It shall be a violation of the Fair Practices of Equipment Manufacturers, Distributors, Wholesalers and Dealers Act for a supplier to take any one or more of the following actions:

1. To coerce, compel or require any dealer to accept delivery of any equipment or repair parts which the dealer has not voluntarily ordered, except as required by any applicable law or unless such equipment or repair parts are safety features required by a supplier;

2. To require any dealer to purchase goods or services as a condition to the sale by the supplier to the dealer of any equipment, repair parts or other goods or services, provided that nothing herein shall prohibit a supplier from requiring the dealer to purchase all repair parts, special tools and training reasonably necessary to maintain the safe operation or quality of operation in the field of any equipment offered for sale by the dealer;

3. To coerce any dealer into a refusal to purchase equipment manufactured by another supplier. However, it shall not be a violation of this section to require separate facilities, financial statements or sales staff for major competing lines so long as the dealer is given at least three (3) years notice of such requirement;

4. To refuse to deliver in reasonable quantities and within a reasonable time, after receipt of the dealer’s order, to any dealer having a dealer agreement for the retail sale of new equipment sold or distributed by such supplier, equipment covered by such dealer agreement specifically advertised or represented by such supplier to be available for immediate delivery. The failure to deliver any such equipment will not be considered a violation of the Fair Practices of Equipment Manufacturers, Distributors, Wholesalers and Dealers Act if such failure is due to prudent and reasonable restrictions on extensions of credit by the supplier to the dealer, an act of nature, work stoppage or delay due to a strike or labor difficulty, a bona fide shortage of materials, freight embargo, or other cause over which the supplier has no control or a business decision by the supplier to limit the production volume of the equipment;

5. To discriminate, directly or indirectly, in filling an order placed by a dealer for retail sale or lease of new equipment under a dealer agreement as between dealers of the same product line;

6. To discriminate, directly or indirectly, in price between different dealers with respect to purchases of equipment or repair parts of like grade and quality and identical brand, where the effect of such discrimination may be to substantially lessen competition, tend to create a monopoly in any line of commerce, or injure, destroy or prevent competition with any dealer who either grants or knowingly receives the benefit of such discrimination; provided, however, different prices may be charged if:

a.such differences are due to differences in the cost of manufacture, sale or delivery of the equipment or repair parts,

b.the supplier can show that its lower price was made in good faith to meet an equally low price of a competitor, or

c.such differences are related to the volume of equipment purchased by dealers or market share obtained by dealers;

7. To prevent by contract or otherwise, any dealer from changing its capital structure or the means by or through which the dealer finances its operations, so long as the dealer gives prior notice to the supplier, and provided the dealer at all times meets any reasonable capital standards required by the supplier pursuant to a right granted in the dealer agreement and imposed on similarly situated dealers; and

8. To require a dealer to assent to a release, assignment, novation, waiver, or estoppel which would relieve any person from liability imposed by this act.

Added by Laws 1991, c. 51, § 2, emerg. eff. April 9, 1991. Amended by Laws 1998, c. 82, § 2, eff. Nov. 1, 1998; Laws 2011, c. 156, § 4, eff. Nov. 1, 2011.