U.S. Moves to Shield Coupang, With Corporate Risk Now Driving Korea–U.S. Friction

J.D. Vance Presses South Korea’s Prime Minister to Hold Back on Coupang Regulation
Coupang Becomes a De Facto U.S. Company After Its New York Listing
Has U.S.-Backed Coupang Sparked a Korea–U.S. Power Struggle?

U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance has asked South Korea’s Prime Minister Kim Min-seok to refrain from imposing regulations or sanctions on Coupang. After listing on the New York stock exchange, Coupang came under U.S. law and capital markets and has since been recognized as an American company, emerging as a new flashpoint in Korea–U.S. relations. The company is reportedly using large-scale lobbying to slow or block regulatory moves by the Korean government, fueling a growing power struggle between the two countries.

U.S. Government Steps In to Protect Coupang

On the 27th (local time), The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported that “Vice President Vance met with Prime Minister Kim in Washington, D.C. last week and warned against taking actions that would disadvantage U.S. technology companies, including Coupang,” adding that “Vance told Kim that the United States wants to see meaningful de-escalation in how the Korean government treats technology companies such as Coupang.” The report partly contradicts Prime Minister Kim’s account given to Korean correspondents immediately after the meeting.

At the time, Kim said that “Vice President Vance asked what, specifically, was problematic about Coupang,” and that explanatory materials were prepared and delivered in response. He also stated that “we made it clear that there has been no discriminatory treatment of U.S. companies regarding the Coupang issue,” adding that “nevertheless, Vice President Vance requested that the issue be managed carefully by both governments so that it does not escalate or lead to misunderstandings between the two sides.” In that account, there was no indication that the U.S. explicitly demanded regulatory easing.

Citing sources, the WSJ added that while Vice President Vance did not issue an explicit threat, there was an implication that continued actions deemed unfair toward U.S. technology companies could further complicate the Korea–U.S. trade agreement, potentially leading to its breakdown and higher tariffs on Korean products. This has fueled speculation that the Coupang dispute may have contributed to the recent rise in trade tensions between the two countries.

Earlier, on the 26th, President Donald Trump criticized delays in the passage of South Korea’s special legislation on investment in the United States via his social media platform Truth Social, and said tariffs on Korean products such as automobiles would be raised again from 15% to 25%. The conversation between Vice President Vance and Prime Minister Kim took place three days earlier, on the 23rd. On the 27th, the Republican-led House Judiciary Committee also posted on its official X account, explaining the rationale behind higher reciprocal tariffs on South Korea, stating, “This is what happens when U.S. companies like Coupang are unfairly targeted.”

Is Coupang an “American Company”?

The reason the U.S. government has sided with Coupang is straightforward: at this point, Coupang is clearly an American company. Its ultimate parent company is not based in Korea but in the United States. The entity listed on the New York Stock Exchange is Coupang, Inc., a Delaware corporation, and Coupang Corp. in Korea is a wholly owned subsidiary of that company. While it is often described as an overseas listing for convenience, in substance Coupang is a company governed by U.S. law and embedded in U.S. capital markets. As such, it is subject to oversight by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and discloses its financial results under U.S. accounting standards. It is also not subject to foreign investment reviews by CFIUS or other restrictions typically applied to foreign companies.

Control over Coupang’s data and platform—including Korean users’ consumption records, payment information, purchasing patterns, regional logistics flows, and AI recommendation algorithms—also resides in the United States. While the data may be physically stored in Korea, the practical authority to control, integrate, and utilize it lies with the Delaware-based parent company. In effect, a data economy generated through the daily lives of Korean consumers is being managed within the U.S. legal system.

Coupang, Inc.’s management is likewise dominated by U.S.-based executives. Founder and chairman Bom Kim has lived in the United States since the age of seven and is a Korean American, while his spouse is a Taiwanese American. Key executives—including Harold Rogers, the interim CEO of Coupang Korea, CFO Gaurav Anand, CISO Brett Matthis, and CAO Jonathan Lee—are all American. Under these circumstances, any sanctions or heightened regulatory measures imposed by the Korean government would directly affect the interests of a U.S.-listed company and U.S. investors. This means that actions against Coupang could quickly move beyond domestic policy decisions and escalate into issues of international finance and trade.

Coupang Moves the U.S. Government Through Lobbying

Some observers argue that Coupang’s large-scale lobbying in the United States helped rein in Korea’s regulatory push. According to OpenSecrets, a lobbying data analysis group, Coupang spent about $8.58 million on lobbying from 2021 through Q3 2025, roughly five years. Including direct political donations, the total rises to $10.75 million. That far exceeds companies with similar revenue profiles, such as eBay ($2.05 million), and even Hyundai Motor ($2.32 million), which lobbied aggressively over EV subsidies and tariffs. In addition, Coupang donated $1 million to the fund for preparations for President Trump’s 2025 inauguration.

Coupang’s lobbying goals in the United States can be traced through its filings and reports. Its lobbying reports repeatedly cite the “discussion of issues facing U.S. firms when participating in and expanding to foreign markets.” Another report released by Coupang in 2024 classified Korea’s proposed online platform law, the Serious Accidents Punishment Act, the Fair Trade Act, union activity, various lawsuits, criminal penalties, and fines as risk factors. Rather than emphasizing a commitment to comply with Korean rules, it highlighted uncertainty around regulatory changes and punishment.

As a result, the market has continued to raise suspicions that Coupang is leveraging U.S. government power to influence Korean policy decisions. In fact, last July the U.S. House Judiciary Committee took the unusual step of criticizing Korea’s push for an online platform law and sent a formal letter of protest to Korea’s Fair Trade Commission. When the U.S. Trade Representative canceled the annual meeting under the Korea–U.S. free trade agreement in December that same year, some also pointed to Coupang as a possible factor. The controversy around a single company has begun to be consumed as material for a broader power struggle between states.