24 OCT 2026 — Taiwan's Fair Trade Commission (TFTC) has prohibited Grab's US$600 million purchase of foodpanda's Taiwan delivery business, ruling on 21 October that the Singapore company's shareholder links to Uber would blunt competition with Uber Eats. The decision ends, for now, Grab's first attempt to operate outside Southeast Asia.
The ruling came at the commission's 1,825th meeting. According to the TFTC's press release, a majority of commissioners voted to block the merger, one would have cleared it with conditions attached, and one recused from the review. Commissioner Shin Chih-chung told a news conference that three had voted to block it, Focus Taiwan reported.
What Grab agreed to buy in March
Grab and Delivery Hero, foodpanda's German parent, announced the deal on 23 March. Under the terms Grab filed with US regulators as an exhibit to a 6-K report, Grab would pay US$600 million in cash, on a cash-free and debt-free basis, with closing expected in the second half of 2026 once regulators had approved.
Taiwan would have been Grab's ninth market. The announcement put the foodpanda business at roughly US$1.8 billion in gross merchandise value for 2025. Grab Group CEO Anthony Tan called the purchase "a natural next step for Grab" at the time.
Grab notified the TFTC on 27 March. After several rounds of supplementary filings the commission formally accepted the case on 16 June, then extended its review to 27 October.
Why a non-competitor still worried the regulator
Grab does not operate in Taiwan, so the deal removed no rival. The question was who Grab would face. Taiwan's food delivery market is a duopoly of foodpanda and Uber Eats, in the TFTC's description, and Grab would simply have stepped into foodpanda's place as Uber Eats' main competitor.
Uber owns about 13.1% of Grab. The release also notes that Uber's chief executive sat on Grab's board for a long time and that the two companies cooperate in other markets. Taken together, the commission said, the shareholding, the shared directorship and that commercial history would reduce both Grab's incentive and its ability to compete against Uber Eats.
It gave four reasons. If Uber Eats cut prices to win customers from Grab, it would also eat into profits that Uber shares through its stake. On the other side, Uber's voting power is only 3.9% because of Grab's dual-class shares, which means it cannot dictate Grab's decisions, but the commission argued that the holding still aligns the two companies' interests. It cited the pair's past conduct as a third factor. Finally, entry barriers are high, and no newcomer, restaurant or consumer is strong enough to break up any coordination.
The 2018 Singapore case resurfaces
The third reason goes back to 2018, when Grab took over Uber's Southeast Asian business. In the TFTC's account, the two companies completed that transaction in a way that was hard to reverse, when they knew or at least ought to have known that it breached competition law.
That episode has an official record in Singapore. On 24 September 2018 Singapore's Competition and Consumer Commission (CCCS) issued an infringement decision against both companies. It found that the sale of Uber's regional business to Grab, in return for a 27.5% stake in Grab, had substantially lessened competition in ride-hailing platform services in Singapore. CCCS imposed financial penalties on each party and directions intended to reopen the market.
Remedies that did not satisfy the commission
Grab offered commitments during the review. They included diluting Uber's holding, limiting Uber personnel from serving as Grab directors and restricting the exchange of competitively sensitive information. The TFTC said it could not be confident those measures would work in practice, and that they still fell short of resolving its concerns.
It concluded that Uber's stake in Grab would have to fall further, or be sold entirely, before the risk of coordination with Uber Eats could be reduced or removed. Shin declined to say how far the stake would need to fall, Focus Taiwan reported, adding that Grab may apply again because "the law does not limit companies to filing only once or twice."
How Grab and Delivery Hero responded
Grab said it was disappointed with the ruling. In a statement carried by The Edge Malaysia in a Reuters report, the company said: "We will continue to focus our capital and resources on executing our growth roadmap and empowering communities across our regional footprint." Focus Taiwan reported that Grab did not indicate whether it would try to revive the purchase.
Delivery Hero said the transaction terms give it deal protections, including a break fee arrangement that applies subject to certain conditions, according to the same report. No Grab filing with the US Securities and Exchange Commission on the decision had appeared by 24 October.
A second buyer turned away
This is the second time the TFTC has refused a buyer for foodpanda in Taiwan. It blocked Uber's own attempt to acquire the business in December 2024, and Uber abandoned that deal in March 2025, Focus Taiwan reported.
Two delivery workers' groups that had protested against the purchase welcomed the decision. Asked whether foodpanda might now leave Taiwan, Shin called the question hypothetical, saying the commission assesses mergers on present market conditions.
In March, Delivery Hero chief executive Niklas Östberg called the sale a key first step in the company's strategic review. Su Po-hao, a spokesman for one of the workers' groups, said foodpanda's parent could look for another buyer, according to Focus Taiwan. Grab's footprint remains its eight Southeast Asian countries unless a new application that goes further on the Uber stake can satisfy the commission.
