Amazon will pay $2.5 billion in fines and reimbursements to Prime subscribers to resolve an FTC complaint that the company "deceived its customers to generate subscriptions," the agency said on Thursday. The settlement, one of the largest consumer-protection penalties on record, requires Amazon to reimburse affected members and alter enrollment practices that the FTC said contributed to unwanted charges.

The deal follows months of scrutiny over how digital platforms enroll and retain subscribers. For Amazon, whose Prime membership is central to its e-commerce ecosystem and services bundling, the financial hit is meaningful but not existential: the sum represents a small fraction of Amazon’s revenue, which runs into the hundreds of billions annually. Still, the settlement raises the cost of aggressive subscription tactics and establishes a regulatory precedent that could prompt other platforms to revise sign-up flows, cancelation processes and disclosure practices.

At the same time, Google has asked the Supreme Court to block a lower-court order that would force sweeping changes to its Play app store, filing to stay the mandate while it pursues appeals. The order, issued in a lower federal court, would require Google to overhaul payment and distribution policies that developers and regulators have criticized for years. Google argues that the lower-court remedy exceeds the judiciary’s authority and that the changes could destabilize the app economy.

The Supreme Court filing elevates the dispute to the highest judicial level in a case with far-reaching implications for platform regulation, antitrust remedies and the balance between judicial oversight and market governance. If the stay is denied and changes are imposed, developers could gain more freedom to route users outside Google’s ecosystem, potentially reducing the search giant’s fee revenue but also creating new complexities in security and user experience. A decision by the justices on whether to intervene could take months and would shape how courts craft remedies in tech antitrust cases going forward.

Retailer Starbucks, meanwhile, said it will shutter underperforming U.S. stores and eliminate 900 corporate roles as part of a plan to stabilize profitability amid slowing sales. The company framed the moves as part of a turnaround strategy to refocus on core operations and labor productivity after a period of expansion that outpaced demand in some markets. For Starbucks, the cuts aim to reduce fixed costs and redirect investment to higher-return channels such as drive-thru and digital ordering.

Taken together, the three developments illustrate intensifying pressure from regulators, courts and market realities on large companies that dominate consumer markets. The Amazon settlement signals tougher enforcement of consumer protection in the subscription age, Google’s Supreme Court appeal underscores unresolved questions about the scope of remedies in platform antitrust, and Starbucks’ restructuring highlights the limits of scale when consumer spending patterns shift.

Analysts say investors will watch closely for how these moves affect near-term earnings and long-term business models. Regulators and policymakers, meanwhile, will see the Amazon settlement and the Google litigation as test cases for shaping rules around digital marketplaces, with implications for competition, privacy and consumer choice far beyond any single company. © Copyright Thomson Reuters 2025.