WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 4755

Consumer protection: unfair trade practices; protections against deceptive ticket sales; provide for. Amends sec. 3 of 1976 PA 331 (MCL 445.903) & adds sec. 3j.

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Brian BeGole and 11 co-sponsors

Prohibits deceptive online ticket sales practices in Michigan, including impersonation, hidden fees, misleading domains/sites, and price misstatements, under the MCPA.

REFERRED TO COMMITTEE ON FINANCE, INSURANCE, AND CONSUMER PROTECTION
#consumerprotection:unfairtradepractices #trade:consumergoodsandservices
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 4755

Summary — HB 4755 (Michigan Consumer Protection Act amendment)

Status: Referred to Committee on Finance, Insurance, and Consumer Protection (9/11/2025)
Sponsor: Rep. Nancy Jenkins‑Arno
Filed/Introduced: March 13, 2025 (filed); bill text dated July 29, 2025
As passed House: September 9–11, 2025 (given immediate effect)

Purpose / Intent

To add targeted consumer‑protection rules to the Michigan Consumer Protection Act (MCPA) that prohibit deceptive practices in online ticket sales for public entertainment events and to update section references in the act. The goal is to reduce consumer confusion and undisclosed fees in ticket purchases and to prevent misleading websites and domain names that impersonate venue or event sellers.

Key provisions

  • Adds a new MCL section (proposed MCL 445.903j) and amends MCL 445.903 to incorporate the new prohibitions.
  • Defines covered terms:
    • "Entertainment event" — public performance, concert, exhibit, athletic game or contest where the public is invited, an entry fee is charged, and tickets are sold.
    • "Operator" — entity that owns/operates a venue or promotes/produces an event and is the first seller of tickets.
    • Technical definitions for internet domain/subdomain and URL.
  • Prohibits, by persons engaged in trade or commerce, the following related to online ticket sales:
    • Using (without prior authorization) a domain/subdomain in a URL that contains the venue name, event name (including performer name), or a substantially similar name.
    • Using a website (text, images, graphics, design, or address) substantially similar to an operator’s site so as to reasonably mislead consumers about the seller’s identity.
    • Selling a ticket without disclosing the total ticket price (including ancillary fees).
    • Failing to clearly and conspicuously disclose the portion of the total price that is a service charge or surcharge.
    • Displaying any subtotal/fee more prominently or in larger font than the total price.
    • Making false or misleading disclosures about price components.
    • Increasing the total price after the initial display, except when (a) the purchase session has timed out and the consumer has not purchased, (b) increases are due to applicable sales tax, or (c) increases are due to disclosed delivery fees for nonelectronic tickets based on address or selected delivery method.

Who is affected

  • Consumers buying event tickets online (greater price transparency and reduced risk of deception).
  • Ticket sellers and resellers, including secondary‑market platforms and any entity using websites/domains to sell tickets.
  • Event operators/promoters (protections against impersonation and misleading resale sites).
  • Website registrars/hosts only to the extent they facilitate prohibited uses.

Remedies & enforcement

  • The existing MCPA remedies apply: a person who suffers a loss may recover $250 or actual damages (whichever is greater) plus reasonable attorney fees; parties may seek declaratory relief or injunctions.
  • The Attorney General or a prosecuting attorney may seek injunctions and civil fines up to $25,000 for unlawful conduct; willful violation of injunctions may incur fines up to $5,000 per violation.
  • The bill makes technical conforming edits to section 3 of the MCPA.

Fiscal and legal considerations

  • Fiscal impact on state and local governments is indeterminate. Civil fines (if collected) are statutorily routed to public and county law libraries.
  • Applicability caveat: Section 4(1)(a) of the MCPA exempts transactions specifically authorized under laws administered by regulatory boards or officers. Michigan Supreme Court precedent narrows MCPA coverage when the general transaction/activity is otherwise regulated, which could affect enforcement against regulated ticketing businesses depending on the regulatory context.

Procedural timeline (selected)

  • Filed: 3/13/2025 (record shows later bill text dated 7/29/2025)
  • Passed House: 9/9/2025 (roll call 103–1), given immediate effect
  • Referred to Senate Committee on Finance, Insurance, and Consumer Protection: 9/11/2025

Relevant citations: amends MCL 445.903 and adds proposed MCL 445.903j.

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

Sign in to ask a question.