Who pays the import duty when a marketplace moves the goods? Milan prosecutors have an answer they want tested in court, and the file they served on Amazon's European unit is the clearest attempt yet to make the platform, rather than the seller, the responsible party. As of November 12, 2026, the record shows a closed investigation and a served notice, with no court date attached. The notice went to Luxembourg-based Amazon EU and two senior managers under Italy's corporate liability law, and it covers more than 1.5 million non-EU products sold through Amazon's Italian marketplace and logistics network.
What the notice actually says
The allegation is not that Amazon imported the goods. It is that the company failed to put organisational measures in place that would have prevented customs offences, and allowed non-EU goods to circulate through its logistics network despite irregularities in documentation. In the prosecutors' framing, an automated fulfilment system that never asks for a customs declaration becomes the pipe through which undeclared goods enter.
The timeline matters as much as the charge. The investigation was opened after raids in November 2025 at Amazon's Milan headquarters and a logistics hub near Bergamo, where thousands of items were seized. The products named in coverage are ordinary consumer goods: phone cases, air fryers, toys, stationery. None of them is a compliance problem on its own; the problem is the declaration attached to them.
What the file has to prove
Italian corporate liability law requires a link between an organisational failure and the offence. That link is where the case will be won or lost. Prosecutors need to show that Amazon had access to information that would have flagged the shipments, and that the absence of controls was a choice rather than an oversight.
For the defence, the argument is contractual. Amazon says clearance and tax obligations sit with the seller under its agreements and standard industry practice, and that it complies with the law and requires the same of sellers. That is a coherent position, and it is the same position marketplaces have taken in other jurisdictions for a decade.
Eighty percent is the hinge
The 80% figure is the most consequential claim in the file. If a marketplace knows that most of what moves through a warehouse originates outside the customs union, the argument that it could not have known which shipments were undeclared becomes harder to sustain. Expect the defence to attack the provenance of that number rather than the principle.
The three-euro duty changes the arithmetic
The case lands while the European rulebook is being rewritten. Around 5.9 billion low-value e-commerce items entered the EU in 2025, four times the 2022 volume. From 1 July 2026, the exemption for many imports below EUR 150 was removed and replaced with a temporary EUR 3 duty calculated by tariff category, and the Council has approved an overhaul that creates a new EU customs authority and a central data system.
| Regime | Before | After |
|---|---|---|
| Parcels below EUR 150 | Duty exemption for many categories | Temporary EUR 3 duty by tariff category from 1 July 2026 |
| Responsibility for declarations | Seller, in most marketplace terms | Platforms selling into the EU may be treated as importers |
| Enforcement data | Fragmented national systems | Central data system under a new EU customs authority |
| Non-compliance | National penalties | Financial penalties and restrictions on customs privileges |
None of this determines the Italian case, which concerns conduct in an earlier period. But it changes the commercial calculation for every seller using a marketplace to reach European shoppers. A flat EUR 3 duty is trivial on a EUR 200 item and decisive on a EUR 6 one, which is exactly the segment that built the low-value import boom. The market size of that segment is what makes the arithmetic awkward for everyone selling into it: the same fixed charge is a rounding error on one order and a margin decision on the next.
It also shifts who carries the risk. If platforms are treated as importers for the goods they move, the compliance function stops being a seller obligation in a contract and becomes an operating cost inside the fulfilment centre. That is a different business model, and it is the direction the Council's framework points.
What a seller should check this quarter
The first check is whether the declared value on the customs entry matches the price the customer actually paid, including shipping charged separately. Mismatches here are the most common source of assessments and the easiest to fix before a filing deadline.
The second is whether the seller of record on the entry is the entity that actually owns the goods. Where a marketplace or a fulfilment provider appears as importer, the seller may believe it has no obligation while the authority treats the arrangement differently.
The third is documentation retention. The Italian file covers conduct from 2021 to March 2026, which is a five-year lookback. A seller that cannot produce declarations and duty receipts for that period is exposed regardless of whether the goods were compliant. Archives age badly when a marketplace retires a seller portal or a logistics provider closes an account, and the gap usually surfaces during an audit rather than before it.
Low-value is the segment to watch
US authorities are moving in the same direction on filing deadlines for low-cost imports, with the stated aim of improving trade compliance at the cost of higher shipping expense. Two large markets tightening the same segment at the same time is a signal about where enforcement capacity is being pointed.
FAQ
Does this mean marketplaces are now liable for seller duty?
Not automatically. The Italian case is an allegation under national corporate liability law, and the EU framework that may treat platforms as importers is being phased in. What changes now is the probability that authorities look at the warehouse rather than only at the seller.
Is the EUR 3 duty already in force?
Yes, from 1 July 2026 for many categories previously exempt below EUR 150. It is described as temporary and sits alongside a broader overhaul that creates a central customs data system.
What is the practical risk for a mid-sized seller?
Assessment plus penalties on historic entries, and slower inbound flow if the marketplace starts demanding validated tax identifiers and proof of cleared duty before receiving stock.
Why does the 80% China figure matter so much?
Because knowledge is the bridge between an operational failure and liability. If the platform knew most goods originated outside the EU, the claim that it could not have screened them becomes harder to defend.
