SLASH Prices Act

**Summary of HR 9371: SLASH Prices Act**

**1. Main Purpose & Objectives** The SLASH Prices Act (Shedding Light on Algorithms Setting Higher Prices Act) aims to increase transparency and consumer control over personalized algorithmic pricing practices. Its primary objective is to mandate disclosure when businesses use consumer data to dynamically adjust prices for identical goods or services, and to allow consumers to opt out of such pricing without facing discrimination. The bill frames these practices as potentially deceptive or unfair, seeking to curb what it characterizes as covert price discrimination enabled by surveillance capitalism.

**2. Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill amends consumer protection frameworks by requiring covered entities to: - Clearly disclose in writing when personalized algorithmic pricing is used, with the exact statement: *“This price was set by an algorithm using your personal data.”* - Display this notice prominently alongside each offered price. - Provide a functional, authenticated opt-out mechanism that immediately ceases personalized pricing and reveals the standard price the consumer would receive. - Prohibit retaliation against opt-out consumers, including price markups, denial of service, or reduced quality. - Notify the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) when initiating or discontinuing such pricing systems.

Enforcement is entrusted to the FTC, which would treat violations as unfair or deceptive acts under Section 5 of the FTC Act, enabling civil penalties, injunctions, and consumer redress. State attorneys general are also authorized to bring civil actions on behalf of residents, with mandatory FTC notification.

Notably, the bill includes broad exemptions: insurance and credit services, dynamic pricing (e.g., surge pricing), group-based discounts (e.g., for seniors or veterans), geographic pricing for ride-shares or tax compliance, delivery-based cost differences, and service recovery credits (e.g., refunds for complaints). These carve-outs significantly limit the bill’s scope, preserving many common data-driven pricing models.

**3. Affected Parties & Stakeholders** - **Affected Businesses**: E-commerce platforms, travel booking sites, online retailers, and digital service providers that leverage behavioral data, browsing history, or demographic profiling to customize prices. Companies reliant on surveillance-based monetization (e.g., certain ad-tech or retail analytics firms) face operational and compliance burdens. - **Consumers**: Gain transparency and opt-out rights, though effectiveness depends on enforcement and consumer awareness. - **FTC & State AGs**: Receive expanded enforcement authority and reporting responsibilities. - **Exempted Sectors**: Insurance, credit, transportation (ride-share), and loyalty/discount programs remain unaffected, limiting the bill’s reach to core retail and digital services.

**4. Potential Impact & Implications** While framed as pro-consumer, the SLASH Prices Act poses a modest threat to data-driven revenue models. By forcing disclosure and enabling opt-outs, it could reduce the efficacy of personalized pricing algorithms, potentially compressing profit margins for firms that rely on granular price discrimination. However, the extensive exemptions suggest the bill is more symbolic than transformative—preserving lucrative practices in finance, travel, and dynamic markets while targeting only a subset of opaque retail tactics.

From a libertarian-elitist perspective, the bill represents regulatory overreach that interferes with market efficiency. Personalized pricing, in theory, allocates goods to those willing to pay more, increasing overall welfare. Mandating disclosure and opt-outs introduces friction, undermines innovation in pricing technology, and treats consumers as incapable of navigating complex markets—a paternalistic assumption unbecoming of a free society.

Moreover, enforcement risks becoming arbitrary: defining “personalized algorithmic pricing” versus permissible “dynamic pricing” invites litigation and regulatory capture. The FTC, already politicized, could wield this authority selectively against disfavored tech firms while exempting politically connected industries.

Ultimately, the SLASH Prices Act is less about consumer protection and more about signaling political will to surveil and constrain the data economy—a step toward greater regulatory oversight that, if expanded, could chill innovation and consolidate power in bureaucratic hands rather than market ones. For now, its narrow scope limits real-world impact, but it sets a dangerous precedent for treating

Main Purpose & Objectives: The SLASH Prices Act (H.R. 9371) aims to increase transparency and consumer control over personalized algorithmic pricing practices. Its primary objective is to require businesses to disclose when they use consumers' personal data to set individualized prices for goods and services, and to provide consumers with a clear opt-out mechanism. The bill seeks to address concerns about opaque pricing algorithms that may lead to discriminatory or unfair pricing based on personal data, by mandating upfront disclosure and enabling consumers to choose standard pricing instead.

Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law: The bill introduces several new requirements under Section 2. Covered persons (businesses) must disclose in writing—prominently displayed alongside each price—when personalized algorithmic pricing is used, with the exact statement: “This price was set by an algorithm using your personal data.” Businesses must also provide an accessible opt-out mechanism that immediately stops personalized pricing and clearly shows the standard price the consumer will receive. Opted-out consumers cannot be discriminated against in terms of access, pricing, or service quality. Businesses must notify the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) when they begin or cease using such pricing. The FTC is granted enforcement authority, treating violations as unfair or deceptive acts under the FTC Act, and states may bring civil actions to enforce compliance. Numerous exemptions apply, including insurance, credit services, dynamic pricing (e.g., surge pricing), group-based discounts (e.g., for seniors or students), location-based fare calculations for ride-shares, jurisdiction-based pricing (e.g., taxes, currency), delivery-based cost differences, and service recovery credits or rebates.

Affected Parties & Stakeholders: The bill primarily affects retailers, e-commerce platforms, travel services, and any business using consumer data to tailor prices—such as airlines, online marketplaces, and subscription services. Consumers benefit from greater transparency and the ability to avoid data-driven price discrimination. The FTC gains expanded enforcement responsibilities, while state attorneys general gain authority to pursue civil actions. Exempted industries (insurance, credit, ride-shares, etc.) are not subject to the disclosure or opt-out requirements. Small businesses may face compliance burdens, though exemptions for certain practices may mitigate impact.

Potential Impact & Implications: If enacted, the SLASH Prices Act could significantly alter how companies use personal data in pricing strategies, potentially reducing the prevalence of individualized pricing models that rely on behavioral tracking. It may encourage more standardized pricing and increase consumer trust through transparency. However, businesses might shift to alternative data uses or face increased compliance costs, particularly in designing opt-out systems and monitoring exemptions. The bill could spur innovation in privacy-preserving pricing tools or lead to legal challenges over the scope of “personalized algorithmic pricing.” Over time, it may influence broader data privacy legislation by establishing a precedent for regulating algorithmic decision-making in commerce. While intended to empower consumers, its real-world effectiveness will depend on enforcement rigor, consumer awareness of opt-out rights, and how narrowly “personalized algorithmic pricing” is interpreted by regulators and courts.

**Summary of H.R. 9371: The SLASH Prices Act (Shedding Light on Algorithms Setting Higher Prices Act)**

**1. Main Purpose & Objectives** The primary purpose of the SLASH Prices Act is to increase transparency and consumer control over personalized algorithmic pricing—where companies use individual consumer data (such as browsing history, purchase behavior, location, or demographic information) to charge different prices for the same goods or services. The bill aims to shed light on what critics call “surveillance pricing” or “price discrimination,” arguing that consumers have a right to know when algorithms are adjusting prices based on their personal data. By mandating disclosure and offering an opt-out mechanism, the legislation seeks to empower consumers, promote fair market practices, and curb potential abuses of data-driven pricing models that may exploit vulnerable or less price-sensitive individuals.

**2. Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill introduces several novel requirements under Section 2: - **Disclosure Mandate**: Any “covered person” (broadly defined to include retailers, online platforms, and service providers using personalized pricing) must clearly disclose when algorithmic pricing is used, with a specific notice: *“This price was set by an algorithm using your personal data.”* This disclosure must be prominently displayed alongside the offered price. - **Opt-Out Right**: Consumers must be provided with an easy, authenticated method to opt out of personalized pricing. Upon opting out, they must be shown the standard, non-personalized price. Crucially, businesses cannot penalize opt-out consumers through denial of service, price markups, or reduced quality. - **Notification to the FTC**: Companies must notify the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) when they begin or cease using personalized algorithmic pricing. - **Enforcement**: Violations are treated as unfair or deceptive acts under the FTC Act, granting the FTC full authority to investigate, penalize, and seek injunctions. State attorneys general may also bring civil actions on behalf of residents, with prior notice to the FTC. - **Exemptions**: The bill carves out significant exceptions, including insurance and credit services, dynamic pricing (e.g., surge pricing based on demand), group-based discounts (e.g., for seniors or students), ride-share fare calculations using location data, jurisdiction-based pricing (e.g., taxes, currency), delivery cost differences, and individualized remedies like rebates for service issues.

**3. Affected Parties & Stakeholders** - **Consumers**: Gain greater transparency and control over how their data influences pricing, potentially reducing unfair price discrimination. - **Retailers & E-commerce Platforms** (e.g., Amazon, Walmart, travel sites): Must implement disclosure mechanisms, opt-out systems, and compliance tracking—potentially increasing operational costs and limiting profit optimization strategies. - **Ad Tech & Data Analytics Firms**: May see reduced demand for hyper-personalized pricing tools if consumers widely opt out. - **Federal Trade Commission (FTC)**: Assumes expanded enforcement role, requiring additional resources for monitoring, reporting systems, and litigation. - **State Attorneys General**: Gain authority to enforce the law locally, enabling multi-state actions against national violators. - **Exempt Industries** (insurance, credit, ride-sharing, etc.): Remain unaffected, though critics may argue these sectors also engage in problematic data-driven pricing.

**4. Potential Impact & Implications** If enacted, the SLASH Prices Act could significantly alter the landscape of digital commerce. By forcing transparency, it may reduce the prevalence of opaque, individualized pricing—potentially leading to more uniform pricing and increased price competition. Consumers, especially those wary of data exploitation, may welcome the opt-out as a tool for fairness and privacy. However, businesses argue that personalized pricing enables efficiency, inventory management, and targeted affordability (e.g., offering discounts to price-sensitive users). The exemptions, while practical, may be seen as loopholes—particularly the exclusion of dynamic pricing, which can also be algorithmically driven and opaque.

Long-term, the bill could inspire broader data privacy and algorithmic accountability legislation, positioning the U.S. as a leader in regulating commercial AI use.

**Summary of H.R. 9371: The SLASH Prices Act**

**1. Main Purpose & Objectives** The SLASH Prices Act (Shedding Light on Algorithms Setting Higher Prices Act) aims to increase transparency and consumer control over personalized algorithmic pricing—where companies use individual consumer data to charge different prices for the same goods or services. The bill seeks to curb what its sponsors frame as covert, discriminatory pricing practices by requiring clear disclosure and offering consumers an opt-out mechanism. Its stated goal is to empower consumers, promote fairness, and prevent exploitation by corporations leveraging surveillance capitalism—though critics may argue it targets innovation under the guise of consumer protection.

**2. Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill mandates that any “covered person” (broadly interpreted as businesses using personalized pricing algorithms) must: - Clearly disclose when prices are set using personal data, with a required notice: *“This price was set by an algorithm using your personal data.”* - Display this disclosure prominently alongside the offered price. - Provide an easy, authenticated opt-out mechanism, immediately honoring requests and showing the standard price the consumer would receive. - Prohibit discrimination against consumers who opt out—no denial of service, price markups, or reduced quality. - Notify the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) when they begin or cease using such pricing.

The FTC is granted enforcement authority, treating violations as unfair or deceptive acts under the FTC Act. States may also bring civil actions as parens patriae. Notably, the bill includes broad exemptions: insurance, credit services, dynamic pricing (e.g., surge pricing), group-based discounts (teachers, seniors, military), location-based fare calculations (ride-shares), jurisdiction-based pricing (currency, taxes), delivery cost differences, and service recovery credits (e.g., refunds for complaints). These carve-outs significantly limit the bill’s scope, focusing it narrowly on individualized, data-driven price discrimination in retail and e-commerce.

**3. Affected Parties & Stakeholders** - **Consumers**: Gain transparency and opt-out rights, though effectiveness depends on awareness and enforcement. - **E-commerce platforms, retailers, and digital advertisers**: Face new compliance burdens if they use individualized pricing based on browsing history, purchase behavior, or demographic profiling. - **Small businesses**: May be disproportionately impacted by disclosure and opt-out infrastructure costs, despite potential exemptions. - **FTC and state attorneys general**: Gain new enforcement tools and responsibilities. - **Tech and data analytics firms**: Could see reduced demand for personalized pricing algorithms if opt-out rates are high. - **Exempted sectors** (insurance, credit, ride-shares, etc.): Unaffected, raising questions about consistency and lobbying influence.

**4. Potential Impact & Implications** If enacted, the SLASH Prices Act could disrupt business models reliant on behavioral pricing, particularly in online retail, travel, and subscription services. Increased transparency may reduce consumer distrust and level the playing field, but opt-out rates remain uncertain—many consumers may accept personalized pricing for convenience or perceived savings. The exemptions suggest political compromise, potentially weakening the bill’s impact while protecting powerful industries. Enforcement will be key: without robust FTC action, compliance may be lax. Critics may argue the bill stifles innovation and unfairly targets tech-driven efficiency, while supporters frame it as a necessary check on corporate surveillance and price manipulation. Ultimately, the bill reflects growing unease with algorithmic opacity—positioning itself as a pro-freedom, anti-elite stand against hidden corporate control, even as it regulates market mechanisms under the banner of consumer empowerment.

**Summary of H.R. 9371 – SLASH Prices Act (119th Congress, 2d Session)**

**1. Main Purpose & Objectives** The SLASH Prices Act (Shedding Light on Algorithms Setting Higher Prices Act) aims to increase transparency and consumer control over personalized algorithmic pricing practices. Its primary objective is to require businesses to disclose when they use consumers’ personal data to set individualized prices for goods and services, and to allow consumers to opt out of such pricing without facing discrimination. The bill seeks to address concerns about opaque, data-driven pricing that may lead to unfair or discriminatory outcomes, particularly in e-commerce and digital markets.

**2. Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill amends consumer protection standards by mandating specific disclosures and opt-out mechanisms for “covered persons” (entities engaged in commerce) using personalized algorithmic pricing. Key requirements include: - **Disclosure Obligation**: Businesses must clearly disclose in writing—“This price was set by an algorithm using your personal data”—and display it prominently alongside each price when personalized algorithmic pricing is used. - **Opt-Out Mechanism**: Consumers must be provided an accessible way to opt out of personalized pricing, with the alternative (non-personalized) price clearly communicated. Opting out cannot result in denial of service, price markups, or reduced quality. - **Notification to FTC**: Businesses must notify the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) when they begin or cease using personalized algorithmic pricing. - **Enforcement**: Violations are treated as unfair or deceptive acts under the FTC Act, granting the FTC authority to investigate, penalize, and seek injunctions. State attorneys general may also bring civil actions on behalf of residents, subject to FTC notification. - **Exemptions**: The requirements do not apply to insurance, credit services, dynamic pricing (e.g., surge pricing), broad-group discounts (e.g., for seniors or students), location-based fare calculations (e.g., ride-shares), jurisdiction-based pricing (e.g., taxes, currency), delivery-based price differences, or individualized credits/rebates from customer service issues.

**3. Affected Parties & Stakeholders** - **Consumers**: Gain greater transparency and control over how their data influences pricing, potentially reducing discriminatory or exploitative pricing. - **Businesses & Digital Platforms**: E-commerce retailers, travel services, and online marketplaces using data-driven pricing models must implement disclosure systems and opt-out tools, increasing compliance costs but reducing legal risk. - **Federal Trade Commission (FTC)**: Assumes primary enforcement role, gaining new authority to monitor and penalize non-compliance. - **State Attorneys General**: Empowered to initiate civil actions to enforce the law, expanding multi-jurisdictional oversight. - **Exempt Industries**: Insurance providers, credit issuers, and certain transportation services are excluded, limiting the bill’s scope.

**4. Potential Impact & Implications** The SLASH Prices Act could significantly alter digital commerce practices by curbing opaque pricing algorithms that exploit consumer data. Increased transparency may foster fairer markets and enhance consumer trust, particularly among privacy-conscious users. However, businesses may face operational challenges in implementing real-time disclosures and maintaining dual pricing systems. The exemptions suggest a legislative balance between consumer protection and preserving legitimate pricing strategies (e.g., dynamic pricing for supply-demand adjustments). If enacted, the Act could prompt broader scrutiny of algorithmic decision-making in consumer markets and serve as a model for future regulation of AI-driven commercial practices. Enforcement effectiveness will depend on the FTC’s resources and ability to detect violations in complex digital ecosystems.

**Summary of H.R. 9371 – SLASH Prices Act (Shedding Light on Algorithms Setting Higher Prices Act)** *119th Congress, 2nd Session | Introduced June 18, 2026*

**1. Main Purpose & Objectives** The SLASH Prices Act aims to increase transparency and consumer control over personalized algorithmic pricing—where companies use individual consumer data (such as browsing history, purchase behavior, or location) to charge different prices for the same goods or services. The bill seeks to prevent hidden, discriminatory, or exploitative pricing practices by requiring clear disclosure when such algorithms are used and giving consumers the right to opt out without penalty. Its core objective is to shed light on opaque pricing mechanisms that may lead to unfair price discrimination, especially in digital marketplaces.

**2. Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill introduces several novel requirements under the Federal Trade Commission (FTC)’s enforcement authority: - **Mandatory Disclosure**: Companies ("covered persons") must clearly disclose in writing when personalized algorithmic pricing is used, with the exact statement: *“This price was set by an algorithm using your personal data.”* This notice must be prominently displayed alongside the offered price. - **Opt-Out Mechanism**: Consumers must be provided an easy, authenticated way to opt out of personalized pricing. Upon opting out, they must be shown the standard, non-personalized price. The bill prohibits retaliation—such as price hikes, denial of service, or reduced quality—against those who opt out. - **Notification to the FTC**: Companies must notify the FTC when they begin or cease using personalized algorithmic pricing. - **Exemptions**: The requirements do not apply to: insurance or credit services; general dynamic pricing (e.g., surge pricing based on demand); broad-group discounts (e.g., for seniors, students, veterans); location-based pricing for ride-shares or tax/jurisdiction calculations; delivery-based price differences; or individualized credits/rebates issued in response to service issues. - **Enforcement**: Violations are treated as unfair or deceptive acts under the FTC Act, granting the FTC full authority to investigate, penalize, and seek injunctions. State attorneys general may also bring civil actions on behalf of residents, provided they notify the FTC. - **Reporting Mechanism**: Within one year of enactment, the FTC must establish a public method for reporting violations, potentially integrating with the Consumer Sentinel Network.

**3. Affected Parties & Stakeholders** - **Consumers**: Gain greater transparency and control over how their data influences pricing, particularly in e-commerce, travel, streaming, and retail sectors. - **Businesses**: Especially large tech platforms, online retailers, and data-driven companies that rely on personalized pricing models (e.g., Amazon, airlines, ride-shares, subscription services) must overhaul pricing displays and opt-out systems. Exempted industries (insurance, credit, ride-share fare calc) are largely unaffected. - **Federal Trade Commission (FTC)**: Assumes primary enforcement role, requiring new guidance, monitoring, and complaint-handling infrastructure. - **State Attorneys General**: Empowered to act as parens patriae to protect residents, though must coordinate with the FTC. - **Privacy & Consumer Advocacy Groups**: Likely supporters, as the bill addresses data exploitation and algorithmic opacity. - **Small Businesses**: May face compliance burdens if they use third-party pricing algorithms, though exemptions for broad discounts and dynamic pricing may ease impact.

**4. Potential Impact & Implications** If enacted, the SLASH Prices Act could significantly alter how companies leverage consumer data for pricing. By forcing transparency, it may reduce the prevalence of covert price discrimination—such as charging loyal or less price-sensitive customers more—while encouraging fairer, more predictable pricing. The opt-out provision could empower privacy-conscious consumers to reject surveillance-based pricing, though uptake may depend on ease of use and awareness. The bill may spur innovation in privacy-preserving pricing models or lead to simpler, flat-rate strategies to avoid compliance complexity. Legal challenges could arise over vague

**Summary of H.R. 9371 – SLASH Prices Act (119th Congress)**

**1. Main Purpose & Objectives** The SLASH Prices Act (Shedding Light on Algorithms Setting Higher Prices Act) aims to increase transparency and consumer control over personalized algorithmic pricing—a practice where companies use consumer data (e.g., browsing history, location, purchase behavior) to charge different prices for identical goods or services. The bill seeks to prevent discriminatory or deceptive pricing by requiring clear disclosure when such algorithms are used and granting consumers the right to opt out without penalty. Its core objective is to curb hidden price manipulation in digital markets and restore fairness in consumer transactions.

**2. Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill amends consumer protection standards under the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Act by defining and regulating “personalized algorithmic pricing.” Key requirements include: - **Mandatory Disclosure**: Covered entities must display a clear notice—“This price was set by an algorithm using your personal data”—adjacent to any price determined by personalized algorithms. - **Opt-Out Mechanism**: Consumers must be able to easily opt out of algorithmic pricing and receive a non-personalized price, with no degradation in service or quality. - **Notification to FTC**: Companies must inform the FTC when they begin or cease using personalized algorithmic pricing. - **Enforcement**: Violations are treated as unfair or deceptive acts under Section 5 of the FTC Act, empowering the FTC to issue cease-and-desist orders, impose civil penalties, and seek restitution. State attorneys general may also bring civil actions on behalf of residents. - **Exemptions**: The rule does not apply to insurance, credit services, general dynamic pricing (e.g., surge pricing based on demand), group discounts (e.g., for seniors or students), location-based fare calculations (e.g., ride-shares), jurisdictional pricing (e.g., currency or tax adjustments), delivery-based pricing, or compensatory discounts (e.g., for service issues).

**3. Affected Parties & Stakeholders** - **Covered Entities**: Primarily large e-commerce platforms, travel booking sites, streaming services, and digital retailers that leverage consumer data for targeted pricing (e.g., Amazon, airlines, hotel aggregators, app-based marketplaces). - **Consumers**: Gain greater transparency and control over pricing, particularly benefiting privacy-conscious and price-sensitive individuals. - **Small Businesses**: Likely less affected, as many lack the data infrastructure for sophisticated algorithmic pricing; however, those using third-party platforms with embedded pricing algorithms may need to ensure compliance. - **Ad Tech & Data Brokers**: Indirectly impacted, as reduced consumer profiling could diminish the value of behavioral data markets. - **Federal Trade Commission (FTC)**: Assumes primary enforcement authority, requiring potential resource allocation for monitoring, rulemaking, and complaint processing. - **State Attorneys General**: Empowered to initiate enforcement actions, increasing multi-jurisdictional oversight.

**4. Potential Impact & Implications** If enacted, the SLASH Prices Act could significantly alter digital commerce practices: - **Increased Transparency**: Consumers would be alerted to hidden price discrimination, potentially reducing trust erosion in online markets. - **Market Efficiency**: May lead to more uniform pricing, reducing arbitrage opportunities but increasing perceived fairness. - **Compliance Costs**: Firms may face expenses related to disclosure redesign, opt-out system development, and legal review—particularly impacting data-driven business models. - **Innovation Effects**: Could discourage over-reliance on invasive profiling, encouraging innovation in non-personalized value-based pricing or subscription models. - **Legal Precedent**: Establishes a federal baseline for algorithmic transparency, potentially influencing future AI and data privacy legislation. - **Enforcement Challenges**: Defining “personalized algorithmic pricing” versus permissible dynamic or contextual pricing may lead to litigation, requiring FTC guidance to avoid overreach or loopholes.

Overall, the bill represents a proactive effort to address growing concerns about surveillance capitalism and