INDUSTRY NEWS | ANALYSIS
Retailers who represent or imply that a price is static when it in fact varies by individual are at risk of misleading customers.
FTC seeks public comment on surveillance pricing Agency says the undisclosed collection or use of personal data for the use of pricing could be in violation of the FTC Act
THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION announced in mid-August it is seeking public comment on an enforcement policy statement regarding personalized pricing, which is the use of personal data to set prices according to the amount that a com- pany believes an individual consumer is willing to spend. “When consumers see a listed price, they expect it to be same price that every- one else sees, not the retailer’s estimate of how much they are willing to pay based on their personal data,” said FTC Chair- man Andrew Ferguson. “The FTC does not have the legal authority to ban per- sonalized pricing in all circumstances, but businesses that fail to tell consumers how their personal data is being used to set a price may be in violation of the FTC Act and other laws we enforce. We are seek- ing public input on this draft statement, which would put businesses engaged in or considering personalized pricing on
notice that the Trump-Vance FTC will not hesitate to enforce the law in this space.” This is the latest in a series of actions by the Commission against businesses that mislead consumers with hidden fees and surprise charges. Consumers expect prices for products and services to change based upon supply and demand, not their web surfing habits or buying history, the statement notes. Retailers who represent or imply that a price is static when it in fact varies by individual are at risk of misleading cus- tomers. Informed consumers might take measures to avoid higher personalized prices, such as using a virtual private network or private browsing session, or simply avoiding retailers engaged in per- sonalized pricing altogether. The statement goes on to note that the undisclosed collection or use of personal data for the purpose of personalized pricing could violate the FTC Act, which
prohibits unfair or deceptive practices in the marketplace. Once the statement has been pub- lished in the Federal Register , the public will have 30 days to submit comments electronically. The Commission vote authorizing the Federal Register notice was 2-0. Three states have already banned surveillance pricing in grocery stores: Maryland, New Jersey and Connecticut, which law covers all retailers. Meanwhile, New York, California, Delaware and Mich- igan are looking to pass similar measures. In New Jersey, a one-year moratorium was placed on installing new electronic shelf labels while the state studies their financial impact. In Maryland, grocery stores with at least 15,000 square feet and third-party grocery delivery apps cannot charge localized or individualized prices based on user data. —Supermarket News Staff
10 SUPERMARKETNEWS.COM SUMMER 2026
Powered by FlippingBook