KPPU's Decision on 97 P2P Lenders Under Scrutiny: Industry, Investors, and Consumers Affected
JAKARTA, KOMPAS.com - The Indonesian Competition Commission’s (KPPU) decision to impose a total fine of Rp 755 billion on 97 P2P lending companies has raised numerous questions.
One of the feared impacts is the possibility that investors will be deterred from establishing P2P businesses in Indonesia.
As background, this ruling is based on alleged violations of Article 5 of Law No. 5 of 1999 concerning anti-competitive practices, specifically in the form of price fixing (cartel), particularly regarding maximum interest rate caps on loans.
The Chairman of the Indonesian Joint Funding Fintech Association (AFPI), Entjik S. Djafar, explained that the maximum economic benefit cap highlighted by the KPPU is actually part of efforts to protect consumers while distinguishing legal loan apps from illegal practices.
Entjik assessed that there are many irregularities in the decision.
One of them is that the KPPU ignored SEOJK No. 19 of 2025, which regulates the economic benefit cap as an important consideration.
He is concerned that this KPPU decision will instead create investor worries about regulatory consistency in the country.
“This decision could damage the industry and push investors out. There are reports of investors wanting to shift their investments to other countries like the Philippines, Pakistan, and Vietnam. This is triggered by perceptions of weak legal certainty in Indonesia,” he explained.
The P2P lending players have collectively taken steps to appeal.
Considering that the substance of the KPPU’s decision is deemed not to reflect the actual industry conditions.
“There are too many strange things in this decision. Therefore, friends have agreed to file an appeal,” he asserted.
Director of the Digital Economy at the Center of Economic and Law Studies (Celios), Nailul Huda, stated that the prohibition on interest rate regulation by associations could lead to unintended consequences, particularly for financial inclusion.
“That when there is this decision and it is required not to regulate interest rates, it will actually further narrow the space for financial inclusion in Indonesia, especially in rural areas,” he revealed.
He emphasised that competition policy needs to consider the characteristics of the digital economy, which differ from conventional sectors, to avoid disrupting the balance between lenders’ and borrowers’ interests.