Amazon is being asked to immediately stop illegal activities for manipulating prices on a large scale
On February 23, 2026, California Attorney General Rob Bonta filed a motion for a preliminary injunction in the existing Amazon lawsuit alleging violations of the Unfair Competition Prevention Act. The motion provides evidence that Amazon has forced its customers to adjust product prices to increase their profits.
Attorney General Bonta Exposes Amazon Price Fixing Scheme Driving Up Costs for Americans, Asks Court to Immediately Halt Illegal Conduct | State of California - Department of Justice - Office of the Attorney General
Amazon BUSTED for Widespread Scheme to Inflate Prices Across the Economy
https://www.thebignewsletter.com/p/amazon-busted-for-widespread-price
The lawsuit, originally filed in 2022, alleged that Amazon had adopted anticompetitive policies to avoid price wars with other retailers, forcing sellers to sell on Amazon at prices lower than their competitors.
According to Attorney General Bonta, Amazon has directed sellers to raise their retail prices above competitors' prices, and has imposed severe sanctions on sellers who fail to comply, including the loss of first-class labeling rights and compensation to Amazon.
Economic analyst Matt Stoller points out the problems with Amazon as follows: First, when consumers buy products on Amazon, they find the product they want and press 'Add to Cart' almost without thinking about it. In this flow, consumers do not choose the seller, but in fact, most products have an option called 'Other Amazon Sellers,' allowing consumers to choose the seller themselves. Most consumers are unaware of this, and the seller built into the 'Add to Cart' flow is automatically selected, resulting in a significant profit for that seller.
According to Stoller, there are several conditions to be met in order to be included in this flow, such as the requirement that sellers use Amazon's warehouse and logistics service, Fulfillment by Amazon. In addition, Amazon uses algorithms to try to lose priority display rights to sellers who sell at lower prices at other retailers, so sellers must take measures to lower their prices only on Amazon in order to secure priority display rights.
In the new complaint, Attorney General Bonta claims that 'through extensive discovery, I have uncovered countless interactions in which Amazon, merchants, and Amazon's competitors agreed to raise prices for products on other websites to increase Amazon's profits.'
New evidence suggests that Amazon's price hike agreements are typically implemented using one or more of three price-fixing schemes:
First, when Amazon and a competitor are competing on price for a particular product, Amazon will ask the sellers who supply the competitors to raise their prices or stop selling the product, making it cheaper to buy from Amazon. Second, when a competitor is discounting its price, Amazon will ask the seller to stop discounting its price. Third, when a seller stops selling a product at a lower price than Amazon, Amazon will raise its price.
'Amazon's low prices are not the result of good business judgment. Amazon's 'low prices' are the result of coercion and illegal conduct that has driven up prices for consumers across the market. Amazon has blatantly prevented consumers from finding cheaper products, while raking in illegal profits from Americans who honestly believed they were getting the best deals on Amazon. This is price fixing, plain and simple, and illegal. I am asking the Court to immediately stop this conduct while this litigation proceeds,' Attorney General Bonta said.
As part of his motion for a preliminary injunction, Attorney General Bonta is asking the court to stop Amazon from engaging in explicit price-fixing with sellers and competitors, communicating with sellers about other retailers' prices, and acting as an intermediary to force sellers to recoup losses from price-matching by cheaper retailers.
'The key point is that we are seeking a valid preliminary injunction now,' Stoller said. 'Judges only issue such orders when they determine that a party is likely to lose, the immediate harm caused by the conduct is significant, and the public interest is served. While much of the evidence is redacted, Mr. Bonta must be reasonably confident. He believes his case is so strong that he is virtually certain he will be able to hold them responsible for the serious harm caused to consumers.'
The next trial is scheduled for January 2027.
Related Posts:
in Note, Posted by log1p_kr