Warren, Hank Johnson Lead New Investigation Into Amazon’s Melania Documentary Payments as Possible Corrupt Pay-To-Play Scheme

Warren, Hank Johnson Lead New Investigation Into Amazon's Melania Documentary Payments as Possible Corrupt Pay-To-Play Scheme

"The fact that Amazon is seeking favorable treatment from the Trump Administration while paying a far-above-market sum to produce and promote the Trump family's film raises questions about Amazon's exposure under federal anti-bribery law"

Text of Letter (PDF)

Washington, D.C. - U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Representative Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) led a new investigation into whether Amazon's investment in the new Melania documentary, which centers on First Lady Melania Trump, was part of a corrupt pay-to-play arrangement with the Trump administration. Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), along with Representatives Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) and Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), also joined the letter.

"[T]he American people deserve assurance that powerful corporations are not using their financial resources to gain political influence or favorable treatment at public expense - and that these corporations are not violating federal bribery laws," wrote the lawmakers.

Amazon's $40 million payment to license the film, in addition to a $35 million marketing budget, made Melania one of the most expensive documentaries ever made. The company reportedly beat the next highest bidder by about $26 million, leading industry experts to question the commercial rationale behind the bid. Amazon reportedly does not even expect to break even from its investment, raising concerns about whether Amazon's financial commitment was a bribe.

An estimated 70 percent of the money Amazon paid to acquire the rights - roughly $28 million - will go directly to Melania Trump. In addition to the financial windfall, the deal gave Melania Trump an extremely positive portrayal that has led to the film being called "favorable propaganda," along with public attention as a "movie star," in the words of President Trump at his State of the Union address.

At the same time, Amazon and owner Jeff Bezos have huge financial stakes in decisions pending before the administration, including:

• Several antitrust suits: Amazon recently settled a lawsuit with the Federal Trade Commission over deceptive subscription practices, agreeing to pay a fine that amounted to a slap on the wrist. Amazon is also facing an FTC suit alleging illegal monopolization of online retail, and Amazon could benefit if the FTC litigates the case less aggressively or declines to pursue substantial monetary penalties or structural relief that could fundamentally reshape Amazon's business model.
• Potential tariff exemptions: In early February, reports indicated that the Trump administration was considering exempting Amazon from upcoming tariffs on semiconductors.
• Foreign trade deals: Amazon has lobbied the administration to use trade negotiations to bully other countries into dropping their regulations of tech companies. Amazon currently faces nearly a billion dollars in fines for potentially violating laws meant to protect consumers, regulate artificial intelligence, and break up monopolies.
• Federal contracts: Since President Trump took office last January, Amazon has won major cloud services contracts with immigration agencies and other federal agencies. Bezos is actively seeking new federal contracts and has reportedly attempted to curry favor with Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.
• Tax cuts: After Amazon lobbied for tax cuts, President Trump delivered corporate tax cuts that have "shaved billions off Amazon's tax bill" to date. Last year alone, Amazon's federal tax bill was slashed by roughly 87 percent, even as its pretax profits rose by nearly 45 percent.

Since President Trump's 2024 election, Amazon has donated $1 million to his inauguration fund, along with an unknown sum to the President's gold-encrusted White House ballroom. Federal bribery law makes it illegal to offer "anything of value," including business opportunities and financial arrangements, to elected officials or people closely associated with them with the goal of influencing official acts.

"When corporate giants refuse to offer [] assurance [that they are not breaking federal anti-bribery laws] and instead transfer tens of millions of dollars to the family of a sitting President, that not only raises questions about corporate governance but also risks eroding public trust in the fairness of our economic and political systems," concluded the lawmakers.

The members asked Amazon to explain, by March 30, 2026, its $40 million payment for the documentary, and clarify whether the company discussed its bid with Melania Trump directly or with anyone in the administration.

###