WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 5562

AN ACT CONCERNING RETAILERS' USE OF THE PHRASE "DOLLAR STORE".

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Bobby Gibson

HB 5562 would limit using the term 'dollar store' in ads and signage to stores meeting a defined low-price standard, with required disclosures and penalties for misleading pricing.

REF. TO JOINT COMM. ON General Law
#advertising #retailtrade
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 5562

Summary — HB 5562

Title: AN ACT CONCERNING RETAILERS' USE OF THE PHRASE "DOLLAR STORE"
Bill Number: HB 5562
Subject: Advertising; Retail trade
Introduced: March 14, 2025
Status: Referred to Joint Committee on General Law; placed on General State Calendar (May 15, 2025)
Companion: SB 2565

Note: The bill text was not provided. The summary below is based on the bill title and the available legislative history. Where the actual statutory language is unavailable, I identify likely objectives, typical provisions, and potential impacts that bills with this title commonly address. This is not a substitute for the bill text.

Purpose / Intent (as implied by the title)

The bill appears intended to regulate how retailers may use the term “dollar store” in advertising, storefront signage, or business names. The likely policy goals are to reduce consumer confusion or deceptive advertising where a store labeled a “dollar store” does not offer goods predominantly priced at or near one dollar, and to set standards for truthful price representation.

Key provisions likely to be included (title-based inference)

Because the bill text is not available, the provisions below are hypothetical but consistent with past legislation and the bill title:
- Definitions: define “dollar store,” “dollar-priced item,” and related advertising terms.
- Pricing standard: require that a specified percentage of in-store merchandise be priced at $1 (or at a specified low-price threshold) for a retailer to use the phrase “dollar store.”
- Disclosure requirements: mandate conspicuous signage or disclaimers if the store uses “dollar store” but offers a substantial share of items above $1.
- Prohibitions: ban false or misleading use of the phrase in advertising, online listings, or business names when the pricing standard is not met.
- Enforcement: designate an enforcement authority (e.g., state Attorney General or Department of Consumer Protection), allow consumer complaints, and specify civil penalties or injunctive remedies.
- Exceptions or grandfathering: possible carve-outs for existing stores or small businesses.

Who would be affected

  • Retailers and chains using the phrase “dollar store” in marketing, signage, trade names, or websites.
  • Consumers, particularly bargain shoppers, who rely on pricing cues.
  • State enforcement agencies responsible for consumer protection.
  • Potential indirect effects on suppliers, local municipalities (signage rules), and businesses that license or franchise such names.

Procedural and timeline notes (legislative history)

  • Filed: 2025-03-14
  • Referred to Joint Committee on General Law: 2025-01-21
  • Read first time and referred to Ways & Means: 2025-04-07
  • Committee activity: public hearing (4/14/2025), testimony recorded; left pending and later considered; committee substitute considered and reported favorably as substituted (5/7/2025). Committee report distributed and sent to Calendars (5/12/2025).
  • Placed on General State Calendar: 2025-05-15 — next step is likely a floor vote in the chamber of origin.

Potential impacts and considerations

  • Consumer protection: could reduce misleading advertising and improve pricing transparency.
  • Business compliance costs: retailers may need to change signage, advertising, or adjust pricing/mix of goods to meet standards.
  • Legal and enforcement workload: enforcement agencies may see an increase in complaints and need clear standards for adjudication.
  • Fiscal effects: depending on penalty structure and enforcement mechanisms, there may be minor state costs or penalty revenue; a referral to Ways & Means suggests potential fiscal considerations were or will be evaluated.

Related legislation

  • SB 2565 — companion bill (track parallel action in the other chamber).

If you want, I can:
- Locate and summarize the actual bill text or committee substitute (if available) to replace the inferred provisions with precise language.
- Track subsequent actions (votes, amendments) and provide an updated status report.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.