PRICE Act
- Sponsor
- Sen. Luján, Ben Ray [D-NM]
- Committees
- Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Apr 27, 2026
Bottom line
The PRICE Act seeks to standardize and clarify pricing practices for food and goods delivery services, preventing hidden fees and personalized surcharges for consumers.
What it actually does
This bill, the Promoting Real-time Information on Cost Expenditure Act (PRICE Act), aims to increase transparency in pricing for third-party delivery platforms by regulating how they calculate and display fees. It mandates that delivery fees be based solely on item price and delivery-related factors, explicitly prohibiting personalized pricing based on user data or negotiated arrangements with restaurants. Platforms must prominently display item prices, ongoing total costs, and provide clear explanations for all delivery fees before payment.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that the bill protects consumers from deceptive pricing practices, such as dynamic pricing based on inferred willingness to pay, and ensures transparency by requiring clear disclosure of all fees upfront. They contend it fosters a fairer marketplace by preventing platforms from obscuring the true cost of delivery, allowing consumers to make more informed purchasing decisions and promoting competition.
Opponents contend
Critics might argue that the bill could stifle innovation in pricing models, potentially limiting platforms' ability to optimize delivery routes and incentivize drivers efficiently. They may also contend that restricting pricing flexibility could lead to higher base fees or reduced service availability in certain areas, ultimately harming both platforms and consumers who benefit from varied service options.
The bill is concise and clearly written, making it accessible for a reader to understand its core provisions and implications within a few minutes.
Section 3(b)(1)
Standardized and Transparent Delivery Fee Calculation
This provision requires third-party delivery platforms to calculate delivery fees using a fixed methodology determined when a user first selects a retail establishment, which cannot change during the order. Fees must be based only on the item's price and delivery factors like distance. Crucially, it prohibits fees from being influenced by user data (like price sensitivity or past behavior) or by special agreements between the platform and the retail establishment.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this provision prevents platforms from engaging in opaque and potentially discriminatory pricing practices, ensuring all consumers pay a fair and consistent delivery fee based on objective factors rather than their perceived willingness to pay. This promotes trust and empowers consumers.
Critics contend
Opponents might contend that restricting dynamic pricing limits platforms' ability to optimize pricing for efficiency, driver incentives, and demand fluctuations, potentially leading to less efficient service or higher flat fees for all users. They may argue it stifles innovation in service delivery.
Tradeoffs
This provision balances consumer protection and pricing transparency against the operational flexibility and potential efficiency gains offered by dynamic pricing models. It trades personalized pricing for standardized, predictable costs.
Section 3(b)(2), (3), (4)
Enhanced Price and Fee Disclosure Requirements
This section mandates that platforms clearly display the price of each item (excluding taxes) when a user selects it. Throughout the ordering process, a running total of all costs, including items, taxes, and fees, must be prominently shown. Before payment, the platform must provide a clear, conspicuous, and not misleading explanation of each delivery fee, detailing its amount, purpose, and refundability.
Section 4
Enforcement by FTC and State Attorneys General
This provision grants the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) the authority to enforce violations of the Act as unfair or deceptive acts or practices under the FTC Act, including promulgating necessary regulations. Additionally, State Attorneys General are empowered to bring civil actions on behalf of their residents to enjoin violations, enforce compliance, and seek damages or restitution, with specific procedures for notifying the FTC and allowing for intervention.
Defines "delivery fee" as any fee imposed by the platform in addition to the retail establishment's price for in-person purchases, or the menu price if no in-person option exists.
Section 2(2)
Why it matters:Standard legislative practice to define terms upfront to establish the scope of the bill.
Case for: Supporters would argue this precise definition ensures the bill targets platform-added costs, which are often opaque, rather than interfering with a retail establishment's own pricing strategies.
Case against: Opponents might argue that this definition still allows platforms to influence retail pricing indirectly or that it doesn't fully address all forms of price inflation consumers might experience.
Estimated impact: Clarifies the scope of fees regulated, potentially narrowing the bill's impact to platform-specific charges rather than overall price differences.
Explicitly prohibits delivery fees from relying on user characteristics (like inferred price sensitivity, prior purchasing behavior, or willingness to pay) or on arrangements negotiated between the third-party delivery platform and the retail establishment.
Section 3(b)(1)(B)(ii)(I) and (II)
Why it matters:Technical detail within a larger regulatory framework, though it represents a core policy choice.
Case for: Proponents would highlight this as the core anti-discrimination and anti-opacity measure, directly targeting practices like dynamic pricing and ensuring that consumer fees are not influenced by secret deals between platforms and businesses.
Case against: Opponents might argue these exclusions are overly restrictive, preventing platforms from using data-driven insights to optimize pricing, offer personalized discounts, or reflect the true cost of serving specific customers or fulfilling certain types of orders.
Estimated impact: Significantly alters how platforms can set prices, potentially leading to more uniform pricing but less flexibility for platforms.