QuorumCivic. Hidden in plain sight Get the app
Bill intelligence

Congress bans dynamic grocery pricing—but leaves 'price gouging' to FTC to define

H.R. 4966 — Stop Price Gouging in Grocery Stores Act of 2025 · Filed by Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) · 93 cosponsors · Introduced Aug 12, 2025 · Referred to committee

78%
Transparency
Typical bill: 82%
28/100
Hidden-provision risk
Typical bill: 15/100
Consumer Protection / Retail Regulation

Your members of Congress

Enter a ZIP to see where your representative and both senators stood on this bill.

Looked up on this device — your ZIP is never stored on our servers.

What it does

This bill prohibits grocery stores from charging 'grossly excessive' prices (generally defined as 120% or more of the 6-month average price, though the FTC can adjust) and bans 'surveillance-based pricing'—using facial recognition, biometric data, or personal information to charge different customers different prices for the same item. It also bans electronic price tags in stores larger than 10,000 sq ft and requires disclosure of facial recognition use. The FTC enforces the rules, states can sue on behalf of residents, and individual consumers can sue for damages ($3,000 per violation, treble for willful violations) plus attorney's fees.

Why we flagged it

This bill establishes federal prohibitions on price gouging and surveillance-based pricing in grocery stores, with enforcement mechanisms through the FTC and private right of action. It is fundamentally a consumer protection statute targeting retail pricing practices and data collection.

What the text implies

  • The 120% price threshold (or lower, at FTC discretion) for 'grossly excessive' pricing may create significant litigation risk for retailers during supply-chain disruptions, natural disasters, or inflationary periods when cost pass-through is legitimate but hard to document retroactively.
  • Electronic shelf label (ESL) ban for stores >10,000 sq ft may impose substantial operational costs on large grocers and reduce their ability to respond dynamically to inventory, waste, or demand signals—potentially increasing food waste and consumer prices long-term.

The full analysis lists 5 implications of this text.

Who stands to gain

consumer advocacy organizations; class-action law firms; data privacy consultants

Correlative observation from public records — not evidence of coordination or wrongdoing, and not financial advice.
This page is the record as of today. The app tells you when it changes.
Quorum analysis of the full bill text · 119th Congress · public record