Who was sanctioned, and for what?

The nationwide wine and spirits distributor headquartered in Florida entered into a non-prosecution agreement and pays USD 12.5 million. It admitted that executives and employees had for years provided employees of alcohol retailers, including grocery chains in California, with cash, prepaid gift cards, flights, golf trips, resort stays and luxury goods to influence the purchase and placement of its products, concealing this through third-party vendors and false invoices. The authority allegedly made the findings set out here; this account is not based on a final judgment.

Authority / court

U.S. Attorney's Office, Northern District of California (U.S. Department of Justice)

Area of law

Bribery and corruption · Commercial bribery

Action

Other

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Liability of senior managers

According to the announcement, several California-based executives, including vice presidents, were directly involved.

Published

10 Sep 2026

Original amount 12,500,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 10 Sep 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

According to the Attorney General's office, the company sold an annual shipping subscription ("Celebrations Passport") whose terms between February 2021 and June 2022 appeared only in small print, in linked terms or in pop-up boxes; a post-purchase acknowledgement and a notice before automatic renewal were missing. In the Assurance of Discontinuance it undertakes to pay 375,000 USD in penalties, fees and costs, to refund subscribers and to change its subscription processes. The authority allegedly made the findings set out here; this account is not based on a final judgment.

Authority / court

Office of the New York State Attorney General

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail

Legal basis

New York General Business Law §§ 349, 527-a; Executive Law § 63(12); Restore Online Shoppers' Confidence Act (15 U.S.C. § 8403)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Published

22 Jul 2026

Original amount 375,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 21 Jul 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The packaging supplier allegedly imported plastic carrier bags made in China via Hong Kong and declared them as goods from Hong Kong in order to evade anti-dumping duties of up to 77.57%. According to the US Department of Justice (DOJ), the company had employees cover up “Made in China” markings, concealed the origin from its customs broker and cancelled orders that were due to be inspected; the settlement of 7.3 million USD (a joint payment with a further settling party) resolves a whistleblower lawsuit.

Authority / court

U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division, und U.S. Attorney’s Office District of New Jersey

Area of law

Sanctions and export control · Customs

Legal basis

False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729 ff. (Vergleich; Haftung nicht festgestellt)

Action

Other

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Liability of senior managers

Measures against individuals are not reported here.

Published

15 Jul 2026

Original amount 7,300,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 15 Jul 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link

At the truck parts distributor's Corpus Christi (Texas) site, an employee was asphyxiated while inspecting a tank trailer. The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) found no confined space programme, deficiencies in the respiratory protection programme and electrical hazards, and proposed $264,380 (16 serious, 3 other violations).

Authority / court

U.S. Department of Labor – Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)

Area of law

Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents

Legal basis

29 CFR 1910.146 (Permit-required confined spaces); 29 CFR 1910.134 (Respiratory protection)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Published

15 Jul 2026

Original amount 264,380 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 15 Jul 2026.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

From July 2020 to June 2024, around 148 departing employees – including managers and staff from finance, legal and supply chain – signed separation agreements containing a waiver of SEC whistleblower awards. Foot Locker had itself phased out the clause from March 2024 but had not amended all templates; the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) imposed 148,000 US dollars.

Authority / court

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission

Area of law

Whistleblower protection · Retaliation against whistleblowers

Legal basis

Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Rule 21F-17(a)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Employees

10,000 or more

Mitigating circumstances

Clause phased out before contact by the SEC; cooperation and prompt remediation

Published

22 May 2026

Original amount 148,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 22 May 2026.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

According to the FTC and eleven states, Walmart misled the drivers of its Spark Driver delivery service about base pay, incentives and tips, so that they lost tens of millions of dollars in earnings. The court order comprises judgments of 100 million USD: 89 million USD for the FTC (of which 10 million USD is paid and 16,175,302 USD goes into a driver fund, the remainder suspended because of back payments already made) and 11 million USD for the states. The authority allegedly made the findings set out here; this account is not based on a final judgment.

Authority / court

Federal Trade Commission (FTC) mit elf Bundesstaaten (AZ, CA, CO, IL, MI, NC, OK, PA, SC, UT, WI)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing

Legal basis

Section 5 FTC Act; Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (15 U.S.C. §§ 6801–6809, 6821–6827); Verbraucherschutzgesetze der klagenden Bundesstaaten

Action

Disgorgement of profits

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Employees

10,000 or more

Published

26 Feb 2026

Original amount 100,000,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 3 Mar 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

According to the FTC, Instacart advertised free delivery but charged mandatory service fees of up to 15 %, promised a "100 % satisfaction guarantee" without providing full refunds and did not sufficiently point out the subsequent charges for trial subscriptions. Under the settlement, the company is paying 60 million USD for refunds and must discontinue the practices complained of.

Authority / court

Federal Trade Commission (FTC)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing

Legal basis

Section 5 FTC Act; Restore Online Shoppers' Confidence Act (ROSCA)

Action

Disgorgement of profits

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Employees

1,000 to 9,999

Published

18 Dec 2025

Original amount 60,000,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 13 Jan 2026.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link

In a second consent decree, Lowe's Home Centers undertakes to pay a civil penalty of allegedly 12,500,000 USD and to introduce a company-wide programme so that the installation firms it hires work lead-safely in homes built before 1978. The EPA had found breaches of the Lead Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule on more than 250 renovation jobs in 23 states, mostly from 2019 to 2021, such as missing certified renovators, missing customer information and inadequate dust containment, as well as breaches of a 2014 settlement. The settlement was lodged with the court on 25 November 2025. The authority allegedly made the findings set out here; this account is not based on a final judgment. The decision is not final.

Authority / court

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) / U.S. Department of Justice (U.S. District Court, Central District of California)

Area of law

Environment and sustainability · Waste and hazardous substances

Legal basis

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), Lead Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule; Consent Decree von 2014

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Employees

10,000 or more

Repeat case

yes

Published

25 Nov 2025

Original amount 12,500,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 25 Nov 2025.

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

According to the allegations of the attorneys general, the online fashion retailer enrolled buyers in a paid VIP membership programme without their express consent, presented prices in a misleading way and made cancellation difficult. Under the settlement with 32 states and D.C., TFG is providing around 3.8 million USD in automatic refunds and paying 1 million USD to the states; the settlement does not constitute an admission of guilt.

Authority / court

Attorney General of Pennsylvania (verhandelt mit Maryland, Texas und D.C.; Vergleich mit 33 Attorneys General)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail

Legal basis

Verbraucherschutzgesetze der beteiligten Bundesstaaten

Action

Disgorgement of profits

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Published

23 Oct 2025

Original amount 4,800,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 23 Oct 2025.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The rural retail giant inadequately informed consumers and job applicants about their rights, offered no effective means of opting out of the sale and sharing of data (including no Global Privacy Control) and passed data on to third parties without the required contracts. An officer must certify compliance annually for four years, as required by the California Privacy Protection Agency (CPPA).

Authority / court

California Privacy Protection Agency (CPPA)

Area of law

Data protection · Data subject rights and transparency

Legal basis

California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Employees

10,000 or more

Published

30 Sep 2025

Original amount 1,350,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 26 Sep 2025.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

According to the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC), Amazon used confusing order screens to push millions of customers into Prime subscriptions without their consent and deliberately made cancellation difficult. The settlement comprises a civil penalty of 1 billion USD and 1.5 billion USD in refunds, as well as a clear decline button and simple cancellation.

Authority / court

Federal Trade Commission (FTC)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail

Legal basis

Restore Online Shoppers' Confidence Act (ROSCA); Section 5 FTC Act

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Employees

10,000 or more

Liability of senior managers

The press release names a Senior Vice President and a Vice President.

Published

25 Sep 2025

Original amount 2,500,000,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 25 Sep 2025.

Checked against the official source on 27 Sep 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link

Adidas America reached a settlement with the US Department of Labor for penalties of 235,000 USD after OSHA, during a 2024 follow-up inspection at a warehouse in New York State, found the missing guardrails and unsafe ladder already cited in 2021 still uncorrected and identified a further unsafe ladder. The company must introduce a safety and health management programme at sites in New York, New Jersey and Puerto Rico, retrain employees on fall hazards, assess fall risks at each site and stop using overhead storage areas. The authority allegedly made the findings set out here; this account is not based on a final judgment.

Authority / court

U.S. Department of Labor – Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)

Area of law

Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents

Legal basis

Occupational Safety and Health Act (Absturzsicherung, Leitern)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Repeat case

yes

Published

4 Jun 2025

Original amount 235,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 30 May 2025.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

For 40 days, the fashion retailer’s misconfigured privacy portal did not process objections to the sale and sharing of personal data; in addition, the company required too much data and identity verification before an opt-out. The California Privacy Protection Agency (CPPA) imposed 345,178 USD and required correct configuration of consent management and employee training.

Authority / court

California Privacy Protection Agency (CPPA), Board

Area of law

Data protection · Cookies and tracking

Legal basis

California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Original amount 345,178 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 6 May 2025.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The New York Attorney General's office concluded an Assurance of Discontinuance with three US distribution companies of the eufy home security brand. Contrary to advertising promising privacy and end-to-end encryption, the cameras' video transmissions were in part not end-to-end encrypted and in part not encrypted at all, a live video stream could in some cases be accessed without authentication via the relevant URL, and testing processes that could have detected these vulnerabilities were lacking. The companies allegedly pay 450,000 USD in penalties and costs and must regularly substantiate that the manufacturer maintains an information security programme, secure software development, vulnerability management with penetration testing and encryption of the videos.

Authority / court

Office of the New York State Attorney General (Bureau of Internet & Technology)

Area of law

Information security and cyber · Security measures and risk management

Legal basis

New York Executive Law § 63(12); New York General Business Law §§ 349, 350

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Published

28 Jan 2025

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

New York aviation products supplier SkyGeek Logistics, Inc. is paying USD 22,172 under a settlement with OFAC for six apparent violations of the Russia sanctions. According to OFAC's findings, between January and March 2024 the company sent four shipments worth USD 3,429.76 to two UAE-based companies and attempted two refunds totalling USD 17,511.63, although both had previously been added to the SDN List for their role in Russia's aerospace and technology sectors. Customers were initially not rescreened before refunds. OFAC treated the apparent violations as non-egregious and four of the six transactions as voluntarily self-disclosed; the base penalties totalled USD 27,715. Source: U.S. Department of the Treasury, Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), enforcement release "SkyGeek Logistics, Inc. Settles with OFAC for $22,172 for Apparent Violations of the Russian Harmful Foreign Activities Sanctions Regulations", 31 December 2024, https://ofac.treasury.gov/media/933866/download?inline; summarised in our own words.

Authority / court

U.S. Department of the Treasury, Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)

Area of law

Sanctions and export control · Breaches of sanctions and embargoes

Legal basis

Russian Harmful Foreign Activities Sanctions Regulations, 31 C.F.R. § 587.201 (sechs mutmaßliche Verstöße); Vergleich nach den Economic Sanctions Enforcement Guidelines, 31 C.F.R. part 501, app. A

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Published

31 Dec 2024

Original amount 22,172 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 31 Dec 2024.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 3 · Direct link

OSHA and Amazon.com Services entered into a company-wide settlement resolving ten cases over ergonomic hazards – such as lower back and other musculoskeletal disorders – arising from inspections at ten facilities since summer 2022, which were due to be tried before the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission in 2025. Amazon will pay 145,000 USD, according to OSHA more than 90 per cent of the penalties assessed, and must assess ergonomic risks annually at fulfilment, sortation and delivery centres, evaluate and implement controls and resolve employee complaints through a dispute resolution process. The authority allegedly made the findings set out here; this account is not based on a final judgment.

Authority / court

U.S. Department of Labor – Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)

Area of law

Health and safety and employment law · Workplace safety and accidents

Legal basis

Occupational Safety and Health Act (Ergonomie-Beanstandungen)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Employees

10,000 or more

Published

19 Dec 2024

Original amount 145,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 19 Dec 2024.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The online retailer did not inform employees at two warehouses in Southern California in writing of the productivity quotas that applied; the authority regarded the peer-to-peer rating system used as a quota within the meaning of the law, which prohibits quotas that prevent breaks, toilet visits or compliance with health and safety. For 59,017 violations between October 2023 and March 2024, the Labor Commissioner’s Office imposed 5,901,700 USD.

Authority / court

California Labor Commissioner's Office (Division of Labor Standards Enforcement)

Area of law

Health and safety and employment law · Working time

Legal basis

California Warehouse Quotas Law (AB 701, Labor Code §§ 2100 ff.); Labor Code § 2699(f)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Employees

10,000 or more

Original amount 5,901,700 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 18 Jun 2024.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 18 Jun 2026 · Direct link

According to the FTC, a kitchenware and home furnishings retailer offered several products as "Made in USA" that were in fact made in China and other countries, thereby breaching a 2020 FTC order on origin claims. On a complaint by the Department of Justice, the federal court entered an agreed order with a civil penalty of 3,175,387 USD, the highest to date in a "Made in USA" case, and annual compliance certifications for five years.

Authority / court

Federal Trade Commission (FTC); Klage durch das U.S. Department of Justice

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing

Legal basis

Section 5(l) FTC Act (15 U.S.C. § 45(l)) – Verstoß gegen die FTC Decision and Order von 2020

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Repeat case

yes

Published

26 Apr 2024

Original amount 3,175,387 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 25 Apr 2024.

Checked against the official source on 8 Oct 2026 · Company name anonymised since 25 Apr 2026 · Direct link

Warehouse and sales staff were not paid for all hours worked, received overtime premiums only after 40 hours a week instead of after eight hours a day, and had to remain available to customers during rest and meal breaks. Following citations issued in 2021, the California Labor Commissioner’s Office agreed a settlement of 1 million USD for 107 employees.

Authority / court

California Labor Commissioner's Office (Division of Labor Standards Enforcement)

Area of law

Health and safety and employment law · Working time

Legal basis

California Labor Code (Daily Overtime, Meal and Rest Periods, Mindestlohn)

Action

Other

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Original amount 1,000,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 8 Feb 2024.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 8 Feb 2026 · Direct link

According to the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the pharmacy chain used AI facial recognition in hundreds of stores from 2012 to 2020, which falsely flagged customers – particularly women and people of colour – as shoplifters; accuracy was neither tested in advance nor monitored, and employees were not adequately trained. Under the proposed settlement order (subject to approval by the bankruptcy court and the federal court), the chain may not use the technology for surveillance for five years and must delete images and algorithms developed from them; in addition, the FTC alleges a violation of its 2010 data security order.

Authority / court

Federal Trade Commission

Area of law

AI and digital regulation · AI systems

Legal basis

FTC Act Section 5; Verstoß gegen FTC-Datensicherheitsanordnung von 2010

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Employees

10,000 or more

Repeat case

yes

Published

19 Dec 2023

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Version 4 · Company name anonymised since 19 Dec 2025 · Direct link