Japan’s Fair Trade Commission has raided Amazon Japan over allegations of anti-monopoly violations. The company is suspected of pressuring sellers to reduce prices in exchange for favourable product placement on its e-commerce platform, a government source revealed.
The investigation comes amid growing global scrutiny of Amazon’s practices. In Europe, regulators are preparing a case to examine whether Amazon favours its branded products on its marketplace under new antitrust rules.
This is not the first time Amazon Japan has faced such scrutiny. In 2018, authorities accused it of shifting discount costs onto suppliers. The case was resolved after Amazon agreed to improve its business practices, but the latest allegations suggest ongoing concerns about its market conduct.
Google has announced further changes to its search results in Europe in response to complaints from smaller competitors and looming EU antitrust charges under the Digital Markets Act (DMA). The tech giant has faced criticism from price-comparison sites, hotels, and small retailers over a 30% drop in direct booking clicks caused by earlier search tweaks.
The DMA, introduced last year to curb Big Tech dominance, prohibits Google from favouring its services. To comply, Google plans to offer expanded and uniformly formatted options for users to choose between comparison sites and supplier websites, along with new ad formats and tools for competitors to display prices and images.
As part of a test in Germany, Belgium, and Estonia, Google will temporarily remove hotel location maps and associated results to assess user interest in a simpler “ten blue links” layout. While reluctant to cut features, Google says these measures aim to strike a balance between user needs and regulatory requirements.
The European Commission has been scrutinising Google since March, with DMA violations carrying potential fines of up to 10% of global annual revenue. Google’s compliance efforts reflect its attempt to navigate the demands of regulators and rival businesses while maintaining its services’ usability.
Brazil’s antitrust regulator, Cade, has mandated Apple to lift restrictions on in-app payments. The decision follows a complaint by e-commerce giant MercadoLibre, accusing Apple of unfair practices.
The complaint, filed in 2022 in Brazil and Mexico, criticised Apple for forcing app developers to use its payment system. It also alleged that the company blocks apps from offering third-party digital goods or redirecting users to external websites.
Cade’s ruling requires Apple to permit developers to integrate external payment systems and allow hyperlinks to external purchasing platforms within apps. Developers must also have the option to include alternative in-app payment methods.
Apple faces a 250,000 real (£43,000) daily fine if it fails to comply within 20 days. Both Apple and MercadoLibre have yet to provide comments on the ruling.
Meta, the company behind Facebook, is set to face trial in April over allegations from the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) that it stifled competition by acquiring Instagram and WhatsApp. The FTC’s lawsuit, filed in 2020, argues that Meta acted illegally to maintain dominance in personal social networks by purchasing potential competitors rather than innovating within the mobile ecosystem.
The case is scheduled to begin on 14 April, as ruled by Judge James Boasberg. Earlier this month, the judge rejected Meta’s request to dismiss the case, which argued that the FTC’s claims relied on a narrow definition of the social media market. Meta highlighted competition from TikTok, YouTube, LinkedIn, and X as evidence that the FTC’s market analysis was outdated.
Judge Boasberg acknowledged the challenges facing the FTC, noting that shifts in technology and market dynamics complicate its claims. He described the agency’s approach as pushing antitrust law to its limits, raising doubts about whether its case could withstand trial.
The trial will examine whether Meta’s acquisitions of Instagram in 2012 and WhatsApp in 2014 were part of a deliberate strategy to eliminate competition. The outcome could have significant implications for the future of antitrust enforcement in the tech industry.
Apple and Google face growing scrutiny in the UK over allegations of stifling competition in mobile web browsers. The UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) claims that both companies use their dominant positions to restrict consumer choice, citing Apple’s limits on progressive web apps as a barrier to innovation on iOS devices. Progressive web apps could bypass app stores and their fees, offering faster and more secure browsing.
The CMA’s report also points to a revenue-sharing deal between Apple and Google that discourages competition in mobile ecosystems. Both companies have responded, with Apple defending its privacy and security measures and Google emphasising the openness of its Android platform.
This investigation is part of a broader crackdown on Big Tech, with regulators in the US and UK aiming to curb monopolistic practices. The CMA plans to finalise its report in March and use upcoming digital competition laws to address these concerns.
The US Supreme Court has cleared the way for a multibillion-dollar class-action lawsuit against Meta, the parent company of Facebook, over its role in the Cambridge Analytica privacy scandal. Investors claim Meta failed to fully disclose the risks of user data misuse, which caused Facebook’s stock value to drop sharply in 2018 when the scandal became public.
Cambridge Analytica, a firm tied to Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign, accessed data from 87M Facebook users to influence voter targeting. While Meta has already paid over $5B in fines and settlements for privacy violations, this lawsuit focuses on alleged failures in investor disclosures.
The US Supreme Court dismissed Meta’s appeal to halt the lawsuit, leaving a prior appellate ruling intact. As legal challenges mount for tech giants, the court is also considering another class action against Nvidia over claims of misleading investors about cryptocurrency-related revenues.
The US Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has finalised a rule to supervise the largest nonbank companies offering digital funds transfer and payment wallet apps, specifically those processing over 50 million transactions annually. That rule aims to ensure that these companies comply with federal laws, similar to banks and credit unions.
The CFPB estimates that the apps affected by this rule collectively process over 13 billion consumer payment transactions yearly. In addressing key concerns such as consumer privacy, fraud prevention, transaction errors, and the issue of ‘debanking’, where consumers lose access to their accounts, the rule will grant the CFPB the authority to supervise these companies proactively.
That will help detect problems early and protect consumers from disruptions such as account closures and fraudulent transactions. Furthermore, the transaction threshold for supervision has been raised to 50 million transactions annually, and the rule’s scope is limited to US dollar transactions. Therefore, this action is part of the CFPB’s broader effort to regulate large technology firms in consumer financial markets.
Digital payment apps are crucial for daily commerce, particularly among middle and lower-income consumers. The CFPB’s oversight will ensure these companies protect privacy, address fraud, and prevent service disruptions, building on past efforts to regulate sectors like debt collection and student loan servicing. This helps ensure that digital payment companies comply with consumer protection laws.
The Blockchain Association has sent a letter to president-elect Donald Trump and Congress, outlining key reforms for the crypto industry during the first 100 days of Trump’s administration. The letter, signed by CEO Kristin Smith, highlights the need for new leadership at the IRS and Treasury Department, alongside changes to policies hindering crypto innovation.
Smith criticised inconsistent taxation on digital assets and the IRS’s ‘Broker rule’, which requires brokers to disclose gains and losses on crypto transactions, warning it could drive businesses offshore. The association also called for rolling back the SAB 121 accounting guideline, labelling it ‘punitive’ and harmful to crypto firms.
The letter further urged reforms to end the exclusion of crypto companies from traditional banking, citing the need for fair access to financial services. To support innovation, the Blockchain Association proposed creating a crypto advisory council to work alongside Congress and regulators.
The association emphasised the importance of a balanced regulatory framework to protect consumers while fostering growth, stressing the role of public-private partnerships in establishing effective policies.
India’s Competition Commission has rejected Apple’s request to pause an antitrust investigation, clearing the way for the case to progress. The investigation alleges Apple breached competition laws by exploiting its dominant app store position. Apple disputes these claims, arguing its market share in India is minor compared to Android devices.
The controversy began in 2021 when the non-profit Together We Fight Society (TWFS) accused Apple of anti-competitive practices. In August, the commission ordered investigation reports to be recalled, following Apple’s claims of sensitive information being leaked to rivals. Revised reports were issued after redaction disputes, but Apple requested a suspension, citing non-compliance by TWFS.
Regulator in India dismissed Apple’s concerns, calling its request to halt proceedings ‘untenable.’ The commission has now instructed Apple to submit audited financial records for three fiscal years to assess potential penalties. Apple has yet to respond publicly to these developments.
Senior officials at the Competition Commission are reviewing the evidence and will issue a final ruling. The case highlights broader scrutiny of major tech companies’ market behaviour, particularly regarding app store operations and developer relations.
The European Commission has closed its antitrust investigation into Apple’s e-book and audiobook practices after the original complaint was withdrawn, TechCrunch reported. The probe, launched in 2020, examined Apple’s in-app payment rules and its restrictions on third-party developers informing users about alternative payment methods.
This inquiry followed a similar case involving music-streaming apps, which led to a $2 billion fine against Apple earlier this year after Spotify alleged unfair competition. Despite the closure of the e-book case, the Commission clarified that this does not mean Apple’s practices comply with EU competition laws.
The investigation’s conclusion underscores the EU’s ongoing efforts to regulate tech giants and ensure a fair digital marketplace, with Apple remaining a focal point of scrutiny.
