los últimos 5 años | Centro Europeo del Consumidor en España – Ministerio de Consumo). A multi-year violation is considered very serious; the longer the duration, the higher the fine under competition guidelines. Moreover, Booking.com continued its practices even after hotel groups complained in 2021 and even after the CNMC opened its case in 2022. The case record shows the CNMC applied a higher fine rate for the period after April 2021, which was around when the investigation was looming (). This suggests the CNMC viewed continued infringement, despite the company being on notice, as an aggravating factor. Essentially, Booking.com’s failure to voluntarily correct course led to a stiffer penalty. (Notably, Booking.com only removed its price-parity clauses in the EU on 1 July 2024, just weeks before the fine was announced, likely in anticipation of regulatory action (Multa a Booking ¿Qué escenarios se abren para hoteles y competidores?).)

• Precedents and Novelty Arguments: Booking.com argued that some allegations (like certain parity clauses or tying hotels to Dutch courts) were novel theories of harm, implying it wasn’t clear they were illegal (). The CNMC and courts firmly rejected this defense – dominant firms are expected to know that exploiting partners or blocking competition is unlawful, even if done in new ways () (). Thus, no leniency or reduction was granted for supposed lack of intent or novelty. The CNMC cited EU case law that novel forms of abuse are still punishable and that Booking’s conduct had parallels in other cases (e.g. price parity clauses were already scrutinized in Europe) (). This meant Booking did not receive any reduction for good faith; if anything, its massive market power meant it “could not ignore” the anti-competitive nature of its behavior ().

• Ability to Pay and Deterrence: Booking Holdings’ financial strength was considered so the fine would have real bite but not be overturned as excessive. With over $21.6 billion in revenue in 2023 (Multa a Booking ¿Qué escenarios se abren para hoteles y competidores?) and robust profits, Booking can absorb a fine in the hundreds of millions. The chosen amount (€413M) was significant enough to potentially hurt earnings (Booking had set aside ~$530M in anticipation) (Multa a Booking ¿Qué escenarios se abren para hoteles y competidores?), fulfilling the goal of deterrence. At the same time, it is below the legal maximum, which helps the CNMC defend it as proportionate if challenged in court. (In fact, Booking.com has appealed the fine to Spain’s Audiencia Nacional, which temporarily suspended the payment pending review – a standard judicial precaution, not a comment on the amount’s merit.)

• Public Interest and Market Impact: The CNMC accompanied the fine with corrective measures (behavioral remedies) to restore competition (La CNMC multa a Booking.com con 413,24 millones por abusar de su posición de dominio durante los últimos 5 años | CNMC). This underscores that the aim was not just punitive but to halt the anti-competitive effects in Spain’s tourism market. The size of the fine reflects the public interest at stake – ensuring hotels can set fair terms and new online travel competitors can emerge. Spain’s officials and industry observers saw the decision as a landmark move to “reset” the online hotel booking market in favor of fairness (Multa a Booking ¿Qué escenarios se abren para hoteles y competidores?). In short, the fine’s magnitude was influenced by the need to send a strong signal in a high-impact market.

In conclusion, Spanish authorities calculated the €413.24 million fine by grounding it in Booking.com’s Spanish revenues and competition law limits, splitting it across two major offenses, and scaling it to reflect the severity, duration, and widespread impact on Spain’s hotel and tourism sector. The result was a fine intended to be both proportionate to the harm done in Spain and severe enough to deter Booking (and other big tech platforms) from abusing their dominance in such a crucial market.

Sources:

• CNMC Official Resolution Summary, Exp. S/0005/21 – Booking (July 2024) () ().
• CNMC Press Release (30 July 2024) (La CNMC multa a Booking.com con 413,24 millones por abusar de su posición de dominio durante los últimos 5 años | CNMC) (La CNMC multa a Booking.com con 413,24 millones por abusar de su posición de dominio durante los últimos 5 años | CNMC); Ministry of Consumer Affairs note (La CNMC multa a Booking.com con 413,24 millones por abusar de su posición de dominio durante los últimos 5 años | Centro Europeo del Consumidor en España – Ministerio de Consumo) (La CNMC multa a Booking.com con 413,24 millones por abusar de su posición de dominio durante los últimos 5 años | Centro Europeo del Consumidor en España – Ministerio de Consumo).
• Spanish Competition Law (15/2007) and CNMC statements on fine limits (La CNMC investiga a Booking por posible abuso de posición dominante con los hoteles | Economía | EL PAÍS) (Competencia investiga a Apple por posible abuso de posición de dominio y le amenaza con una multa de hasta 35.000 millones).
• El País (17 Oct 2022) – initial investigation report, noting fines can range 1%–10% of turnover (La CNMC investiga a Booking por posible abuso de posición dominante con los hoteles | Economía | EL PAÍS).
• Xataka Tech News (Feb & Jul 2024) – on preliminary €486M figure and final fine (La CNMC multa a Booking con 413 millones de euros: la mayor sanción de la historia de España por abuso de posición de dominio).
• Hosteltur (Aug 2024) – analysis of Booking fine’s impact on hotels (market share 70–90%, ~200k accommodations, Booking’s finances) (Multa a Booking ¿Qué escenarios se abren para hoteles y competidores?) (Multa a Booking ¿Qué escenarios se abren para hoteles y competidores?).
• Business Insider España (Sep 2024) – notes 10,000+ establishments considering legal claims post-fine (El fallo europeo contra Booking da alas a los hoteleros españoles afectados que decidieron demandar tras la sanción de la CNMC).
• La Razón (Jul 2024) – explains 10% of worldwide turnover cap for very serious infringements (Competencia investiga a Apple por posible abuso de posición de dominio y le amenaza con una multa de hasta 35.000 millones).