LG was fined 108 million RMB in India, yet breathed a sigh of relief and continued building factories: It had long treated Indian fines as part of its operational costs.

This reaction is not surprising in India. What truly warrants deeper reflection is another fact: LG’s fine and LG’s expansion in India occurred simultaneously. India is dubbed the 'graveyard for foreign investment' and regarded as a hub for astronomical penalty notices issued to multinational corporations. Samsung, Xiaomi, Oppo, Vivo, Ford, Walmart, Vodafone, Nokia, and Amazon—all have faced massive fines from Indian authorities after entering the market. Given how difficult it is, why don’t LG, Samsung, and others simply exit—and instead choose to expand further? How large has LG actually become in India? Let’s look at some figures. LG has operated in India for 28 years. In Q3 FY26, LG held a 27.3% market share in India’s TV market—ranking second. Yet in the premium OLED TV segment, LG’s share stood at 62.4%—effectively monopolistic. In Q4 FY26, LG India achieved a record-high quarterly revenue, with its TV business reporting an EBIT margin of 13.4%. A company commanding 62% of India’s premium TV market was hit with a 100-million-RMB customs penalty. So why doesn’t LG leave? Because it literally cannot afford to. LG’s operations in India go far beyond selling TVs. It operates three major manufacturing bases—in Greater Noida, Pune, and Sanand—producing televisions, refrigerators, washing machines, and air conditioners entirely locally. Its distribution network, built over two decades, spans tens of thousands of offline retail outlets. LG’s Indian factories took five to eight years to build; its channel infrastructure has been cultivated for over a decade; and its brand enjoys high recognition among India’s middle-class households. Withdrawing from India over a 100-million-RMB penalty would mean abandoning hundreds of billions of RMB in fixed assets—and forfeiting twenty years of future market potential. Even more crucial is the Indian market itself. With 1.4 billion people and a median age under 30, India’s middle class accounted for 29% of the population a decade ago—now 53%, and projected to reach 60% by 2030. India’s TV market stood at $4.7 billion in 2025, with OLEDs representing only 4%—indicating that the premium segment remains in its infancy, and virtually all future growth lies here. LG currently commands 62% of the OLED segment—meaning it occupies the top position in a market that hasn’t even taken off yet. From this vantage point, even a $100-million penalty is too steep a price to pay for stepping down. This is precisely what India has calculated: these companies cannot afford to leave. And from the companies’ perspective, as long as they treat Indian penalties as an ordinary cost of doing business, the Indian market remains viable. India is a 'penalty calculation problem' for multinationals. LG’s fine is no outlier. In the same week, India’s Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) launched parallel investigations into Samsung and LG over OLED import duty classification. Going further back: Samsung was ordered to pay $601 million in back taxes and penalties for allegedly evading import duties on telecom equipment; Volkswagen faces a $1.4-billion demand for allegedly circumventing automobile tariffs by importing vehicles as disassembled parts; Pernod Ricard was directed to pay $314 million for undervaluing imports of Scotch whisky. Vodafone exited India after a protracted, decade-long legal battle triggered by India’s retroactive tax law amendment; Apple faces up to $38 billion in penalties following an antitrust probe by India’s Competition Commission of India (CCI). Collectively, these penalties form a telling pattern. Where are the rules written? Entirely in the hands of India’s tax authorities. Whether OLED components qualify as a subtype of LED (5% duty) or constitute an independent category (15% duty) is left ambiguous in statutory language—the DRI simply declares them to be 15%.

India’s Top 10 Pharmaceutical Companies: Glenmark focuses resources on innovation, transforming from a generic drugmaker into an integrated pharmaceutical enterprise.

The company currently has two monoclonal antibody candidates in development for autoimmune diseases, with the following progress: Antibody ISB 830 (telazorlimab): ISB 830 is an OX40 antagonist. A Phase 2b clinical trial targeting moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis was completed in 2021. In October 2023, Ichnos entered into an exclusive global licensing agreement with Astria Therapeutics for ISB 830’s development and commercialization in autoimmune diseases. ISB 880 is a fully human, high-affinity monoclonal antibody that blocks IL-1RAP signal transduction. It has completed an Investigational New Drug (IND)-enabling study in patients with autoimmune diseases and is now undergoing Phase 1 clinical trials. In December 2021, Glenmark signed an exclusive global licensing agreement with Almirall for ISB 880’s development and commercialization in autoimmune diseases. Under the agreement, Almirall assumes full responsibility and bears all costs for global development and commercialization. Financial Position For the first nine months of FY2023–24 (April–December 2023), Glenmark’s consolidated operating income totaled ₹98.191 billion (US$1.197 billion), up 2.9% year-on-year from ₹96.164 billion (US$1.208 billion). In Q3 FY2023–24, consolidated operating income amounted to ₹29.096 billion (US$349.1 million), down 16% year-on-year from ₹34.639 billion (US$422.6 million). This quarter’s sales decline was primarily driven by significant impacts on the company’s India business, stemming from a strategic reorganization of its distribution model—including consolidation of inventory points and rationalization of channel inventories. These measures are expected to enhance the company’s future operating margins and overall working capital efficiency. (Note: FY2023–24 figures were converted using an exchange rate of US$1 = ₹82.69; FY2022–23 figures used US$1 = ₹79.58.) By region, Q3 FY2023–24 revenue breakdown was as follows: India formulations sales totaled ₹2.622 billion (US$20.8 million), down 75.6% year-on-year from ₹10.745 billion (US$130.7 million); North America finished-dosage-form sales reached ₹7.629 billion (US$91.6 million), down 8.9% from ₹8.373 billion (US$102.3 million); European sales rose 28.9% to ₹6.357 billion (US$76.4 million); sales in other regions increased 10.8% to ₹7.250 billion (US$87.2 million); and GLS’s API product sales grew 9.9% to ₹4.129 billion (US$49.6 million). Below is the market share of the company’s global product Ryaltris across key regions for this quarter: In FY2022–23, Glenmark’s consolidated operating income totaled ₹129.901 billion (US$1.619 billion), up 5.6% year-on-year.

Granules India profit surges as higher sales outweigh cost pressures

16 hours ago

Indian drugmaker Granules India reported a nearly 40% surge in second-quarter profit driven by strong overseas sales despite rising material costs. The company supplies about one-third of global paracetamol demand across over 80 countries.

reuters

2026-01-27

Granules India leans on PFI, CDMO/peptides growth as API revenue contracts

2026-11-02

Granules India profit surges as higher sales outweigh cost pressures

Granules India profit surges as higher sales outweigh cost pressures

FAQ