California Attorney General Rob Bonta dropped a bombshell last week. Newly public documents in a four-year antitrust battle lay bare Amazon’s alleged playbook for jacking up prices across the web. No more redactions. The evidence names names—Levi’s, Hanes, Scotts Miracle-Gro—and points fingers at rivals like Walmart, Target, and Home Depot. Boom. Consumers paid more. Amazon stayed low.
Filed originally in September 2022 under California’s Unfair Competition Law and Cartwright Act, the suit claims Amazon’s dominance lets it dictate terms to vendors. Sell cheaper elsewhere? Face demotion in search results or outright bans from the platform. But the real twist emerged in February 2026: Bonta’s motion for a preliminary injunction, backed by a 16-page memo now mostly unredacted and hosted on DocumentCloud. Discovery unearthed emails, depositions, and slides showing Amazon didn’t just penalize. It orchestrated hikes.
Take Levi’s Easy Khaki Classic Fit pants. Walmart listed them below Amazon’s price. Amazon flagged it to Levi’s. Levi’s emailed Walmart: price bumped to $29.99 instantly. Hanes got similar heat over underwear at Target and Walmart. Amazon sent links. Hanes promised to ‘reach out.’ Scotts? Directed to nudge a retailer three days before Prime Day. Vendors caved, fearing Amazon’s wrath—lost visibility means lost sales. And competitors? Often aware, sometimes complicit, matching the new floor to avoid undercutting.
Three schemes stand out. First, Amazon and a rival collude via shared vendor to lift prices mutually. Second, Amazon demands a vendor force a low-price rival to match higher. Third, yank the cheap option from the rival’s site entirely. Result: no bargains anywhere. ‘Amazon bullied vendors to hike up the price of their products sold at other shops, or secured the removal of these products altogether, to ensure Amazon was the cheapest place consumers could find products,’ Bonta said in a press release on April 20.
The Verge broke down the memo’s details first, highlighting Prime Day prep. Bonta told the New York Times, ‘You don’t see price fixing so explicitly and egregiously in writing like this.’ The Guardian published exclusive internals: emails where Amazon demands vendors ‘resolve issues’ with low prices at Chewy or Best Buy. CNBC quoted Bonta: ‘Amazon has strong-armed vendors into raising prices elsewhere or pulling products from competing retailers altogether so that Amazon can protect its profit margins.’
Amazon pushes back hard. ‘The Attorney General’s motion is a transparent attempt to distract from the weakness of its case,’ a spokesperson told AL.com in February. Agreements pro-competitive, they argue—protect brand value, spur innovation. No comment yet on the latest unsealing, per Reuters. But a recent win for Bonta: San Francisco Superior Court denied Amazon’s summary judgment bid on whether state antitrust laws apply. Trial set for January 19, 2027. Injunction hearing July 23, 2026.
So what? Amazon controls 38% of U.S. e-commerce. Its policies ripple. Vendors rely on it for volume; rivals match to stay relevant. Prices climb on Amazon too, once undercutters fold. Bloomberg notes Levi’s, Hanes caught in crossfire, but schemes spanned apparel, lawn care, pet supplies. LA Times details the khaki pants saga. Broader FTC suit echoes this, alleging monopoly maintenance.
Courts have mixed records. Amazon survived demurrer in 2023. But evidence mounts. Vendors testified to coercion; slides show internal metrics tracking ‘price parity enforcement.’ X chatter amplifies: EcommerceBytes noted Amazon’s loss last week, trial looming. Techmeme headlined the NYT filing.
Industry watchers eye impacts. Sellers fear policy shifts—looser pricing could spark races to bottom, eroding margins. Consumers? Potential relief if injunction sticks. Amazon’s $638 billion revenue last year dwarfs Levi’s $6.4 billion. Leverage real. Bonta seeks monitor to halt communications on rival pricing, claw back profits.
This isn’t isolated. Separate $2 million reference-pricing settlement with counties. FTC’s blockbuster antitrust case. Europe fines. Pattern of scrutiny. Amazon built empire on low prices. Now accused of engineering them artificially. Vendors squeezed. Rivals boxed. Shoppers billed.
January 2027 trial looms large. Evidence like Levi’s email: irrefutable? Amazon’s defenses—pro-consumer intent—tested. For now, filings paint a market rigged from Seattle. Prices higher. Choices narrower. California fights back.
WebProNews is an iEntry Publication