Predatory Pricing Practices on E-Commerce From an Islamic Perspective
Keywords:
Predatory Pricing, E-commerce, Maqhasyid ShariaAbstract
Numerous e-commerce platforms for buying and selling have emerged due to the advancement of information technology. This has several benefits for firms in terms of product promotion. Despite the convenience of online shopping, there might be risks for small businesses. This is because international e-commerce trade has allowed imported items to dominate the Indonesian market at significantly lower selling prices than local goods. This type of study is desk research. The aim of desk research is to collect information about the subject at hand from books, articles, papers, journals, and other sources. To gather data for this study, various publications were reviewed, including books, articles, papers, research reports, periodicals, newspapers, and laws and regulations pertinent to the subjects under discussion. Data was also retrieved via literature reviews. This study utilized primary and secondary data sources for its material. Monopoly pricing is typically established to counteract losses, which might harm consumers. This strategy aims to maximize income while offsetting losses from sales at a loss or cheap pricing. Although some nations do not forbid it, predatory pricing is generally seen as an unethical trading practice, according to the research above. Regarding the perspective of maqashid sharia, Islamic economics acknowledges the concept of predatory pricing as إغراق. Ighraq is prohibited in Islam since it is a dishonest trading activity that causes injury and has the potential to undermine monopolies and the market process. Islam prohibits the practice of monopoly.
References
AP, K. N. A. (2023). The role of the business competition supervisory commission in response to allegations of predatory pricing practices in e-commerce. Jurnal Geuthèë: Penelitian Multidisiplin, 6(2), 175. https://doi.org/10.52626/jg.v6i2.249
Arif, M. (2022). Profil Internet Indonesia 2022. SRA Consulting., June, 1–104.
Ariyanti, N., & Nugroho, W. C. (2023). Peran Kppu Dalam Melindungi Konsumen Dari Pelaku Usaha Tidak Sehat. Indonesian Journal of Law and Social-Political Governance, 3(1), 885–896. https://doi.org/10.53363/bureau.v3i1.222
Ayun, et al. (2015). Universitas Islam Negeri Maulana Malik Ibrahim Malang. Sufi Penjaga Hutan: Pencegahan Deforestasi Melalui Gerakan Tasawuf, 1–37, 134–137.
Darania, M. (2019). Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat Di Indonesia Menurut Hukum Ekonomi Islam Dan Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 Tentang Larangan Monopoli Dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat. El-Jizya : Jurnal Ekonomi Islam, 7(1), 21–46. https://doi.org/10.24090/ej.v7i1.3446
Faishol, M., Nisak, L. N. S., Najib, M. T. A., Mukminin, M. A. A., & Sadid, M. A. (2022). Praktek Predatory Pricing dalam Perspektif Maqashid Syariah. AL-MANHAJ: Jurnal Hukum Dan Pranata Sosial Islam, 4(2), 113–118. https://doi.org/10.37680/almanhaj.v4i1.1580
Khoerulloh, A. K., & Hidayah, S. R. (2023). Analisis Konsep Cashback dalam Transaksi E-commerce: Perspektif Hukum Ekonomi Islam. Al Mashalih - Journal of Islamic Law, 4(2), 73–82. https://doi.org/10.59270/mashalih.v4i2.209
Munir, M. M. (2023). Islamic Finance For Gen Z Karakter Dan Kesejahteraan Finansial Untuk Gen Z Penerapan Islamic Finance Sebagai Solusi (S. M. Komarudin (ed.)). CV. Green Publisher Indonesia. https://books.google.co.id/books?id=a9bUEAAAQBAJ&lpg=PR7&ots=gso8M48dqO&lr&hl=id&pg=PR7#v=onepage&q&f=false
Nugroho, M. A., & Amsori. (2022). Jurnal hukum indonesia. Jurnal Hukum Indonesia, 1, 10–18. https://doi.org/10.58344/jhi.v2i2.45
Panjaitan, Y. A. (2021). Indikasi Predatory Pricing Pada Praktik Perang Harga Antara Pelaku Usaha Financial Technology (Fintech) Ditinjau Berdasarkan Hukum Persaingan Usaha Di Indonesia. Jurnal Program Magister Hukum Fakultas Hukum Universitas Indonesia, 1(3), 1615–1629.
Prahmana, V. D., & Wiradiputra, D. (2022). Predatory Pricing Dalam E-Commerce Menurut Perspektif Hukum Persaingan Usaha. JISIP (Jurnal Ilmu Sosial Dan Pendidikan), 6(3), 9844–9853. https://doi.org/10.58258/jisip.v6i3.3277
Rezmia, F. (2017). Dampak Kegiatan Jual Rugi (Predatory Pricing) yang Dilakukan Pelaku Usaha dalam Perspektif Persaingan Usaha. Jurnal Selat, 4(2), 234–249. https://www.neliti.com/id/publications/235516/
Setiowati, H. diah. (2022). Analisis Rule of Reason Dalam Jual Rugi Dan/Atau Menetapkan Harga Yang Sangat Rendah Pada Perkara Kppu Nomor 3/Kppu-L/2020 Dalam Mencapai Kepastian Hukum. 3(1), 1–87. https://medium.com/@arifwicaksanaa/pengertian-use-case-a7e576e1b6bf
Simanjuntak, M. S. H. (2022). Dugaan Praktek Predatory Pricing Dalam Electronic Commerce Di Indonesia (Studi di Kantor Wilayah I KPPU). 10(3), 1–51. https://repository.uhn.ac.id/handle/123456789/7635
Syarief, E., Shahrullah, R. S., Jaya, F., & Kurniawan, J. (2021). Potensi Terjadinya Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat pada Penggunaan Aplikasi Perdagangan Elektronik di Era Revolusi Industri 4.0. Jurnal Supremasi, 3(2), 105–114. https://doi.org/10.35457/supremasi.v11i1.1290
Syamsul, E. M., & Kuswaya, A. (2023, July). Expert Wakaf, Wakif Family Social Security in The Achievment of Sustainable Development Goals. In Journal of International Conference Proceedings (Vol. 6, No. 3, pp. 35-49).
Thoha, J. M., Shofari, A., Chamim, M., & Afif, A. (n.d.). Hukum Islam Terhadap Predatory Pricing Pada Persaingan Usaha Jual Beli Secara Online.
Wahjono, S. ., & Marina, A. (2009). Kebijakan Anti Monopoli dalam Perekonomian Indonesia. Balance, 3(1), 1–15