QuorumCivic. Hidden in plain sight Get the app
Bill intelligence

Congress moves to ban algorithmic price gouging at grocery stores

H.R. 8895 — No Rigged Grocery Prices Act · Filed by Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) · 1 cosponsor · Introduced May 19, 2026 · Referred to committee

75%
Transparency
Typical bill: 82%
15/100
Hidden-provision risk
Typical bill: 15/100
1
Unrelated riders
No connection to the stated subject
Consumer Protection Against Price…

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 large grocery retailers and food delivery services from using personal data to charge different customers different prices for the same item (dynamic pricing). It requires online grocery sellers to disclose when items are out of stock or weighed for pricing, and mandates that delivery services get explicit customer approval before substituting ordered items. The FTC enforces violations as unfair trade practices.

Why we flagged it

The bill's core mechanism is straightforward: it bans algorithmic price discrimination in grocery retail and delivery services, with FTC enforcement. This is a direct consumer-protection measure, not a subsidy, deregulation, or narrow carve-out.

  • Section 3 requires the Department of Labor to report on employment effects of electronic shelf labels—substantively unrelated to dynamic pricing prohibition.

What the text implies

  • The bill defines 'covered entity' to include only food retailers of at least 15,000 sq ft, potentially exempting small grocers and farmers markets from the dynamic pricing ban—creating a competitive advantage for large chains that comply.
  • The 'personal data' definition is broad ('any information linked or reasonably linked to an identified consumer'), which may capture location data, purchase history, and device identifiers—expanding the scope of what retailers cannot use for pricing.

The full analysis lists 5 implications of this text.

Who stands to gain

consumers (reduced price discrimination); smaller retailers (potential competitive relief if large chains face compliance costs)

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