Fair Fees Act
- Sponsor
- Rep. Cohen, Steve [D-TN-9]
- Committees
- Transportation and Infrastructure Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Sep 21, 2026
Bottom line
The 'Fair Fees Act' aims to strengthen consumer protections by requiring airlines and ticket agents to provide timely cash refunds for flight disruptions and passenger cancellations, shifting financial risk from consumers to carriers.
What it actually does
This bill amends federal law to mandate full cash refunds for airline passengers when flights are cancelled or significantly delayed/changed by the carrier, or when a passenger cancels their ticket at least 48 hours before departure. It sets specific timelines for these refunds and requires clear disclosure of refund rights, while also allowing non-expiring vouchers as an alternative if explicitly offered and rejected by the passenger.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that this bill provides essential consumer protection, ensuring that passengers are not unfairly penalized when airlines fail to deliver contracted services or when personal circumstances necessitate a cancellation. They contend it will increase transparency, hold airlines accountable, and prevent consumers from being stuck with unusable credits or vouchers.
Opponents contend
Opponents, likely representing the airline industry, would argue that these mandates could impose significant financial burdens on air carriers, potentially leading to higher ticket prices, reduced flight options, or decreased investment in service improvements. They might also contend that existing regulations are sufficient or that the bill's provisions are overly prescriptive, hindering operational flexibility.
The bill is relatively short and clearly structured, making it accessible for an informed reader to understand its core provisions within a reasonable timeframe.
Section 2(a), amending 49 U.S.C. 42305(a)
Mandatory Cash Refunds for Carrier-Initiated Disruptions
This provision requires air carriers and foreign air carriers to provide a full cash refund, including taxes and ancillary fees, to passengers whose flights are cancelled or significantly delayed/changed by the carrier. Passengers must request the refund, but a request is implicitly made if they don't accept an alternative flight or compensation. Refunds must be issued within 7 business days for credit card purchases and 20 days for other payment methods. This ensures passengers receive their money back promptly if the airline alters their travel plans substantially.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this provision is crucial for consumer protection, ensuring that airlines bear the financial responsibility for disruptions they cause, rather than shifting the burden to passengers who may need their funds for alternative travel arrangements.
Critics contend
Airlines would likely argue that mandating cash refunds for all significant delays and cancellations could strain their financial resources, especially during widespread operational disruptions, potentially leading to higher ticket prices or reduced service.
Tradeoffs
This provision balances consumer financial security against the operational and financial flexibility of airlines. It aims to protect passengers from losing money due to airline-controlled events, but could increase the financial risk for carriers.
Section 2(a), amending 49 U.S.C. 42305(b)
Mandatory Cash Refunds for Passenger-Initiated Cancellations
This section mandates that if a passenger cancels a ticket at least 48 hours before the scheduled departure, the airline or ticket agent must offer and provide a full cash refund, including all taxes and ancillary fees. The refund must be issued within 30 days of cancellation. Additionally, carriers and agents are required to disclose this right to passengers in writing before the ticket sale. This empowers passengers to change their plans without financial penalty within a reasonable timeframe.
Section 2(a), amending 49 U.S.C. 42305(c)
Conditions for Offering Vouchers as Alternative to Refunds
This provision clarifies that airlines and ticket agents may offer vouchers, credits, or other forms of compensation as an alternative to a required cash refund, but only under strict conditions. The offer must include a clear and conspicuous notice of its terms and, crucially, the passenger's explicit right to reject the offer and elect a full cash refund. Furthermore, any such alternative compensation must be redeemable at any time without any expiration or use-by date. This ensures that if a passenger accepts a voucher, it retains its value indefinitely.
Section 2(a), amending 49 U.S.C. 42305(d)(3)
Definition of 'Significantly Delayed or Changed Flight'
This provision defines what constitutes a 'significantly delayed or changed flight' for the purpose of triggering a mandatory cash refund. For domestic flights, it means the passenger arrives at their destination 3 or more hours after the original scheduled arrival time. For international flights, this threshold is 6 or more hours. This establishes clear, objective criteria for when a passenger is entitled to a refund due to airline-initiated delays or changes.
Requires the Secretary of Transportation to issue a final rule within one year to apply the refund requirements to ticket agents, and to issue regulations for prompt transfer of funds from carriers to agents when agents are responsible for refunds but don't possess the funds.
Section 2(a), amending 49 U.S.C. 42305(a)(4)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for delegating implementation details to regulatory agencies, ensuring the policy intent is carried out through specific rules.
Case for: Supporters would argue this ensures comprehensive consumer protection by closing potential loopholes where ticket agents might evade refund responsibilities, and ensures agents have the necessary funds to comply.
Case against: Ticket agents might argue that this imposes new regulatory burdens and potential financial liabilities, especially concerning the prompt transfer of funds, which could be complex to implement.
Estimated impact: Significant regulatory impact on ticket agents, potentially requiring changes to their business practices and financial arrangements with airlines.
Defines 'covered carrier' as any passenger air carrier with over $1.5 billion in operating revenue in the previous year, or any passenger foreign air carrier operating to/from the U.S. The $1.5 billion threshold is subject to inflation adjustment starting in 2028.
Section 2(a), amending 49 U.S.C. 42305(d)(2)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for defining terms used throughout the bill, but its placement means a casual reader might miss which carriers are actually subject to the new rules.
Case for: Proponents would argue this focuses the most stringent requirements on larger carriers with greater capacity to absorb costs, while still covering foreign carriers operating in the U.S. market. The inflation adjustment ensures the threshold remains relevant over time.
Case against: Smaller, but still significant, domestic carriers just under the threshold might argue it creates an uneven playing field. Critics might also argue that the threshold is arbitrary or that all carriers should be subject to the same rules.
Estimated impact: Excludes smaller domestic carriers from some of the new refund requirements, potentially creating a two-tiered system for domestic flights.