It has taken Canberra’s regulators to do what London’s soft-touch enforcers have dodged. Australia’s competition watchdog has filed suit against Amazon, alleging the tech titan abuses its market dominance through unfair contracts with third-party sellers. The message is clear: the era of Silicon Valley impunity is over. Now the question is whether the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has the spine to follow suit.
Documents lodged by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) paint a familiar picture. Amazon, they argue, uses its platform power to impose onerous terms on small businesses. Sellers are forced to accept pricing clauses that prevent them from offering lower prices elsewhere. They face sudden account suspensions with little recourse. Data from their own sales is used by Amazon to launch rival products. It is a playbook seen from Seattle to Slough.
Yet Whitehall has been slow to act. The CMA’s own market study into online platforms in 2020 catalogued similar concerns but produced only voluntary commitments from Amazon. Critics call it a whipped response. No fines. No legal action. Just a promise to behave better.
Australia’s move changes the calculus. The ACCC is not known for bluffing. It took on Google over location data and won. It forced Facebook to pay for news. Now it targets Amazon’s contractual stranglehold. The timing is impeccable. Across the Atlantic, the US Federal Trade Commission is also circling. The political winds have shifted.
Inside the CMA, sources say there is growing frustration at the slow pace of enforcement. The Digital Markets Unit, launched with much fanfare in 2021, remains in a shadowy regulator limbo. The government has yet to give it the statutory powers needed to fine Big Tech. Ministers talk tough but fear deterring investment. The Treasury worries about London’s status as a tech hub.
But the Australian suit exposes the cost of inaction. Small British businesses tell the same story of dependency and fear. They cannot speak out for fear of being removed from the platform. One seller, who asked to remain anonymous, described Amazon’s contracts as ‘a velvet mousetrap’. The ACCC has now named it a cage.
The politics are compelling. Labour has promised to empower the DMU. The Liberal Democrats scent a populist issue. Even some Tory backbenchers are uneasy. The Prime Minister, already grappling with a cost-of-living crisis, could score easy points by backing action against a foreign giant that many voters distrust.
Yet the CMA remains cautious. Its chief executive has hinted at future probes but will not commit. The fear of a legal battle with Amazon’s deep pockets is real. But the ACCC’s move shows that regulatory courage is possible. The question is whether London will find its own.
For now, the Australian lawsuit is a political football that the UK government cannot afford to let drop. The message from Canberra is unmistakable: you can take on Big Tech and win. The only loser is a regulator that fails to act.
