The state of California has accused Amazon of working behind the scenes with major brands and retailers to artificially increase consumer prices, according to newly unsealed evidence in an ongoing antitrust case.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta claims that Amazon coordinated with merchants and companies to influence pricing decisions at competing retailers, preventing Amazon from being undercut on key products.
The lawsuit alleges that Amazon communicated with well-known brands such as Levi Strauss & Co. and retailers including Home Depot, Walmart, and Chewy to encourage price alignment across platforms.
According to court filings, these interactions allegedly resulted in price increases on everyday goods, including clothing, fertilizer, eye drops, and pet products. In some cases, California claims that when Amazon expressed concern about lower prices elsewhere, rival retailers adjusted their prices upward or temporarily changed product availability.
One example cited in the filing involves Levi Strauss allegedly encouraging Walmart to raise the price of certain khaki pants after Amazon objected to a lower price. Another example claims Amazon’s concerns over fertilizer pricing led Home Depot to increase prices to avoid undercutting.
The state also alleges that Amazon pushed pharmaceutical and consumer goods companies to monitor competitor pricing, including discussions involving eye drop products and price matching strategies with Walmart.
In another reported case, communications linked to Chewy showed that prices for pet products reportedly rose across platforms after changes were made on Amazon, suggesting coordinated pricing behavior.
California argues that these practices effectively reduced competition, leaving consumers with fewer options for lower prices. The lawsuit claims Amazon used its market influence to ensure rival retailers did not consistently undercut its prices.
Amazon has denied all allegations, stating that its agreements with merchants are legal and ultimately benefit consumers by improving product availability, selection, and overall pricing efficiency.
The company, which generated revenue surpassing Walmart in 2025, is the sole defendant in the case. It has not yet issued a detailed response to the latest allegations.
The case, which has been ongoing for more than three years, is scheduled for trial in January 2027. California is also seeking a court injunction to stop the alleged pricing practices while the case continues.
A hearing related to the injunction request is set for July 23.
If proven, the case could become one of the most significant antitrust challenges faced by Amazon, raising broader questions about pricing practices in online retail markets and competition in the digital economy.
0 Comments