We need new laws to ban "Personalized Pricing".
There is no federal ban on algorithmic or personalized pricing (also called surveillance pricing) in the U.S., but the FTC treats undisclosed use of personal data to set individualized prices as potentially unfair or deceptive under Section 5 of the FTC Act. States are moving faster, creating a patchwork of disclosure requirements and outright prohibitions, mainly focused on consumer personal data rather than pure supply-and-demand dynamic pricing.
Federal level
The FTC proposed an Enforcement Policy Statement on Personalized Pricing in August 2026. It states that where consumers reasonably expect prices to be uniform (not varying by personal data like browsing history, location, loyalty status, or willingness-to-pay estimates), companies must clearly and conspicuously disclose that a price is personalized, the basis for personalization, and the types of data used. Failure to do so is likely to violate Section 5. The FTC has acknowledged it lacks authority for an outright ban.
On October 28, 2026, the FTC issued Section 6(b) study orders (not an enforcement action) to nine companies—Delta, United, JetBlue, Lyft, Uber, DoorDash, Instacart, Target, and Walmart—seeking details on their use of personal data and AI/algorithms for consumer pricing and, for platforms, gig worker compensation. Responses are due roughly 45 days after receipt (around mid-December 2026). This follows a 2024 study the current Commission viewed as insufficient because it focused on intermediaries rather than the companies setting prices.
Proposed federal bills (such as versions of a Stop AI Price Gouging and Wage Fixing Act or One Fair Price Act) have been introduced but not enacted. Separate antitrust efforts target algorithms that use competitor data to facilitate collusion, distinct from individualized consumer pricing.
State level
States are the primary source of binding restrictions, with approaches ranging from disclosure to bans (often with exceptions for loyalty programs, cost-based differences, or promotions):
- New York: Algorithmic Pricing Disclosure Act (in effect since late 2025) requires a clear notice stating “THIS PRICE WAS SET BY AN ALGORITHM USING YOUR PERSONAL DATA” when personal data is used. A broader ban has been considered.
- Maryland: Protection from Predatory Pricing Act (effective October 1, 2026) restricts food retailers and certain delivery services from using personal data or dynamic pricing to charge higher prices to specific consumers.
- Connecticut: Law (effective July 1, 2027) broadly bans “surveillance pricing” for retailers and delivery services using personal data, with some disclosure obligations.
- New Jersey: Fair Price Protection Act (effective August 1, 2027) prohibits personalized/surveillance pricing for groceries and foodstuffs based on personal data and includes a private right of action.
California has targeted “common pricing algorithms” that use competitor data under its Cartwright Act (antitrust). Dozens of other states have considered or have pending bills. Scope, definitions of “personal data,” covered businesses, and exceptions vary significantly, creating compliance complexity for multistate operations.
Key distinctions and context
- Personalized/surveillance pricing uses individual consumer data (or inferences from it) to estimate willingness to pay and set different prices for the same item/service. This is the main focus of the consumer-protection rules above.
- Pure dynamic pricing based on real-time supply, demand, time, or location (common in rideshares or airlines) is generally treated differently and is more widely accepted, though it can overlap with personalized practices.
- Enforcement remains evolving: the FTC’s recent orders are fact-finding, while states are already implementing rules. Undisclosed practices risk Section 5 claims federally and state AG or private actions where laws apply.
The legal landscape is actively developing, with the FTC study results and further state action expected to shape it further into 2027. Businesses using these tools should map data inputs, document justifications, and prepare clear disclosures. For the most current status on a specific state or practice, checking official legislative sources or recent FTC materials is advisable.
