Congress Just Introduced a Bill That Would Force Amazon to Prove Suspensions Before Acting
A bill introduced in the House on July 21 would require Amazon, Walmart, and other dominant marketplaces to prove wrongdoing before suspending a seller's account, rather than suspending first and letting sellers fight to get reinstated. H.R. 9799, the Online Sellers' Bill of Rights Act of 2026, was introduced by Rep. Becca Balint of Vermont and Rep. Nydia Velázquez of New York, and currently has eight cosponsors. It's been referred to the House Judiciary Committee.
What the Bill Would Actually Require
The core mechanism reverses the current burden of proof. Right now, Amazon and similar platforms can suspend a seller, freeze inventory, or hold funds first and require the seller to prove they did nothing wrong to get reinstated. Under H.R. 9799, platforms would have to prove a violation before suspending or deactivating a seller in the first place.
The bill also puts a clock on holds. Inventory and fund holds would generally be limited to 30 days unless the platform can establish unlawful conduct, and platforms would have to send written notice within 72 hours of placing a hold. Enforcement notices would need to identify the specific policy violated, explain the proposed penalty, and lay out an appeal timeline, replacing the generic, boilerplate suspension notices sellers currently receive with little explanation.
The Bill Would Have Real Teeth if Passed
H.R. 9799 doesn't stop at notice requirements. It would treat violations as an unfair method of competition under the FTC Act, giving the Federal Trade Commission enforcement authority and 180 days to write implementing rules if the bill becomes law. State attorneys general would be authorized to bring action on behalf of affected residents, and sellers who prove violations could pursue treble damages, court costs, and attorneys' fees in federal court, even where a marketplace agreement would otherwise force arbitration.
Why This Bill Is Happening Now
Rep. Balint framed the legislation around a specific power imbalance: “No corporation should have the power to destroy someone's livelihood with the click of a button.” Balint sits on the House Antitrust Subcommittee, and Velázquez is Ranking Member of the House Small Business Committee, positioning both sponsors squarely inside the committees that oversee marketplace competition and small business policy.
The bill's stated target is platform dominance specifically. Amazon alone reportedly accounts for roughly 40% of US online transactions, giving it outsized control over which businesses can reach customers at scale. For sellers using Fulfillment by Amazon or Walmart Fulfillment Services, that leverage extends beyond account access into physical inventory. A suspension doesn't just cut off sales. It can leave merchandise stranded inside a platform-controlled warehouse with no clear timeline for release.
A coalition of advocacy groups has endorsed the bill, including the Open Markets Institute, Public Citizen, the American Economic Liberties Project, and Main Street Alliance. ROCC Policy Director Joe Van Wye described the current environment as a system of “vague, unpredictable, and ever-changing rules” that dominant platforms can manipulate largely without accountability.
Where the Bill Actually Stands
The bill is worth reading correctly for what it is right now: an introduced bill referred to committee, not enacted law, and not close to becoming one in the near term. All nine current sponsors and cosponsors, Balint, Velázquez, Carson, García, Lee, Foushee, Jayapal, Johnson, and Simon, are Democratic members of the House. No Republican cosponsors have signed on as of this writing, which matters for assessing its realistic path through a divided Congress. Bills referred to committee without bipartisan support historically face long odds of reaching a floor vote, let alone passage.
That doesn't make the bill irrelevant to sellers. Legislation like this often signals where regulatory pressure is building even before it becomes law, and marketplace due process has drawn attention from lawmakers on both sides of the aisle in prior antitrust hearings involving Amazon. Whether this specific bill advances or not, the underlying complaint, opaque suspensions with limited recourse, isn't going away as a policy conversation in Washington.
What Sellers Should Actually Do Right Now
The practical reality for right now is unchanged. H.R. 9799 does not currently modify any marketplace policy, and Amazon, Walmart, eBay, Etsy, and every other covered platform continue operating under their existing enforcement terms while this bill sits in committee.
That means your best protection today is still the same discipline this bill is trying to legislate into existence: organized, exportable documentation of your compliance history, supplier invoices, product authenticity records, and communication with the platform, kept outside the platform itself where a suspension can't also cut off your access to your own records. If a hold or suspension does hit your account, having that paper trail ready to submit immediately remains the single most effective tool you have, regardless of whether this bill eventually becomes law or joins the long list of marketplace-related legislation that never made it out of committee.
