Consumers blame corporations for rising prices, unfair practices, and endless subscription fees. Corporations, meanwhile, exist because consumers keep buying their products and services. So, who is really responsible?
There’s no simple answer to the debate. After all, neither can exist without the other.
But when a company has more than 200 million paying members, how much responsibility does it bear to ensure its services are fair, transparent, and easy to leave?
That question is now at the center of a legal dispute involving Amazon. Arizona’s Attorney General accused the retail giant of making it unnecessarily difficult for Prime members to cancel their subscriptions, allegedly forcing customers through at least six steps to end their memberships.
The lawsuit, filed in 2024, has now resulted in an agreement under which Amazon will pay $3 million to eligible Arizona consumers who faced difficulties canceling, as reported by the Arizona Daily Star. Amazon, however, denied violating any Arizona laws.
It is not yet clear how eligible consumers will be identified or paid.
Amazon agreed to pay $3 million in refunds to eligible Arizona consumers
Amazon reportedly agreed to refund $3 million to eligible Arizonans whom Attorney General Kris Mayes claimed couldn’t cancel their Prime memberships without a challenge, according to the Arizona Daily Star.
In a new consent judgment, Amazon denied it has violated any state law, and the state also agreed not to claim that any of Amazon’s past, present, or future business practices are illegal, the Arizona Daily Star noted.
Under the deal, Amazon will pay a total of $7 million, out of which $3 million will go to the Attorney General’s Office to be distributed to “eligible consumers.”
Those consumers belong to a group that tried to cancel their $139 Prime membership and who, according to the AG’s office, faced hurdles that were allegedly designed to make canceling difficult, spokesman Richie Taylor said, according to the Arizona Daily Star.
Amazon agreed to pay the following:
- $3 million for eligible consumers;
- $1.5 million into a fund used by the AG’s Office to investigate consumer fraud and educate Arizona residents about ways to protect themselves.
- $1.5 million to cover the state’s legal fees.
- $1 million in charitable donations to organizations selected by Mayes.
Attorney general’s lawsuit against Amazon’s previous cancellation process
On May 15, 2024, Mayes announced that Arizona had filed two separate lawsuits against Amazon, accusing the online company of unfair and deceptive business practices under the Arizona Consumer Fraud Act and the Arizona Uniform State Antitrust Act.
The first lawsuit focuses on Amazon Prime’s cancellation process. The state alleges that Amazon used confusing messages, misleading options, and repeated prompts to make cancellations difficult.
Until 2023, canceling a Prime membership online required at least six clicks, according to the lawsuit press release:
- Prime Central
- Manage Membership
- End Membership
- Continue to Cancel
- Continue to Cancel (again)
- End Now
The strategy, internally dubbed “Project Iliad” due to its complexity, allegedly reduced Prime cancellations by 14%.
Moreover, the lawsuit argued that Prime members are valuable to Amazon not only for the subscription fees it collects (currently at $139 a year), but also because Prime members spend more than twice as much as other Amazon customers (averaging about $1,400 per year).
The second lawsuit against Amazon’s Buy Box algorithm
The second lawsuit targets Amazon’s Buy Box algorithm, which decides which seller’s offer appears under the “Buy Now” or “Add to Cart” buttons. The state claimed the system favored Amazon’s own products and sellers who pay for its fulfillment services, even when other sellers offered lower prices.
Mayes said in the press release that Amazon’s practices had “artificially inflated prices for Arizona consumers.”
Additionally, the lawsuit accused Amazon of unfairly maintaining its market dominance by enforcing unlawful price parity agreements through its Business Services Agreement.
These agreements allegedly prevent third-party sellers from offering lower prices outside of Amazon, hindering the e-commerce giant’s competition, and ultimately inflating prices for Arizona consumers.
“Arizona consumers deserve to be treated fairly and without deception by big corporations like Amazon, and small businesses deserve a level playing field. Amazon should change its business practices to comply with Arizona law,” stated Mayes in the press release.
That case remains pending in Maricopa County Superior Court, where Amazon is fighting it. No hearing date has been set.
Amazon changed its cancellation policies following FTC settlement
In September 2025, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) reached a $2.5 billion settlement with Amazon over allegations that the company enrolled millions of customers in Prime without their consent and made it difficult for them to cancel their subscriptions.
The FTC alleged that Amazon used confusing messages and misleading buttons to encourage sign-ups and prevent cancellations. Amazon did not admit wrongdoing.
Under the settlement, Amazon agreed to pay $1 billion in civil penalties and provide $1.5 billion in refunds to affected customers. The FTC estimated that about 35 million consumers were affected.
Amazon also agreed to change its Prime sign-up and cancellation processes. Customers must receive clear information about subscription costs and automatic renewals and be able to cancel as easily as they signed up.
Nevertheless, Mayes continued with the lawsuit through the attorney general’s office. Spokesman Richie Taylor said it wasn’t clear whether the FTC settlement would cover everyone who faced cancellation problems.
Other Articles
Tesla (TSLA) Stock: $385 Thursday After Lagging the…
