Tag Archives: payments

Amazon Faces UK Investigation Over Alleged Late Payments to Suppliers

Posted on by
Reply

The UK’s grocery watchdog has initiated an investigation into Amazon amid claims that retail and tech firms have been remiss in timely payments to suppliers.

The Groceries Code Adjudicator (GCA) indicated that there was a “reasonable basis” for suspecting Amazon of breaching certain grocery supply codes.

This scrutiny comes nearly a year after the GCA urged online retailers to take “swift and inclusive actions.” to enhance adherence to industry regulations intended to safeguard suppliers.

The GCA oversees the relationship between the 14 largest grocery retailers in the UK and their direct suppliers, which includes major supermarkets like Tesco and Sainsbury’s.

This investigation into Amazon’s grocery sector marks the third since the GCA was established in 2013, following inquiries into Tesco and Co-op. The watchdog has the authority to impose fines of up to 1% of a company’s sales if it is found to have breached grocery codes.

Judge Mark White remarked: “Payment delays can severely damage suppliers. Such allegations could expose Amazon’s suppliers to undue risks and unforeseen costs, potentially hindering their capacity for investment and innovation.”

In the UK, Amazon retails food through its Fresh branded stores and online platforms, in addition to managing the Whole Foods chain, acquired in 2017 for $13.7 billion (£10.2 billion).

According to a GCA survey conducted in 2024, suppliers have reported more issues with Amazon than with other retailers.

Following a warning to Amazon last July, the GCA stated it has been monitoring retailers’ conduct and has gathered detailed testimonies regarding suppliers’ experiences.

On Friday, the GCA noted it has grounds to believe that Amazon violated paragraph 5 of its grocery code between March 1, 2022, and June 20, 2025. However, it intends to concentrate its investigation on the period starting at the beginning of 2024 to gain clearer insights into Amazon’s present practices.

The watchdog is calling on suppliers to submit evidence by August 8th, assuring them that all submissions will remain confidential.

Skip past newsletter promotions

The GCA also stated it has received information about various other concerns related to Amazon, asserting it would “not hesitate” to initiate additional investigations as needed.

In a previous case, the GCA criticized Tesco for its treatment of suppliers after a year-long inquiry but found the Co-op unpunishable in 2015 due to the timing of the alleged misconduct relative to the enhanced powers given to the GCA by the government.

Amazon commented that it takes the groceries code of practice seriously and that it “works closely with the arbitrator.”

A spokesperson stated: “While we are disappointed by this decision, we welcome the chance to further demonstrate our continued compliance with this specific section of the Code.

“We have already made significant improvements to the experience of our grocery suppliers, particularly regarding payment practices.

“We will continue to listen and collaborate with grocery suppliers as we implement further changes.”

Source: www.theguardian.com

Trump’s Proposal Will Connect Certain Drug Prices to State Payments

Posted on by
Reply

Updated May 12th: Additional insights Executive Order and its implications .

On Monday, President Trump is set to sign an executive order aimed at reducing various drug prices in the US by aligning them with what other prosperous nations pay. This was reported by True Social on Sunday evening.

He noted that his proposal cannot alter federal policies, describing it as the “most favored nation” pricing approach. While specifics regarding the types of insurance covered or the number of drugs affected were not shared, Trump emphasized that the US must secure the lowest prices compared to its counterparts.

“In the end, our nation will be treated equitably and citizens’ healthcare expenses will decrease significantly,” he stated in a social media update.

This kind of plan is likely to face legal challenges, and it remains uncertain whether it will succeed without input from Congress.

During his first term, Trump attempted to implement a similar Medicare strategy, targeting 68 million Americans aged 65 and older or those with disabilities. This plan would have focused on 50 medications administered in healthcare settings funded by Medicare. However, it was blocked by a federal court, which ruled that the administration bypassed necessary procedures in policy formulation.

The pharmaceutical sector strongly opposes this concept, arguing it may severely impact their profit margins. They have ramped up lobbying efforts against the proposal as discussions revive in Washington. Industry leaders caution that such measures will hinder research funding and limit patient access to innovative treatments.

“Every form of government pricing is detrimental to patients in America,” declared Alex Schriver, a staff member of a prominent pharmaceutical lobbying organization. He added: “Policymakers should prioritize reforming flaws in the US system instead of adopting ineffective strategies from abroad.”

Trump’s support for these ideas distinguishes him from the majority of Republicans, who are generally hesitant about government pricing. Meanwhile, Democrats are advancing a similar proposal.

Amiet Salpatwali, a pharmaceutical policy specialist at Harvard Medical School, noted that Trump is capitalizing on ideas that resonate with populist sentiments.

Trump has long expressed concerns about the significant disparity in drug prices that the US faces compared to other wealthy nations. He is correct; in the United States, the cost of branded medications is, on average, three times higher than that in peer countries.

This is despite the fact that a substantial portion of the research leading to new drugs is conducted in American laboratories and hospitals.

Pharmaceutical manufacturers generate a significant majority of global profits from US sales, typically developing their strategies with the US market in mind.

The pharmaceutical industry contends that the elevated prices in the US provide additional advantages. Analyses funded by the industry have indicated that US patients tend to access medications more swiftly and face fewer insurance restrictions compared to their counterparts in other countries.

Source: www.nytimes.com

Trump’s Proposal Ties Certain Drug Prices to State Payments

Posted on by
Reply

On Monday, President Trump plans to sign an executive order intending to reduce various US drug prices by aligning them with the rates paid by other affluent nations. True Social reported on Sunday evening.

The proposal, referred to as the “most favored nation” pricing model, cannot alter federal policies. Trump did not specify which insurances or drugs would be included, but asserted that the US should secure the lowest price among comparable countries.

“Our nation will be treated fairly, and citizens’ healthcare costs will drop to unprecedented levels,” he stated in a social media update.

This initiative may face legal challenges, and it remains uncertain if it can proceed without legislative action.

During his first term, Trump attempted to implement a version of this Medicare concept. It would have affected 68 million Americans aged 65 and older or those with disabilities. The proposal would have targeted only 50 drugs given in clinics and hospitals reimbursed by Medicare, but a federal court blocked it, citing procedural oversights by the administration.

The pharmaceutical sector staunchly opposes this notion, fearing significant cuts to their profits. They have been actively lobbying against it as policy discussions have intensified in Washington in recent weeks. Companies caution that such measures could lead to reduced research funding and limit patient access to new medications.

“Government pricing in any form is detrimental to patients in America,” stated Alex Schriver, an employee of a prominent pharmaceutical lobbying group. He added, “Policymakers should concentrate on addressing flaws in the US system rather than adopting unsuccessful policies from abroad.”

Trump’s openness to these ideas distinguishes him from the majority of Republicans, who are generally skeptical of government pricing. Democrats are also proposing a version of the concept.

Amiet Salpatwali, a pharmaceutical policy expert at Harvard Medical School, noted that Trump is capitalizing on ideas that carry “populist appeal.”

Trump has long complained that the US pays much higher prices for the same drugs compared to other affluent countries. His claim holds merit: in the US, branded drug prices are on average three times higher than those in peer nations.

This disparity occurs even though a significant portion of the research that leads to new drugs is performed in American laboratories and hospitals.

Pharmaceutical firms generate a considerable majority of their global profits from US sales, often tailoring business strategies to the US market.

The industry asserts that higher prices in the US have certain advantages. According to industry-funded analyses, patients in the US access medications more rapidly and face fewer insurance restrictions compared to other nations.

Source: www.nytimes.com

Global ransomware payments expected to drop by one-third following crackdown on cybercrime.

Posted on by
Reply

Ransomware payments have dropped by over one-third compared to last year, totaling $813 million, as victims are now refusing to pay cybercriminals and law enforcement. The trend has been cracked.

This decline in cyber attacks involves computers or data being blocked with a demand for money to release it, despite notable cases in 2024 in the UK and the US, including the well-known donut company Krispy Kreme and NHS Trust.

Last year’s ransomware payments have decreased from the recorded $1.250 million in 2023, with a research company analyzing payment data and stating that payments dropped significantly in the second half of the year due to actions taken and the resistance to paying cyber criminals.

The total for 2024 was lower than the $1.1 billion recorded in 2020 and 2019, coming in at $999 million. In ransomware attacks, criminals gain access to the victim’s IT system, steal data, encrypt it, and demand a ransom payment in bitcoin to decrypt the files and return the data.

Jacqueline Burns Koven, head of cyber threat intelligence at Chain Dissolving, noted that the decrease in ransomware payments signifies a shift in the ransomware landscape. She mentioned the effectiveness of measures, improvement in international cooperation, and the impact on attackers and victims.

However, Burns Koven cautioned that the downward trend in payments is fragile, and ransomware attacks continue to be prevalent.

Further evidence shows that victims refusing to comply with attackers’ demands lead to an increase in ransomware attacks demands by cyber gangs, exceeding actual payments by 53%.

During the same period, the number of ransom-related “on-chain” payments (terms in the blockchain recording encryption transactions) decreased, indicating less compliance from victims.

One expert mentioned an international operation that successfully took down the Lockbit ransomware gang in February, as well as the disappearance of another cyber criminal group called Blackcat/Alphv.

Lizzy Cookson from a Ransomware-compatible company stated that the current ransomware atmosphere is influenced by newcomers focusing on smaller markets with modest ransom demands.

In the UK, there’s consideration to ban schools, NHS, and local councils from paying ransomware demands. Private companies would need to report payments to the government, which could potentially block them. Reporting ransomware attacks may also become mandatory if legal changes are implemented.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Code.org, a nonprofit organization, files a lawsuit against WhiteHat Jr, Byju’s organization, over disputed membership fee payments

Posted on by
Reply

US education nonprofit Code.org has filed a lawsuit in California District Court, alleging that WhiteHat Jr, a subsidiary of Byju, violated its licensing agreement by continuing to use Code.org’s platform without paying fees.

WhiteHat Jr, which was sold to Byju’s in 2020 for $300 million, partnered with Code.org last year, agreeing to pay $4 million over four years to license Code.org’s coding education platform. However, in a lawsuit filed earlier this month, Code.org alleges that WhiteHat Jr. failed to adhere to its payment schedule while continuing to utilize its coding courseware.

According to the Code.org complaint, WhiteHat Jr paid the 2022 license fee, but notified the nonprofit earlier this year that it would not be able to make the remaining payments scheduled in the four-year contract. Code.org claims that WhiteHat Jr requested that his original contract be amended to backload unpaid license fee obligations. But Code.org’s lawyers argue that the original contract makes clear that termination does not relieve WhiteHat Jr. of its obligation to pay all future license fees. There is.

“To date, White Hat has not paid either its Q1 2023 invoice or its Q2 2023 invoice. In fact, despite repeated written and verbal requests for payment by Code.org, , WhiteHat has not made any payments in excess of the $1 million it paid pursuant to the 2022 invoice before the agreement was amended,” Code.org’s lawyers claim.

Byju’s did not respond to a request for comment.

The lawsuit is the latest trouble for Byju stemming from its acquisition of WhiteHat Jr, and adds to existing problems the company has faced since the acquisition. The Indian edtech giant, which was valued at $22 billion in a funding round in early 2022, was considering whether to wind down WhiteHat Jr earlier this year, TechCrunch reported.

This also makes Byju’s predicament even worse. Byju’s is facing a difficult situation due to prolonged delays in financial reporting and governance issues. Byju’s leading backer, Prosus, recently reduced the startup’s valuation to less than his $3 billion.

Source: techcrunch.com