Mr. Nadadur S. Kumar, a prominent U.S. immigration attorney with over 30 years of experience, will lead the session. He will walk attendees through key aspects of the EB-5 program, including eligibility requirements, the difference between direct and regional centre investments, job creation mandates, targeted employment areas, documentation standards, and recent changes impacting Indian applicants. The seminar is intended to equip participants with accurate, actionable information so they can make well-informed decisions in what has become an increasingly complex immigration environment.

“In today’s global climate, families are looking for long-term solutions that offer security, flexibility, and opportunity,” said Mr. Nadadur S. Kumar. “The EB-5 visa continues to be one of the most effective and reliable pathways to U.S. permanent residency — not only for investors, but for their spouses and children as well. Our goal with this seminar is to demystify the process and help individuals make informed decisions with clarity and confidence.”

In recent years, interest in the EB-5 visa from Indian investors has grown significantly, driven in part by uncertainties around student visas, H-1B backlogs, and long wait times for green cards through traditional routes. The seminar comes at a time when many high-net-worth individuals are seeking more reliable and permanent solutions for U.S. residency for themselves and their families. Financial advisors, wealth managers, and legal professionals who work with clients interested in U.S. immigration are also encouraged to attend.

The seminar will be held in Pune at JW Marriott Hotel, Pune, from 4:00 PM onwards, with participation free of charge, though prior registration is required as seats are limited. For registration or further details, interested individuals can visit the Law Offices of Nadadur S. Kumar’s website at www.nskumarlaw.com.

The post Understanding the Surge in Indian Interest for EB-5 Visa appeared first on NRI News.

UNITED STATES: The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and 17 state attorneys general have filed a lawsuit against Amazon, alleging that the online retail giant is a monopolist that uses anticompetitive and unfair strategies to illegally maintain its monopoly power. The lawsuit alleges that Amazon’s ongoing pattern of illegal conduct blocks competition, allowing it to wield monopoly power to inflate prices, degrade quality, and stifle innovation for consumers and businesses.

The complaint alleges that Amazon violates the law not because it is big, but because it engages in a course of exclusionary conduct that prevents current competitors from growing and new competitors from emerging. By stifling competition on price, product selection, and quality, and by preventing its current or future rivals from attracting a critical mass of shoppers and sellers, Amazon ensures that no current or future rival can threaten its dominance.

The FTC and its state partners say Amazon’s actions allow it to stop rivals and sellers from lowering prices, degrade quality for shoppers, overcharge sellers, stifle innovation, and prevent rivals from fairly competing against Amazon. Amazon’s far-reaching schemes impact hundreds of billions of dollars in retail sales every year, touch hundreds of thousands of products sold by businesses big and small, and affect over a hundred million shoppers.

“Our complaint lays out how Amazon has used a set of punitive and coercive tactics to unlawfully maintain its monopolies,” said FTC Chair Lina M. Khan. “The complaint sets forth detailed allegations noting how Amazon is now exploiting its monopoly power to enrich itself while raising prices and degrading service for the tens of millions of American families who shop on its platform and the hundreds of thousands of businesses that rely on Amazon to reach them. Today’s lawsuit seeks to hold Amazon to account for these monopolistic practices and restore the lost promise of free and fair competition.“

The FTC and states allege Amazon’s anticompetitive conduct occurs in two markets—the online superstore market that serves shoppers and the market for online marketplace services purchased by sellers. These tactics include anti-discounting measures that punish sellers and deter other online retailers from offering prices lower than Amazon, conditioning sellers’ ability to obtain “Prime” eligibility for their products on sellers using Amazon’s costly fulfillment service, and biasing Amazon’s search results to preference Amazon’s own products over ones that Amazon knows are of better quality.

“We’re bringing this case because Amazon’s illegal conduct has stifled competition across a huge swath of the online economy. Amazon is a monopolist that uses its power to hike prices on American shoppers and charge sky-high fees on hundreds of thousands of online sellers,” said John Newman, Deputy Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Competition. “Seldom in the history of U.S. antitrust law has one case had the potential to do so much good for so many people.”

The FTC and states allege Amazon’s anticompetitive conduct occurs in two markets—the online superstore market that serves shoppers and the market for online marketplace services purchased by sellers. These tactics include:

• Anti-discounting measures punish sellers and deter other online retailers from offering prices lower than Amazon, keeping prices higher for products across the internet. For example, if Amazon discovers that a seller is offering lower-priced goods elsewhere, Amazon can bury discounting sellers so far down in Amazon’s search results that they become effectively invisible.
• Conditioning sellers’ ability to obtain “Prime” eligibility for their products—a virtual necessity for doing business on Amazon—on sellers using Amazon’s costly fulfillment service, which has made it substantially more expensive for sellers on Amazon to also offer their products on other platforms. This unlawful coercion has in turn limited competitors’ ability to effectively compete against Amazon.

Amazon’s illegal, exclusionary conduct makes it impossible for competitors to gain a foothold. With its amassed power across both the online superstore market and online marketplace services market, Amazon extracts enormous monopoly rents from everyone within its reach. This includes:

• Degrading the customer experience by replacing relevant, organic search results with paid advertisements—and deliberately increasing junk ads that worsen search quality and frustrate both shoppers seeking products and sellers who are promised a return on their advertising purchase.
• Biasing Amazon’s search results to preference Amazon’s own products over ones that Amazon knows are of better quality. 
• Charging costly fees on the hundreds of thousands of sellers that currently have no choice but to rely on Amazon to stay in business. These fees range from a monthly fee sellers must pay for each item sold, to advertising fees that have become virtually necessary for sellers to do business. Combined, all of these fees force many sellers to pay close to 50% of their total revenues to Amazon. These fees harm not only sellers but also shoppers, who pay increased prices for thousands of products sold on or off Amazon.  

The FTC, along with its state partners, is seeking a permanent injunction in federal court that would prohibit Amazon from engaging in its unlawful conduct and pry loose Amazon’s monopolistic control to restore competition. Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Nevada, New York, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Wisconsin joined the Commission’s lawsuit. The Commission vote to authorize staff to file for a permanent injunction and other equitable relief in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington was 3-0

The post FTC and 17 State Attorneys General Sue Amazon for Illegally Maintaining Monopoly Power appeared first on NRI News.