By Yoni Mazor Co-Founder & CGO of Getida

The Case

The Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) case against Amazon has brought together 17 states in an ambitious endeavor. This legal battle promises to be a labyrinthine exploration of the e-commerce giant's practices and may prove to be a formidable challenge. Several factors have contributed to the increasing costs of Amazon marketplace services in recent years. The complexities introduced by the COVID-19 pandemic, coupled with an exponential surge in online shopping, have reshaped the landscape of global commerce. The ramifications include supply chain disruptions, bottlenecks, delivery delays, rising labor costs, and the specter of inflation looming over economies worldwide.

Amazon's Fulfillment by Amazon (FBA) program

Central to this case is Amazon's Fulfillment by Amazon (FBA) program. When promoting the benefits of FBA to third-party sellers, Amazon often points out that despite the program's steadily rising fees, it remains a competitive solution for e-commerce logistics when compared to alternatives. These alternatives involve sellers either owning or renting their own warehouses and navigating the intricate web of shipping fees with national and local transportation carriers. Amazon's contention is that FBA offers a cost-effective and efficient option, simplifying logistics for businesses of all sizes.

The FTC's Scrutiny and Its Implications

However, the crux of the matter lies in the FTC's meticulous examination of the financial intricacies of these costs. If the commission uncovers evidence suggesting that Amazon is, in fact, acting as a deflationary force for third-party sellers, it could mark a turning point in the case. Such a revelation might hold the key to exonerating Amazon and potentially easing the tension that has long persisted between major tech corporations and government regulatory bodies.

COVID-19 and Supply Chain Disruptions

The COVID-19 pandemic has undoubtedly reshaped the dynamics of global commerce. With consumers increasingly turning to online platforms, Amazon experienced an unprecedented surge in demand for its services. However, the pandemic also unleashed a wave of challenges. Supply chain disruptions, characterized by bottlenecks at ports, prolonged delivery times, and escalating labor costs, have disrupted the flow of goods and services worldwide. As a result, many companies, including Amazon, found themselves grappling with unexpected complexities and rising operational expenses.

Inflationary Pressures

Simultaneously, inflation began to loom as a significant concern across the globe. The sudden surge in demand for goods, coupled with supply chain bottlenecks, contributed to rising prices. Inflation not only affected consumer purchasing power but also added to the operating costs for businesses. In such an environment, maintaining competitive pricing while navigating these economic headwinds became an arduous task for Amazon and its third-party sellers.

Amazon's Defense

In defense of its practices, Amazon argues that despite the increase in FBA fees, it continues to offer a competitive pricing model for third-party sellers. Amazon contends that the convenience, reliability, and scale of its FBA program outweigh the rising costs. By offloading the logistical burden to Amazon, sellers can focus on their core business activities, leaving fulfillment and shipping in the capable hands of the e-commerce giant.


As the FTC case against Amazon unfolds, it becomes increasingly evident that this legal battle is multifaceted and intricate. The interplay of COVID-19 disruptions, supply chain challenges, and inflationary pressures have contributed to the rising costs within Amazon's marketplace services. However, Amazon's argument in favor of FBA's cost-effectiveness remains a pivotal point of contention. If the FTC's scrutiny unveils evidence supporting Amazon's claims of deflationary effects on third-party sellers, it could reshape the trajectory of this case and potentially redefine the relationship between big tech companies and government regulatory bodies. The outcome of this legal saga remains uncertain, but its implications will undoubtedly reverberate throughout the e-commerce landscape and beyond.