Jakarta, CNBC Indonesia - The decision by the Business Competition\nSupervisory Commission (KPPU) regarding the discovery of an online loan\ninterest cartel has elicited varied views from various parties. As is\nknown, in relation to that decision, the KPPU has imposed fines on 97\nonline lending companies totaling Rp755 billion.<\/p>\n
This, of course, burdens the industry. It is therefore no surprise\nthat the Indonesian Joint Funding Fintech Association (AFPI) considers\nthe KPPU to be overly forceful. Because AFPI views that there was no\nagreement on the maximum economic benefit limit (interest rate).<\/p>\n
According to the Director of Digital Economy at the Center of\nEconomic and Law Studies (CELIOS), Nailul Huda, the KPPU itself is\ncurrently riding high after winning the Google case.<\/p>\n
However, the issue is that there was knowledge from the regulator\nregarding the establishment of the economic benefit limit.<\/p>\n
\u201cEven if we trace the timeline of the case, before the establishment\nof the economic benefit or interest limit, the benefits and interest set\nby each platform were higher. That\u2019s why many pushed for the regulation\nof that limit,\u201d Nailul explained to CNBC Indonesia on Sunday\n(29\/3\/2026).<\/p>\n
According to him, due to a regulatory vacuum, there was an\nestablishment by the association, which is referential in nature,\nsimilar to what Bank Indonesia does. On that basis, this interest rate\nsetting actually benefits consumers.<\/p>\n
\u201cOn the other hand, the most felt impact is on lenders, not\nborrowers. Lenders as fund owners will rethink credibility. When that\nhappens, it will impact distribution as well. Whereas if you look at the\npinjol demand, I think it is still quite high. Borrowers don\u2019t really\ncare about the KPPU decision,\u201d he emphasised.<\/p>\n
According to him, borrowers will prioritise whether financing can\nstill be provided or not, rather than looking at the KPPU decision.<\/p>\n
\u201cIndustry players should file a new lawsuit. However, since many\nplatforms are implicated, whether they can do it individually or all\ntogether. I think the Indonesian Joint Funding Fintech Association\n(AFPI) can facilitate that,\u201d Nailul concluded.<\/p>\n
The Financial Services Authority (OJK) itself respects the KPPU\u2019s\ndecision. As is known, that decision was issued by the KPPU Panel\nChairman in Case Number 05\/KPPU-I\/2025, which was read out in the trial\nregarding allegations of violations of Article 5 of Law Number 5 of 1999\nrelated to online money lending or technology-based joint funding\nservices.<\/p>\n
Head of the Literacy, Financial Inclusion, and Communication\nDepartment, M. Ismail Riyadi, stated that in that decision, the KPPU\nPanel declared all respondents proven to have lawfully and convincingly\nviolated Article 5 of Law Number 5 of 1999 on the Prohibition of\nMonopolistic Practices and Unhealthy Business Competition.<\/p>\n
\u201cOJK will continue to encourage the pinjol (online loan) industry to\nstrengthen the implementation of governance, risk management, and\nconsumer protection to realise a healthy, integrous pinjol industry that\nbenefits society,\u201d he said in a written statement.<\/p>\n
To strengthen the pinjol industry, OJK has issued OJK Circular Letter\n(SEOJK) Number 19 of 2025 on the Implementation of Technology-Based\nJoint Funding Services (LPBBTI).<\/p>\n
Those provisions, among others, regulate the limits on economic\nbenefits that can be imposed by online loan providers on fund\nrecipients, as an effort to ensure healthy, transparent business\npractices oriented towards consumer protection.<\/p>\n
In addition, OJK has also issued provisions regulating governance,\nrisk management, the health level of pinjol providers, and compiled a\nRoadmap for the Development and Strengthening of LPBBTI for 2023-2028,\naimed at improving the effectiveness and efficiency of supervision,\nencouraging better industry governance, and strengthening consumer and\npublic protection.<\/p>\n
\u201cOJK will continue to monitor industry developments and ensure that\nevery LPBBTI provider conducts its business in accordance with\napplicable provisions, to maintain stability in the financial services\nsector and increase public trust in digital financial services,\u201d he\nconcluded.<\/p>\n
Previously, AFPI expressed regret over the decision, stating that it\ndoes not reflect the open facts throughout the examination hearing.<\/p>\n
In fact, the approach applied in the industry, including the maximum\neconomic benefit limit, is part of efforts to protect consumers and\nclearly differentiate from illegal online loan (pinjol) practices. This\nhas also been the applicable regulatory framework under OJK\nsupervision.<\/p>\n
AFPI General Chairman, Entjik S. Djafar, expressed disappointment\nwith the KPPU decision, noting that the maximum economic benefit limit\nat that time was guidance from OJK to protect consumers from predatory\nlending practices and illegal pinjol that charged very high interest\nrates.<\/p>\n
\u201cTherefore, the majority of association members will appeal the KPPU\ndecision,\u201d Entjik said in his official statement some time ago.<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/strange-and-extraordinary-experts-response-to-allegations-of-online-loan-interest-cartel-1774785080", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }