WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 6098

Consumer protection: other; use of surveillance pricing in the sale of certain goods and services; prohibit. Amends sec. 3 of 1976 PA 331 (MCL 445.903) & adds sec. 3q. TIE BAR WITH: HB 6099'26

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Will Bruck and 5 co-sponsors

Michigan bans surveillance pricing that uses personal data to raise prices; dynamic pricing and loyalty discounts tied to data remain allowed under defined limits.

REFERRED TO COMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
#consumerprotection:other
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 6098

Summary of HB 6098 (2025-2026) – Michigan

Purpose and intent

  • Proposes amendments to the Michigan Consumer Protection Act (1976 PA 331, as amended) to prohibit a specific pricing practice described as “surveillance pricing.”
  • Also adds a new section (3q) defining terms and establishing a general prohibition on surveillance pricing, with a tie-bar to HB 6099.

Key provisions and changes

  • Section 3 (unfair, unconscionable, or deceptive practices):

    • Maintains the broad list of unlawful practices under the Michigan Consumer Protection Act (MCPA), including false representations, deceptive pricing, and other enumerated unfair practices.
    • Adds or retains numerous specific prohibitions related to advertising, pricing, quality claims, and protections for consumers (the text lists many enumerated subsections from (a) to (mm), including rules on refunds, disclosures, credit terms, warranty representations, environmental claims, and identity/return protections). The language largely mirrors existing MCPA prohibitions with some expansions and cross-references to related acts. (Note: HB 6098’s primary new content is the separate 3q definition and ban of surveillance pricing; the rest of Section 3 remains as the established framework in 3, with references to current prohibitions.)

  • Section 3q – Prohibition on “surveillance pricing”:

    • Prohibition: A person engaged in trade or commerce shall not use surveillance pricing in the sale of goods and services.
    • Definitions:
    • Dynamic pricing (a): Pricing that changes based on non-individualized data such as date, time, location, weather, events, purchase history, competitor pricing, or demand.
    • Retailer loyalty program (b): Pricing system that may decrease the price using an individual’s personal data (e.g., promotions, coupons, discounts, subscriptions) to retain customers.
    • Surveillance pricing (c): Pricing that raises the price based on an individual's personal identifiable data (e.g., device type, MAC/IP address, cookies, geolocation, search history, purchasing habits). Not considered surveillance pricing if it falls under dynamic pricing or loyalty programs as defined.
    • Effective date: The act takes effect 30 days after enactment.
    • Condition for enactment: The new provisions do not take effect unless HB 6099 (the tied bill) is enacted into law.

Who/what would be affected

  • Businesses and sellers in Michigan engaged in the sale of goods and services who might otherwise use dynamic pricing, loyalty-program-based discounts, or surveillance-pricing strategies.
  • Consumers would gain an additional protection against pricing practices that adjust in ways tied to their personal data, ensuring pricing transparency and reducing the risk of price discrimination based on identifiable data.
  • The prohibition targets pricing practices that rely on or exploit consumer data to alter prices.

Procedural and timeline aspects

  • Introduced and referred to the Committee on Regulatory Reform on June 16, 2026.
  • The bill includes a tie-bar linking its effectiveness to enactment of HB 6099; if HB 6099 does not become law, HB 6098 cannot take effect.
  • If enacted, the surveillance-pricing prohibition would become effective 30 days after enactment.

Practical impact and considerations

  • If enacted, Michigan would become more restrictive on price discrimination based on consumer data, barring price increases tied to non-public personal data and certain tracking-based pricing schemes.
  • The bill preserves the existing framework of the MCPA’s unfair or deceptive practices, ensuring continued enforcement of general consumer protections in addition to the new surveillance-pricing ban.
  • Businesses would need to review pricing practices, inventory pricing strategies, and any loyalty-program structures to ensure compliance, particularly around the use of consumer data to modify prices.

If you’d like, I can:
- Compare HB 6098’s surveillance-pricing ban to existing laws in other states.
- Highlight specific examples of practices that would be prohibited versus allowed (dynamic pricing and loyalty programs as currently defined).
- Provide a one-page quick reference checklist for compliance.

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

Sign in to ask a question.