Quick Facts

• The FTC voted 2-0 on August 19, 2026 to issue a proposed enforcement policy statement on personalized pricing and is now seeking public comment.
• A Consumer Reports study found Instacart prices differed by as much as 23% per item between customers, costing some users up to $1,200 more per year on groceries.
• Over 100 price transparency bills were introduced across 33 states in 2025, with more than 60 pricing-related bills currently pending.

The Federal Trade Commission put personalized pricing in its crosshairs on August 19, 2026, issuing a proposed enforcement policy statement and opening a public comment period. The 2-0 vote signals bipartisan concern at the agency level, even as the current administration reframes the issue.

FTC Chairman Andrew Ferguson drew a clear line for retailers. “When consumers see a listed price, they expect it to be the same price that everyone else sees, not the retailer’s estimate of how much they are willing to pay based on their personal data,” he said. The agency stopped short of calling for an outright ban, with Ferguson acknowledging the FTC lacks authority to prohibit the practice in all cases.

The shift in terminology is notable. The Trump-era FTC dropped the term “surveillance pricing” used by the Biden administration and replaced it with “personalized pricing.” The policy focus, however, remains the same: whether retailers are disclosing how consumer data shapes the prices individual shoppers see.

How the Enforcement Framework Evolved

The FTC launched its investigation into the practice in July 2024 under Section 6(b) authority, targeting third-party pricing intermediaries that work with at least 250 retail clients spanning groceries and apparel. Initial findings, released in January 2025, showed that data points as granular as mouse movements, unpurchased cart items, device type, and browser history were being fed into pricing algorithms.

When Ferguson became chairman on January 20, 2025, he halted a follow-up request for information tied to the Biden-era study. In December 2025, the FTC issued a Civil Investigative Demand to a delivery service company over its AI pricing tool, signaling the agency was still active in the space under new leadership.

The August 2026 proposed statement represents the current administration’s first formal policy move on the issue.

The Business Risk for Retailers

The data on consumer sentiment is hard to ignore. A September 2025 Consumer Reports survey of 2,240 U.S. adults found 72% of Instacart users did not want the platform charging different prices to different users for any reason. A separate 2024 Consumer Reports study found two-thirds of U.S. consumers oppose personalized pricing broadly.

Retailers using these tools reported revenue gains of 2-5% in documents submitted to the FTC. One study cited in the agency’s research found that knowledge of even a single past purchase could improve coupon revenue by 50% compared to blanket distribution. McKinsey projects generative AI could deliver $240 billion to $390 billion in value to the retail sector, with dynamic pricing a major driver.

The legal exposure, though, is real. Ferguson stated the FTC “will not hesitate to enforce the law” against businesses that fail to disclose how personal data informs pricing, citing potential violations of the FTC Act and other statutes.

Jon Picoult, founder of Watermark Consulting, offered a direct warning to operators. “If your pricing strategy leaves customers feeling exploited, it’s not going to end well for you,” he said. “Make sure it is defensible to both consumers and regulators.”

What Operators Should Watch

The public comment period on the proposed statement gives the industry a window to shape the final policy. Retailers using AI-driven pricing tools, third-party pricing intermediaries, or any data-informed dynamic pricing should audit their disclosure practices now.

State-level pressure is compounding federal scrutiny. More than 100 price transparency bills were introduced across 33 states in 2025 alone. Operators selling nationally face a patchwork of potential requirements if federal standards are not established first.

The FTC has not set an enforcement deadline, but the proposed policy statement puts retailers on notice that non-disclosure is the primary legal risk the agency intends to pursue.

Read more: The FTC is turning its sights on personalized pricing. What does it mean for customers?