PRICE Act
- Sponsor
- Rep. Goldman, Daniel S. [D-NY-10]
- Committees
- Energy and Commerce Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Apr 27, 2026
Bottom line
The PRICE Act aims to enhance consumer protection by standardizing delivery fee calculations and mandating comprehensive price transparency on third-party delivery platforms.
What it actually does
This bill mandates that third-party delivery platforms implement transparent and consistent pricing practices for delivery fees. It requires that these fees be calculated based solely on the total item price and delivery-related factors, explicitly prohibiting the use of user-specific characteristics (like inferred price sensitivity) or platform-retailer negotiated arrangements. Platforms must prominently display item prices, an ongoing total cost throughout the ordering process, and a clear explanation of all delivery fees before payment. The Federal Trade Commission and State Attorneys General are granted enforcement authority.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that the bill protects consumers from opaque and potentially discriminatory pricing practices, ensuring they understand the full cost of their order upfront. It promotes fair competition by preventing platforms from using personalized pricing algorithms that could exploit perceived willingness to pay, thereby fostering trust and predictability in online delivery services.
Opponents contend
Opponents might argue that these regulations could limit platforms' flexibility to innovate pricing models, potentially leading to higher flat fees for all users or reduced service in certain areas. They may contend that prohibiting dynamic pricing based on user characteristics or platform-retailer agreements could hinder efficiency, increase operational costs, and ultimately impact platform profitability and service offerings.
The bill is relatively short and clearly written, making it accessible for an informed reader to understand its core provisions within a reasonable timeframe.
Section 3(b)(1)
Standardized Delivery Fee Calculation
This provision requires that any delivery fees charged by a third-party delivery platform must be determined when the user selects the retail establishment and cannot change thereafter. These fees must be based exclusively on the total price of items ordered (excluding taxes and platform fees) and factors related to delivery, such as distance. Crucially, it prohibits basing fees on user characteristics like inferred price sensitivity or prior purchasing behavior, as well as any arrangements negotiated between the platform and the retail establishment.
Supporters argue
Proponents argue this prevents discriminatory pricing and ensures fairness, as all users face similar charges for similar services, removing opaque algorithmic surcharges that could exploit perceived willingness to pay.
Critics contend
Opponents might argue it stifles innovation in pricing, potentially leading to less efficient delivery networks or higher base costs for all users if platforms cannot optimize pricing based on demand or user behavior.
Tradeoffs
This provision balances consumer protection from dynamic pricing against platform flexibility and potential efficiency gains that could be derived from more complex, personalized pricing models.
Section 3(b)(2)
Item-Level Price Transparency
This section mandates that whenever a user selects an item to order from a retail establishment through a third-party delivery platform, the platform must prominently display the price charged by the retail establishment for that specific item (excluding any taxes). Additionally, any delivery fees imposed with respect to that item by the third-party delivery platform must also be clearly shown at this stage.
Section 3(b)(3)
Real-time Total Cost Display
This provision requires third-party delivery platforms to prominently display the ongoing total amount to be charged to the user throughout the entire ordering process. This dynamic total must include the cost of every item the user has selected up to that point, all applicable taxes, and any relevant fees, ensuring the user is continuously aware of their accumulating costs.
Section 3(b)(4)
Pre-Payment Fee Explanation
Before a third-party delivery platform requests payment for an order, it must provide the user with a clear, conspicuous, and not misleading explanation of each delivery fee imposed by the platform. This explanation must detail the amount of the fee, its purpose, whether it is refundable, and any other information the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) may specify through future regulations.
Section 4(a)
FTC Enforcement Authority
This section designates any violation of the Act as an unfair or deceptive act or practice under the Federal Trade Commission Act. It grants the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) full authority to enforce the Act, including the power to investigate, bring actions, impose penalties, and promulgate necessary regulations. This ensures a federal agency is responsible for overseeing compliance with the new pricing requirements.
Section 4(b)
State Enforcement Authority
This section authorizes State Attorneys General to bring civil actions in federal or state courts on behalf of their residents if they believe the Act has been violated. States can seek injunctions, enforce compliance, and obtain damages, restitution, or other compensation. The provision includes rules for notifying the FTC before filing an action and allows the FTC to intervene. It also prevents states from initiating parallel actions if the FTC has already instituted a case against the same defendant for the same violation.
This provision explicitly prohibits third-party delivery platforms from basing delivery fees on factors related to user characteristics (such as inferred price sensitivity, prior purchasing behavior, or willingness to pay) or on arrangements negotiated between the platform and the retail establishment.
Section 3(b)(1)(B)(ii)
Why it matters:This is a common legislative drafting technique to define the scope of a rule by listing what is permitted and then what is specifically excluded. It's technically precise but can be easily overlooked by a casual reader focusing on the positive requirements.
Case for: Proponents argue this ensures true price transparency and fairness, preventing platforms from engaging in 'dynamic pricing' or 'price discrimination' based on user data. It also prevents platforms from passing on costs from their negotiated deals with restaurants directly to consumers in an opaque manner.
Case against: Opponents might argue that prohibiting these factors limits platforms' ability to optimize pricing for efficiency, potentially leading to higher average costs for all users or reduced service in less profitable areas. They might contend that personalized pricing can sometimes offer benefits, such as discounts to new users or loyalty rewards, which this provision would restrict.
Estimated impact: Significant impact on platform business models and consumer pricing experience, potentially leading to more uniform pricing but possibly affecting platform profitability and service flexibility.