The Google name is displayed outside the company’s office in London, Britain, November 1, 2018. REUTERS/Toby Melville/File Photo
Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com
BRUSSELS, Sept 13 (Reuters) – Alphabet unit Google (GOOGL.O) will face damages claims for up to 25 billion euros ($25.4 billion) over its digital advertising practices in two suits to be filed in British and Dutch courts in the coming weeks by a law firm on behalf of publishers.
Google’s adtech has recently drawn scrutiny from antitrust regulators following complaints from publishers. read more
The French competition watchdog imposed a 220-million-euro fine on the company last year while the European Commission and its UK peer are investigating whether Google’s adtech business gives it an unfair advantage over rivals and advertisers. [ read more
Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com
“It is time that Google owns up to its responsibilities and pays back the damages it has caused to this important industry. That is why today we are announcing these actions across two jurisdictions to obtain compensation for EU and UK publishers,” Damien Geradin at law firm Geradin Partners said in a statement on Tuesday.
Google criticised the imminent lawsuits, saying that it works constructively with publishers across Europe.
“This lawsuit is speculative and opportunistic. When we receive the complaint, we’ll fight it vigorously,” a spokesperson said.
The British claim at the UK Competition Appeal Tribunal will seek to recover compensation for all owners of websites carrying banner advertising, including traditional publishers. Britain has an opt-out regime.
The Dutch claim is open to publishers affected by Google’s actions. Litigation funder Harbour is funding both lawsuits.
($1 = 0.9860 euros)
Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com
Reporting by Foo Yun Chee; editing by Philip Blenkinsop and David Evans
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
The Rogers Building, the green-topped corporate campus of Canadian media conglomerate Rogers Communications is seen in downtown Toronto, Ontario, Canada July 9, 2022. REUTERS/Chris Helgren
Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com
Register
TORONTO, July 10 (Reuters) – Rogers Communications (RCIb.TO) complicated its chances of getting antitrust approval for a C$20 billion telecom merger after Friday’s massive outage highlighted the perils of Canada’s effective telecom monopoly and sparked a backlash against its industry dominance.
The Rogers network outage disrupted nearly every aspect of daily life, cutting banking, transport and government access for millions, and hitting the country’s cashless payments system and Air Canada’s (AC.TO) call center.
Consumers and opposition politicians called on the government to allow more competition and enact policy changes to curb telecom companies’ power. Rogers, BCE Inc (BCE.TO) and Telus Corp (T.TO) control 90% of the market share in Canada.
Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com
Register
Smaller internet and wireless providers rely on their infrastructure network to deliver their own services.
“The reality is in Canada there is a serious monopoly of our telecommunications,” New Democratic Party leader Jagmeet Singh said in a TikTok video as he launched a petition to halt Rogers’ merger plans and “break up these monopolies”.
“The impact of this outage makes it clear this monopoly cannot continue,” he added.
Industry Minister François-Philippe Champagne, calling the outage “unacceptable”, said on Sunday that he would meet with Rogers CEO Tony Staffieri and other industry executives to discuss improving the “reliability of networks across Canada.” High cellphone bills have been a hot-button issue in recent Canadian elections.
The disruption in internet access, cell phone and landline phone connections meant some callers could not reach emergency services via 911 calls, police across Canada said.
“Because of the Rogers outage, millions of Canadians couldn’t call 911 yesterday. Hospitals couldn’t call in staff. There was no way to call families so that they could say goodbye to their loved ones at end of life,” tweeted Amit Arya, director-at-large at the Canadian Society of Palliative Care Physicians.
Rogers, which blamed a router malfunction after maintenance for the disruption, said on Sunday it was aware that some customers were still facing disruptions. It did not comment on whether the outage could impact the merger proceedings.
Friday’s outage came two days after Rogers held talks with Canada’s antitrust authority to discuss possible remedies to its blocked C$20 billion ($15.34 billion) takeover of Shaw Communications (SJRb.TO).
Canada’s competition bureau blocked the deal earlier this year, saying it would hamper competition in a country where telecom rates are some of the world’s highest. The merger still awaits a final verdict.
The disruption could prompt the Competition Bureau, which generally assesses mergers based on their impact on price, to look more closely at other considerations such as quality and service, said consumer rights groups.
“It is a ‘non-price effect’ (argument) – that is, concentration of ownership and control of critical infrastructure making an ever more central point of failure to deliver basic services,” said John Lawford, executive director of the Ottawa-based Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC), which has argued against the merger at the Competition Bureau.
But Vass Bedner, Executive Director of the Public Policy program in McMaster University, said the outage was a separate issue from Rogers’ merger plan.
“I don’t think this issue will impact the merger because I am not sure how the Competition Bureau can account for risk of bigger outage,” Bedner said.
University of Ottawa professor Michael Geist, who focuses on the internet and e-commerce law, said the outage “must be a wake-up for a government that has been asleep on digital policy.”
“The blame for Friday’s outage may lie with Rogers, but the government and (Canadian telecommunications regulator) should be held accountable for a failure to respond,” he wrote on his blog.
The outage, which began around 4:30 a.m. ET (0830 GMT) on Friday before service was fully restored on Saturday, knocked out a quarter of Canada’s observable internet connectivity, said the NetBlocks monitoring group.
The interruption was Rogers’ second in 15 months with an external software upgrade knocking out service primarily to consumer clients last year.
Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com
Register
Reporting by Divya Rajagopal; writing by Amran Abocar; Editing by Chizu Nomiyama
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
SHANGHAI, July 10 (Reuters) – China has imposed fines on technology giants Alibaba (9988.HK) and Tencent (0700.HK) as well as a range of other firms for failing to comply with anti-monopoly rules on the disclosure of transactions, the country’s market regulator said on Sunday.
The State Admnistration for Market Regulation (SAMR) released a list of 28 deals that violated the rules. Five involved units of Alibaba, including a 2021 purchase of equity in its subsidiary, the Youku Tudou streaming platform.
Tencent was involved in 12 of the transactions on SAMR’s list.
Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com
Register
The firms could not immediately be reached for comment.
China’s tech sector has been one of the main targets of a crackdown on monopolistic practices that started in late 2020.
Under the anti-monopoly law, the maximum potential fine in each case stands at 500,000 yuan ($74,688).
($1 = 6.6945 yuan)
Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com
Register
Reporting by David Stanway; Editing by Edmund Klamann
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
July 7 (Reuters) – Spirit Airlines Inc (SAVE.N) said it has postponed a shareholder vote scheduled for Friday on its $2.4 billion sale to Frontier Group Holdings Inc (ULCC.O) so its board can continue discussions with both Frontier and JetBlue Airways.
Reuters first reported the planned delay.
Over the past few months, JetBlue and Frontier, led by influential airline investor Bill Franke, have repeatedly sweentened their bids for Spirit, seeking to create the fifth largest U.S. airline.
Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com
Register
The Spirit shareholder vote, which has been delayed twice before, is being pushed back for a third time to give Spirit and JetBlue time to finalize a deal, sources told Reuters, requesting anonymity as the discussions are confidential.
Spirit said it now plans to hold a special meeting on July 15.
JetBlue CEO Robin Hayes said in a statement the airline was “encouraged by our discussions with Spirit and are hopeful they now recognize that Spirit shareholders have indicated their clear, overwhelming preference for an agreement with JetBlue.”
JetBlue submitted a sweetened $3.7 billion all-cash bid last month but Spirit has been reluctant to accept JetBlue’s much more financially attractive offer due to concerns that antitrust regulators may reject it, according to the sources.
JetBlue is already facing a lawsuit from the U.S. Justice Department over its partnership with American Airlines (AAL.O) in the New York and Boston areas.
There is no certainty JetBlue will provide Spirit the necessary assurances on the regulatory front to reach a deal and Frontier, which has already improved its offer, may come back with a new bid, the sources added.
The Frontier deal is also expected to face antitrust scrutiny. But Spirit and some analysts say that deal has a better chance of getting a nod from regulators.
Both bidders view Spirit as an opportunity to expand their domestic footprints and reshape the U.S. airline industry, which is largely dominated by four domestic carriers. An acquisition by either bidder would come at a time when the industry is currently grappling with labor and aircraft shortages.
Last week, Spirit was forced to postpone the shareholder vote until July 8. The sources said it did not have enough shareholders to back the Frontier deal at the time.
Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com
Register
Reporting by Anirban Sen and Svea Herbst-Bayliss in New York and David Shepardson in Washington; additional reporting by Rajesh Kumar Singh; Editing by Greg Roumeliotis, Bill Berkrot and Edwina Gibbs
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
WASHINGTON, June 13 (Reuters) – Dozens of companies and business organizations are sending a letter to U.S. senators on Monday to urge them to support a bill aimed at reining in the biggest tech companies, such as Amazon.com (AMZN.O) and Alphabet’s (GOOGL.O) Google.
Democratic U.S. Senator Amy Klobuchar and lawmakers from both parties said last week they had the Senate votes needed to pass legislation that would prevent the tech platforms, including Apple (AAPL.O) and Facebook , from favoring their own businesses on their platforms.
The companies supporting the measure, which include Yelp, Sonos, DuckDuckGo and Spotify, called it a “moderate and sensible bill aimed squarely at well-documented abuses by the very largest online platforms.”
Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com
Register
Other signatories included the American Booksellers Association, the American Independent Business Alliance, the Institute for Local Self-Reliance and Kelkoo Group.
The organizations urged the Senate to pass the bill, saying it would modernize antitrust laws so smaller companies have space to compete.
The logos of Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Google in a combination photo/File Photo
Klobuchar said last week she believed she had the 60 Senate votes needed to end debate and move to a vote on final passage. There is a similar bill in the House.
The Senate is expected to vote on the bill this summer, perhaps as early as late June, according to two sources familiar with the matter. The House is then expected to vote on the Senate version, sources said. read more
Amazon.com, the Chamber of Commerce and others have taken aim at the measure. read more
The tech giants have said the bill would imperil popular consumer products like Google Maps and Amazon Basics and make it harder for the companies to protect their users’ security and privacy.
Amazon has lambasted the bill saying in a blog post the bill “jeopardizes two of the things American consumers love most about Amazon: the vast selection and low prices made possible by opening our store to third-party selling partners, and the promise of fast, free shipping through Amazon Prime.”
Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com
Register
Reporting by Diane Bartz
Editing by Chris Reese
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
March 21 (Reuters) – The U.S. Federal Trade Commission has sought additional data from Activision Blizzard Inc (ATVI.O) and Microsoft Corp (MSFT.O) related to the antitrust review of their deal, the games developer said in a regulatory filing on Monday.
Microsoft in January agreed to acquire the “Call of Duty” maker for $68.7 billion in the biggest gaming industry deal in history. read more
Microsoft will file for approval of the deal in 17 jurisdictions, the company’s president, Brad Smith, told reporters last month.
In order to woo U.S. and other regulators, the company said in February that it had developed a new set of principles for its app store, including open access to developers who meet privacy and security standards. read more
With the Activision deal, Microsoft will take on industry leaders Tencent Holdings Ltd (0700.HK) and Sony Group Corp (6758.T). Sony Interactive Entertainment recently said it would buy Bungie Inc, creator of the “Halo” videogame, in a deal valued at $3.6 billion.
Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com
Register
Reporting by Diane Bartz in Washington, Yuvraj Malik in Bengaluru
Editing by Shailesh Kuber and Matthew Lewis
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
Russian court says Meta engaged in ‘extremist activity’
Facebook, Instagram already banned in Russia
Prosecutors, court say WhatsApp will not be affected
Meta can return if it sticks to Russia’s terms -lawmaker
March 21 (Reuters) – A Moscow court on Monday found Meta Platforms Inc (FB.O) guilty of “extremist activity”, but said its decision would not affect the WhatsApp messenger service, focusing its ire on the company’s already banned Facebook and Instagram social networks.
Moscow’s Tverskoi District Court upheld a lawsuit filed by Russian state prosecutors on banning the activities of Meta on Russian territory, the court’s press service said in a statement.
Meta did not respond to requests for comment.
Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com
Register
The U.S. company’s lawyer, Victoria Shagina, had said in court earlier on Monday that Meta was not carrying out extremist activities and stood against Russophobia, the Interfax news agency reported.
TASS cited judge Olga Solopova as saying the decision would be enforced immediately.
It was not immediately clear whether Meta would appeal.
The court said the activities of Facebook and Instagram in Russia were banned “on the grounds of realising extremist activity”.
Russia has in the past designated groups such as the Taliban and Islamic State as “extremist” but later expanded this to the Jehovah’s Witnesses and jailed Kremlin critic Alexei Navalny’s Anti-Corruption Foundation.
The implications of Monday’s ruling remain unclear.
Meta’s flagship platforms, Facebook and Instagram, are already banned in Russia and the court said WhatsApp would be unaffected by the ruling.
“The decision does not apply to the activities of Meta’s messenger WhatsApp, due to its lack of functionality for the public dissemination of information,” the court said.
Russia banned Facebook for restricting access to Russian media while Instagram was blocked after Meta said it would allow social media users in Ukraine to post messages urging violence against Russian President Vladimir Putin and troops Moscow sent into Ukraine on Feb. 24. read more
Russia calls the conflict in Ukraine a “special military operation” to disarm Ukraine and protect it from people it describes as dangerous nationalists.
Meta has since narrowed its guidance to prohibit calls for the death of a head of state and said its guidance should never be interpreted as condoning violence against Russians in general. read more
But the perceived threat to Russian citizens angered Russian authorities and led to the launch of a criminal case against the company.
WHATSAPP’S FATE
It was not immediately clear how the WhatsApp messaging service would be able to continue operating, now that the court has put a stop to Meta’s commercial activities.
Analysis of mobile internet traffic on Monday showed that Telegram, popular in Russia for a long time, has overtaken WhatsApp to become the country’s most popular messaging tool in recent weeks. read more
The prosecution sought to allay fears that people who find ways around bans on Meta’s services may face criminal charges for liaising with an extremist group.
“Individuals will not be prosecuted simply for using Meta’s services,” TASS cited the prosecutor as saying in court.
But human rights lawyer Pavel Chikov said neither the court, nor the prosecutor could guarantee the safety of Facebook or Instagram users, warning that any public displays of Meta symbols – on websites, shop entrances, on business cards – could be grounds for administrative charges and up to 15 days in jail under Russian law.
“Buying adverts on both social networks or trading Meta’s shares may qualify as financing extremism activity – this is a criminal offence,” he wrote on Telegram.
Facebook last year had an estimated 7.5 million users and WhatsApp 67 million, according to researcher Insider Intelligence.
WAY BACK FOR META?
Russia’s military operation in Ukraine has added fuel to a simmering dispute between foreign digital platforms and Moscow.
Access to Twitter (TWTR.N) has also been restricted and on Friday communications regulator Roskomnadzor demanded that Alphabet Inc’s (GOOGL.O) Google stop spreading what it called threats against Russian citizens on its YouTube video-sharing platform. read more
Anton Gorelkin, a member of Russia’s State Duma committee on information and communications who has fiercely criticised foreign firms, while championing domestic alternatives, said the Russian market could be opened to Meta again, but only on Moscow’s terms.
“These are an immediate end to blocking Russian media, a return to the policy of neutrality and strict moderation of fakes and anti-Russian comments,” Gorelkin said on Telegram.
Another condition, Gorelkin said, was that Meta comply with a Russian law demanding that foreign companies with more than 500,000 daily users open representative offices in Russia. read more
Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com
Register
Reporting by Reuters
Editing by Susan Fenton, Jonathan Oatis and Emelia Sithole-Matarise
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
Lockheed Martin’s logo is seen during Japan Aerospace 2016 air show in Tokyo, Japan, October 12, 2016. REUTERS/Kim Kyung-Hoon
Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com
Register
Feb 13 (Reuters) – U.S. arms maker Lockheed Martin Corp (LMT.N) called off plans on Sunday to acquire rocket engine maker Aerojet Rocketdyne Holdings Inc (AJRD.N) for $4.4 billion amid opposition from U.S. antitrust enforcers.
The Federal Trade Commission sued to block the deal in late-January on the grounds that it would allow Lockheed to use its control of Aerojet to hurt other defense contractors. Missile maker Raytheon Technologies (RTX.N) was an outspoken opponent of the proposed acquisition.
The merger, which was announced in late 2020, drew criticism as it would give Lockheed a dominant position over solid fuel rocket motors — a vital piece of the U.S. missile industry.
Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com
Register
Lockheed’s Chief Executive James Taiclet said the acquisition would have improved efficiency, speed and cut costs for the U.S. government, but that terminating the agreement was in its stakeholders’ best interest.
Aerojet, which reports fourth quarter earnings later this week, said in a separate statement that it still expects a strong “future performance,” despite the scrapped merger.
The companies’ merger agreement does not include a termination fee in the event that antitrust regulators opposed the deal, according to a regulatory filing. A Lockheed spokesman previously said the company did not plan to make any such payment to Aerojet.
If the deal had ended up in court, it would have been the first litigated defense merger challenge in decades, according to FTC.
Other critics of the deal included U.S. Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren, whohad asked the FTC to examine the internal firewalls Lockheed said it would put in place to prevent it from gaining a competitive advantage over its peers.
Lockheed had said it accounted for 33% of Aerojet’s sales and argued that the deal would reduce costs for the Pentagon and the U.S. taxpayer.
Rocket motors like those made by Aerojet are used in everything from the homeland defensive missile system to Stinger missiles.
Aerojet develops and manufactures liquid and solid rocket propulsion, air-breathing hypersonic engines and electric power and propulsion for space, defense, civil and commercial applications. Its customers include the Pentagon, NASA, Boeing (BA.N), Lockheed Martin, Raytheon and the United Launch Alliance.
Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com
Register
Reporting by Anirudh Saligrama in Bengaluru and Diane Bartz and Mike Stone in Washington, D.C.; Editing by Diane Craft and Jacqueline Wong
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
Outdated laws date back to end of Prohibition in 1933
Treasury will streamline tax reporting
States urged to review anticompetitive impacts of laws
WASHINGTON, Feb 9 (Reuters) – The U.S. Treasury Department on Wednesday flagged concerns about consolidation in the $250 billion annual U.S. alcohol market and outlined reforms it said could boost competition and save consumers hundreds of millions of dollars each year.
New merger and acquisition scrutiny, different tax rates and lifting regulatory burdens to new entrants in the wine, beer and spirits market would make the market fairer for new brewers and cheaper for consumers, Treasury said in a 63-page paper.
The long-awaited report is part of a July executive order on competitiveness. Its focus on the beer industry, in particular, marks the latest push by the Biden administration to fight what it calls excess consolidation in industries from meatpacking to shipping.
Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com
Register
Treasury, responding to over 800 public comments on the issue, suggested stiffer Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission oversight, tougher enforcement of existing rules and development of new ones in the report, which was first reported by Reuters.
“American consumers, small business owners, entrepreneurs, and workers should not have to suffer under the thumb of a highly concentrated beer industry,” said Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Kanter. “Enforcement and regulatory authorities should have the courage to learn and the fortitude necessary to enforce the law and protect competition.”
The U.S. market for beer, wine and spirits has spawned thousands of new breweries, wineries and distilleries over the past decade.
But a web of complicated state and federal regulations, some dating back to the end of Prohibition in 1933, coupled with “exclusionary behavior” by massive producers, distributors and retailers means small entrants can struggle to compete and flourish, U.S. officials said.
The two largest brewers selling beer in the United States – Anheuser Busch InBev (ABI.BR) and Molson Coors (TAP.N) – account for 65% of U.S. beer revenues.
“We’re determined to protect what has been a successful, vibrant industry with a lot of small businesses entering it,” while tackling issues that “lead to excessive prices for consumers,” said one senior U.S. official.
So-called “post and hold” laws, which restrict price competition, mean beer consumers alone pay $487 million more a year than they should, and can drive up the cost of a bottle of wine by up to 18% and a bottle of spirits by over 30% the report said, citing studies.
The DOJ and FTC, who share the work of antitrust enforcement, should take a closer look at proposed acquisitions of smaller players by bigger ones, Treasury said, noting that price benefits promised in past deals had failed to materialize.
The report also called for the Treasury Department’s Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) to change labeling rules to protect public health and to limit the impact of lobbying. As of 2017, alcohol companies reported 303 lobbyists in Washington.
U.S. states – which control the bulk of oversight – should examine the anticompetitive impact of regulations and franchise rules on small producers, Treasury said.
Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com
Register
Reporting by Andrea Shalal and Diane Bartz; Editing by Heather Timmons, Aurora Ellis, Alexandra Hudson
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
Amazon 2019 Future deal was at heart of ongoing legal disputes
India watchdog suspends deal, says Amazon suppressed info in 2019
Amazon should pay penalty of 2 billion rupees-watchdog
Suspension of deal latest legal twist in Future-Amazon saga
NEW DELHI, Dec 17 (Reuters) – India’s antitrust agency suspended Amazon.com’s (AMZN.O) 2019 deal with Future Group on Friday, potentially denting the U.S. e-commerce giant’s attempts to block the sale of Future’s retail assets to an Indian market leader.
The regulator ruled that the U.S. company had suppressed information while seeking regulatory approval on an investment into Indian retailer Future Group two years ago.
The ruling by the Competition Commission of India (CCI) could have far-reaching consequences for Amazon’s legal battles with now estranged partner Future.
Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com
Register
Amazon has for months successfully used the terms of its toehold $200 million investment in Future in 2019 to block the Indian retailer’s attempt to sell retail assets to Reliance Industries (RELI.NS) for $3.4 billion.
The regulator’s 57-page order said it considers “it necessary to examine the combination (deal) afresh,” adding its approval from 2019 “shall remain in abeyance” until then.
The CCI’s order said Amazon had “suppressed the actual scope” of the deal and had made “false and incorrect statements” while seeking approvals.
“The approval is suspended. This is absolutely unprecedented,” said Shweta Dubey, a partner at Indian law firm SD Partners, who was formerly a CCI official.
“The order seems to have found new power for CCI to keep the combination approval in abeyance,” she added.
With the 2019 Future deal’s antitrust approval now suspended, it could dent Amazon’s legal position and retail ambitions, while making it easier for Reliance – the country’s largest retailer – to acquire number two player Future, people familiar with the dispute said.
The CCI also imposed a penalty of around 2 billion rupees ($27 million) on the U.S. company, adding that Amazon will be given time to submit information again to seek approvals, the CCI added.
Future Group, however, is unlikely to cooperate with Amazon if it tries to reapply for antitrust clearance after the CCI’s decision, a source with direct knowledge told Reuters.
The Indian company is also set to take CCI’s Friday decision before various legal forums to argue that Amazon has no legal basis to challenge its asset sale, the source added.
Future and Reliance did not respond to a request for comment. Amazon said it is reviewing the order “and will decide on its next steps in due course.”
RETAIL BATTLE
The dispute over Future Retail, which has more than 1,500 supermarket and other outlets, is the most hostile flashpoint between Jeff Bezos’ Amazon and Reliance, run by India’s richest man Mukesh Ambani, as they try to gain the upper hand in winning retail consumers.
Hit by the COVID-19 pandemic, Future last year decided to sell its retail assets to Reliance for $3.4 billion, but Amazon managed to block the sale successfully through legal challenges.
Amazon cited breach of contracts by Future, arguing that terms agreed in 2019 to pay $200 million for a 49% stake in Future’s gift voucher unit prevented its parent, Future Group, from selling its Future Retail Ltd (FRTL.NS) business to certain rivals, including Reliance.
The CCI review of the deal started after Future, which denies any wrongdoing, complained, saying that Amazon was making contradictory statements before different legal forums about the intent of the 2019 transaction.
In June, the CCI told Amazon the U.S. firm in 2019 explained its interest in investing in Future’s gift voucher unit as one that would address gaps in India’s payments industry. But later, the CCI said, Amazon disclosed in other legal forums the foundation of its investment in the Future unit was to obtain special rights over the retail arm, Future Retail.
In the Friday order, CCI said there was “a deliberate design on the part of Amazon to suppress the actual scope and purpose of the” deal.
Ahead of CCI’s decision, Amazon denied concealing any information and warned the watchdog that Future’s bid to unwind the 2019 deal to allow Reliance to consolidate its position “will further restrict competition in the Indian retail market”.
Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com
Register
Reporting by Aditya Kalra in New Delhi;
Editing by Euan Rocha, Jane Merriman and Louise Heavens
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.