Consumer protection: unfair trade practices; violation under Michigan consumer protection act for certain violations under the shopping reform and modernization act; provide for. Amends sec. 3 of 1976 PA 331 (MCL 445.903). TIE BAR WITH: SB 0992'26

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Rosemary Bayer and 4 co-sponsors

Michigan CMPA will treat Shopping Reform and Modernization Act violations as unfair or deceptive trade practices, enabling stronger enforcement.

REFERRED TO COMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

#consumerprotection:other #consumerprotection:unfairtradepractices

Summary of SB 993 (2025-2026) – Michigan

Purpose and intent

SB 993 amends the Michigan Consumer Protection Act (CMPA) to address violations related to the Shopping Reform and Modernization Act, clarifying that certain violations under the Shopping Reform and Modernization Act constitute unfair trade practices under the CMPA.

The bill ties together consumer protection enforcement with shopping reform provisions, aiming to strengthen remedies for consumers against practices deemed unfair or deceptive in the context of shopping reforms.

Key provisions and changes

Amends Section 3 of 1976 Public Act 331 (MCL 445.903) to incorporate or reference violations under the Shopping Reform and Modernization Act as violations of the CMPA.

Enables the Michigan Attorney General and private plaintiffs under the CMPA to pursue enforcement or remedies for violations that arise under the Shopping Reform and Modernization Act, where those violations meet the CMPA standard for “unfair, unconscionable, or deceptive acts or practices.”

Establishes alignment between shopping reforms (pertaining to consumer transactions, disclosures, protections, or modernization efforts within the shopping framework) and traditional CMPA enforcement tools, potentially broadening the scope of enforcement for shopping-related conduct.

The bill is presented as a tie-bar with SB 992/26, indicating related or concurrent consideration, likely sharing the same policy goals or related regulatory changes.

Who is affected

Consumers: potential benefit from strengthened protections and remedies for deceptive or unfair shopping practices.

Businesses and merchants: subject to enhanced CMPA enforcement for practices that fall under the Shopping Reform and Modernization Act, including disclosures, marketing practices, or other shopping-related conduct that could be deemed unfair or deceptive.

State enforcement and judiciary: increased scope of CMPA enforcement authority to address violations tied to shopping reform provisions.

Procedural and timeline aspects

Action History:

Introduced: May 20, 2026, by Senator John Cherry.
Referred to: Committee on Economic and Community Development (May 20, 2026).

The bill is a tie-bar with SB 0992/26, suggesting concurrent consideration and potentially coordinated passage if both bills move forward together.

As of the latest action, the bill is in the committee stage, with no further enacted provisions or dates specified in the summary.

Potential impact and considerations

The harmonization of CMPA protections with shopping reform provisions could:

Increase accountability for businesses engaging in shopping-related practices that could mislead or harm consumers.
Expand the range of conduct that can be challenged under Michigan’s consumer protection framework.
Influence compliance strategies for businesses by clarifying that certain shopping reform provisions are enforceable under CMPA standards.

Stakeholders may seek to assess:

The specific definitions of “unfair,” “unconscionable,” and “deceptive” acts as applied to Shopping Reform and Modernization Act provisions.
Any thresholds, remedies, or penalties that accompany CMPA enforcement in this context (e.g., civil fines, injunctions, restitution, attorney fees).

Note: This summary reflects the bill’s stated scope and procedural status based on the available information. For precise language, definitions, and enacted provisions, reviewing the bill text and amendments as it proceeds through committee and floor action is recommended.