The author is a Reuters Breakingviews columnist. The opinions expressed are her own.

By Katrina Hamlin

HONG KONG, July 17 (Reuters Breakingviews) - Supporters of the US-based e-commerce giant in Washington sprung to its defence after a cyber breach exposed it to fines and probes in its top market. Unlike other American firms that have fought with Seoul, the $30 bln firm is too dependent on Korea to wrap itself in the flag.

Full view will be published shortly.

Follow Katrina Hamlin on Bluesky and Linkedin.

CONTEXT NEWS

U.S.-listed and -headquartered e-commerce giant Coupang is facing discriminatory treatment as an American company operating in South Korea, according to a U.S. House Judiciary Committee report on July 1, noting that the company has been the subject of dozens of investigations by more than 10 Korean agencies since a cyber breach last year. South Korea’s foreign ministry has denied the allegations of discrimination.

In June, Korean authorities fined Coupang $410 million following the 2025 leak of customer information and illegal collection of personal information. Korea’s Personal Information Protection Commission said that the incident exposed personal data of more than 33 ⁠million customers.

Following the decision, Coupang said, “We regret that our proactive measures to prevent secondary harm from last year’s data leak incident, as well as our explanations based on clear facts, were not sufficiently reflected in the PIPC’s decision.”

Coupang was founded by Korean-American entrepreneur Bom Kim and incorporated in Delaware in 2010 and listed in New York in 2021. Following the listing, Coupang established its headquarters in Seattle. South Korea is the company's largest market.

U.S. Federal Reserve Chair Kevin Warsh was a Coupang board member from 2019 until May 2026. The company spent more than $2 million on lobbying last year, according to nonprofit research group OpenSecrets.

U.S. President Donald Trump bought and sold shares in Coupang multiple times between October 2025 and May, according to reports filed with the Office of Government Ethics in May and June.