Amazon Misled Congress, U.S. Lawmakers Say While Teasing Potential Criminal Probe

The House Judiciary Antitrust subcommittee is giving Amazon one final probability to inform the entire reality about its use of third-party sellers’ information. Fool me as soon as, disgrace on me… possibly a bunch of different occasions, too, however this time, they’re critical.

On Monday, 5 House Judiciary Committee members published a letter accusing executives, together with Amazon founder and Chairman Jeff Bezos, of presumably mendacity to Congress throughout an antitrust investigation, including that they’re contemplating referring this to the Department of Justice for a legal investigation. The letter was despatched to Amazon CEO Andy Jassy, from Reps. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), David Cicilline (D-RI), Ken Buck (R-CO), Pramila Jayapal (D-WA), and Matt Gaetz (R-FL).

The letter refers to final week’s Reuters report displaying that the corporate had an express, detailed technique to tear off third-party sellers in India, used their information to streamline their very own knockoffs, and prioritized its merchandise in search outcomes. Last 12 months in a House antitrust subcommittee hearing, Bezos didn’t deny these practices however handed the buck to hypothetical dangerous actors inside Amazon. “What I can tell you is we have a policy against using seller-specific data to aid our private-label business,” he stated. “But I can’t guarantee you that policy has never been violated.” Amazon’s been sticking to that line—that the corporate has a coverage, and it’s potential that dangerous workers violate this coverage. It’s extraordinarily unclear what would inspire an worker to violate firm coverage with a purpose to assist the corporate.

“At best, this reporting confirms that Amazon’s representatives misled the Committee,” the letter states. “At worst, it demonstrates that they may have lied to Congress in possible violation of federal criminal law.”

Committee members additionally level to related experiences from the Markup, the Wall Street Journal, and the Capitol Forum, stating that the experiences “are inconsistent with the sworn testimony and numerous statements made by Amazon’s executives to the Committee during our investigation into Amazon’s business practices last Congress.” Amazon has denied findings in every report that Amazon makes use of personal, seller-specific information and unfairly boosts its personal manufacturers.

In a press release shared with Gizmodo, an Amazon spokesperson stated outright that “Amazon and its executives did not mislead the committee, and we have denied and sought to correct the record on the inaccurate media articles in question.” They added that Amazon’s inside coverage “prohibits the use of individual seller data to develop Amazon private label products” and that Amazon investigates potential violations.

Last 12 months, two U.S. lawmakers accused Amazon of mendacity to Congress after a Wall Street Journal report discovered that paperwork and worker interviews confirmed that the corporate tapped third-party sellers’ information, which is taken into account non-public, for its personal acquire. The Journal famous that Amazon may use that information to determine essentially the most fascinating product options or set its value factors.

That contradicted a 2019 testimony from Nate Sutton, Amazon’s affiliate normal counsel, who stated that “we do not use any seller data for—to compete with them.” After that listening to, the lawmaker letter despatched this week notes, Amazon normal counsel David Zapolsky despatched a letter doubling down, writing that Amazon “prohibit[s] in our private label strategy the use of data related specifically to individual sellers” and aggregated retailer information on complete gross sales and search quantity for classes and merchandise.”

The lawmakers’ letter notes that knowingly mendacity in a congressional investigation and making perjurious statements underneath oath earlier than Congress are federal crimes. Amazon can also be going through antitrust probes within the EU and India. Both have agreements with the U.S. permitting them to share proof associated to potential antitrust violations.