Penalty Amount
$2,250,000
The FTC alleged that Amazon knowingly violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) by refusing to provide transaction records to identity theft victims whose personal information was used to commit fraud. Amazon agreed to pay a $2.25 million civil penalty and is required to comply with FCRA Section 609(e), provide notice to consumers, and contact victims who previously requested records since April 2024.
Amazon must pay $2.25 million in civil penalties, is prohibited from violating FCRA Section 609(e), must provide notice to consumers about how identity theft victims can request records, and must contact consumers who requested records since April 2024 but did not receive them to inform them about available records.
In-house legal teams should review vendor agreements, particularly those with data processors and customer service providers, to ensure they include clauses requiring compliance with FCRA Section 609(e) for timely provision of transaction records to identity theft victims and law enforcement. Additionally, review data processing agreements to confirm the company can access and deliver such records, and update privacy policies or customer-facing terms to include clear procedures for victims to request records. Vendor contracts should also mandate written policies and training to handle these requests within 30 days, as failure could lead to significant penalties.
Entity
Amazon.com Inc.
Industry
RetailOfficial Press Release
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2026/06/ftc-requires-amazon-pay-225-million-resolve-charges-it-knowingly-violated-fair-credit-reporting-act
Amazon Complaint
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/Amazon-Complaint.pdf
Amazon ConsentMotionforOrder
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/Amazon-ConsentMotionforOrder.pdf
Federal Trade Commission Enforcement Page
https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement
"Amazon.com Inc."
"Amazon will pay $2.25 million in civil penalties"
"Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA)"
"Section 609(e) of the FCRA"
"refusing to provide transaction records to consumers whose personal information was used by identity thieves to commit fraud"
"the complaint alleged that in numerous instances, Amazon.com Inc. failed to comply with Section 609(e) of the FCRA, which requires companies to, within 30 days of a consumer’s request, provide victims of identity theft with application and business transaction records about fraudulent transactions made in their names"
The FTC referred a complaint against REPS & Company Inc. and company executives, alleging they bypassed ticket-issuer security controls and purchasing limits to acquire millions of tickets for resale. The complaint was filed by the Department of Justice, and the case will be decided by the court; the press release does not report a penalty or other remedy imposed.
The FTC sued Digital Forensics Corporation LLC and affiliated defendants, alleging they misled sextortion victims with promises of investigative and monitoring services that often were not provided, and used fake positive reviews. A federal court granted the FTC’s request to temporarily halt the defendants’ activities; the complaint remains for the court to decide.
The FTC alleged that Greenway Auto Group advertised vehicle prices thousands of dollars below the amounts consumers actually paid and used mailers falsely suggesting recipients had won cash prizes. Greenway agreed to an order requiring transparent pricing and prohibiting deceptive prize mailers and other misrepresentations; the press release does not state a monetary penalty.
The FTC sent warning letters to 24 large healthcare services companies, cautioning that incomplete, inaccurate, or untimely pricing information for scheduled medical care may be unfair or deceptive. The letters urge recipients to review their price-disclosure practices and take corrective action; they announce no fine or formal order.
$1.9M
The FTC alleged that Premier Franchising Group LLC and Franchise Fastlane LLC made deceptive and unsubstantiated claims about the Premier Martial Arts franchise opportunity and violated the Franchise Rule. The proposed settlements require the companies to pay a combined $1.85 million to compensate franchisees, prohibit certain misrepresentations, and require Franchise Rule compliance; certain franchisees may also cancel their agreements without penalty.
The FTC, Utah, and Nevada sued Lens.com Inc., alleging that it advertised artificially low contact lens prices while hiding mandatory checkout charges and misleading consumers about its AutoRefill subscription. The complaint seeks to stop the alleged practices; the court has not yet decided the case, and no penalty or remedy has been imposed.