Amazon has confirmed it will lay off approximately 16,000 corporate employees across multiple divisions, citing intensifying competition in artificial intelligence as a central reason for the move. The cuts are part of a broader restructuring aimed at streamlining operations, reducing overhead, and redirecting resources toward AI development, marking one of the largest single reductions of Amazon’s white collar workforce in recent years.
Amazon executives disclosed the layoffs in an internal memo and public statement on January 28, 2026, saying the company must “sharpen our focus” as competition in artificial intelligence accelerates. Leadership pointed to mounting pressure from rivals such as OpenAI, Google, Microsoft, Meta, and emerging Chinese firms, all of which are pouring massive resources into AI infrastructure and talent. According to the company, “rising competition over AI” has forced a reassessment of staffing levels, particularly in corporate and support roles, to ensure long term competitiveness.
The affected positions are concentrated in corporate functions including human resources, finance, marketing, legal, operations support, and some engineering teams, rather than warehouse or delivery roles. Amazon emphasized the layoffs are not performance based but instead reflect a strategic realignment. Impacted employees will receive severance packages, extended benefits, and job placement assistance, with the reductions expected to roll out in phases through mid 2026.
This move follows several rounds of workforce cuts since 2022, after Amazon rapidly expanded hiring during the pandemic boom. While earlier reductions focused more heavily on retail and logistics, this round hits corporate employees the hardest, underscoring that even high paying tech jobs are increasingly vulnerable as companies race to fund AI expansion. Analysts note that Amazon’s heavy investment in artificial intelligence, including its multibillion dollar stake in Anthropic and development of its own AI models, has significantly raised costs, prompting leadership to offset spending through aggressive cost cutting elsewhere.
