Bipartisan and State-Level Crackdown on AI "Surveillance Pricing" Accelerates

Bipartisan and State-Level Crackdown on AI "Surveillance Pricing" Accelerates

A major legislative and regulatory wave is sweeping across the United States, targeting what regulators have termed "surveillance pricing"—the use of artificial intelligence, opaque algorithms, and harvested consumer data (such as browsing history, real-time location, and purchase history) to charge individualized prices based on a consumer's inferred willingness to pay.

While traditional "dynamic pricing" (adjusting prices based on aggregate market signals like supply and demand) remains generally lawful, "surveillance pricing" has become a primary target of state AGs, state legislatures, federal agencies, and bipartisan congressional committees in 2026.

The State Legislative Patchwork

State legislatures have moved faster than federal regulators, creating a rapidly expanding and fragmented compliance landscape for companies with multistate operations.¹ As of late July 2026, more than 40 surveillance pricing bills are pending across over two dozen states, alongside 28 bills targeting electronic shelf labels (ESLs).

• New Jersey's Fair Price Protection Act (Signed July 23, 2026): This landmark law makes it an unlawful practice under the Consumer Fraud Act for any retail food store or third-party grocery delivery platform to use personalized algorithmic pricing or surveillance pricing that varies grocery prices based on personal data. The law also imposes a one-year moratorium on installing new electronic shelf labels (ESLs) while the state studies their impact. It allows the New Jersey AG to recover penalties of up to $50,000 per violation, treble damages, and grants consumers a private right of action.
• Maryland: Enacted a ban on surveillance pricing for food retailers and delivery platforms, set to take effect on October 1, 2026.
• Connecticut: Prohibits surveillance pricing effective October 1, 2026, and mandates a prominent consumer-facing disclosure label: "THIS PRICE WAS INCREASED BY A PRICE SETTING DEVICE USING YOUR PERSONAL DATA."
• New York: Following the Algorithmic Pricing Disclosure Act (effective November 2025), which requires disclosure when personalized algorithmic pricing is used, the New York Legislature passed the One Fair Price Act (S.8623B/A.9349B) on June 10, 2026. Championed by AG Letitia James, the bill awaits Governor Kathy Hochul's signature and would replace the disclosure regime with an outright ban on personalized pricing, carrying penalties of up to $20,000 for repeat violations.
• Vermont (H.942): Permits electronic shelf labels but explicitly bans intraday price increases except for documented pricing errors.

Federal Regulatory Action and Bipartisan Congressional Scrutiny

Federal scrutiny has converged around fee transparency, algorithmic collusion, and data privacy, framing surveillance pricing as a populist consumer-protection issue.

• Senate Judiciary Subcommittee Hearing (August 4, 2026): The Senate Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Crime and Counterterrorism held a high-profile hearing titled "Your Data, Their Profit: The Consumer Cost of AI Surveillance Pricing." Chaired by Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), who described AI-driven surveillance pricing as the "unholy trinity of everything America hates," the hearing focused on how companies monetize loyalty program data and use location-triggered in-app pricing. Witnesses testified about extreme pricing practices, such as a major airline reportedly charging a 230% fare increase for a consumer booking emergency funeral travel, and a major grocery retailer generating $500 million in revenue by selling harvested consumer data. Senator Hawley indicated he expects to introduce federal surveillance pricing legislation soon.
• FTC Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (April 14, 2026): The FTC issued an ANPRM covering total price disclosure, fee transparency, and personalized pricing disclosure. While initially focused on "junk fees" in food delivery apps, the FTC folded in inquiries regarding whether delivery platforms disclose when they charge personalized prices. This regulatory push has been backed by a coalition of 16 state AGs and several U.S. senators.
• Robinson-Patman Act (RPA) Revival: The FTC has revived the dormant RPA to target discriminatory pricing and disproportionate promotional payments, bringing its first suits in a generation against a major wine distributor (December 2024) and a global food and beverage giant (January 2025).

State AG Enforcement: The Near-Term Front Line

State Attorneys General are actively using existing broad Unfair or Deceptive Acts or Practices (UDAP/UDAAP) authority to target algorithmic pricing, bypassing the need for new legislation.

• New York AG Sweep: In January 2026, New York AG Letitia James demanded answers from a major delivery platform after investigations by Consumer Reports revealed 23% price discrepancies in the platform's pricing experiments, forcing the platform to shut down the tests.
• California AG Sweep: In January 2026, California AG Rob Bonta launched a broad surveillance pricing sweep, sending inquiry letters to grocery chains, hotels, and major retailers regarding their data collection and algorithmic pricing practices.