WeVote
Log In

Bill

WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SF 4199

Summary of Bill: SF 4199 (2025-2026) – Prohibit Surveillance-Based Price Setting (Minnesota)

Overview

SF 4199 is a Minnesota Senate bill introduced in March 2026 that seeks to prohibit price setting that relies on surveillance or data collection about consumers’ behavior, location, or other sensitive information. The bill’s stated aim is to curb dynamic or individualized pricing practices that adjust prices based on observed consumer data, thereby protecting consumers from potentially discriminatory or exploitative pricing.

  • Session: 2025-2026
  • Jurisdiction: Minnesota
  • Title: Prohibit surveillance-based price setting
  • Introduced: March 9, 2026
  • First Reading / Referral: Referred to Commerce and Consumer Protection
  • Sponsors:
    • Co-sponsor: Lindsey Port
    • Co-sponsor: Erin Maye Quade
    • Co-sponsor: Jen McEwen

Purpose and Intent

  • To prohibit price-setting practices that use surveillance or consumer data to determine the price charged to an individual or a specific group.
  • To promote fair pricing practices and reduce potential inequities arising from data-driven price discrimination.
  • To empower consumers by limiting the ability of businesses to tailor prices based on personal data collected through tracking, analytics, or other surveillance methods.

Key Provisions (Proposed Provisions Likely Included)

While the exact text is not provided here, typical provisions for surveillance-based price setting bans generally include:
- A broad prohibition on dynamic pricing that varies prices based on an individual’s data, including location, device, browsing history, purchase history, and perceived willingness to pay.
- Prohibition on using specific consumer data categories to set or adjust prices.
- Clarifications that the ban applies to all products and services offered by covered entities, including online and offline channels.
- Exemptions (if any) may include:
- Standardized marketing promotions that apply uniformly to a defined group.
- Prices determined by objective, non-personalized factors such as costs, competitor prices, or aggregate market data.
- Compliance and enforcement mechanisms, such as:
- Obligations on businesses to avoid surveillance-based pricing and to maintain records or adopt policies demonstrating compliance.
- Penalties for violations (e.g., fines, civil remedies) and potential enforcement by a state agency (likely the Department of Commerce or a consumer protection agency).
- Definitions for key terms:
- “Surveillance-based price setting”
- “Personal data”
- “Consumer data” and “price discrimination”
- “Commercial establishment” or “covered person” (businesses subject to the law)

Who Would Be Affected

  • Primary targets: Businesses and merchants that set prices using consumer data or surveillance information.
  • Covered entities: Likely includes online retailers, marketplaces, and possibly service providers that engage in price discrimination based on data.
  • Consumers: Indirectly protected by prohibiting discriminatory pricing practices.
  • Exclusions/Exemptions: May affect small businesses or startups if exemptions or compliance thresholds are specified.

Procedural and Timeline Aspects

  • Introduction and First Reading: March 9, 2026.
  • Referral: Commerce and Consumer Protection committee.
  • Next Steps (typical):
    • Committee hearings to discuss, amend, and potentially vote on the bill.
    • Floor consideration by the full chamber (Senate) with potential companion legislation in the House or cross-filed bill.
    • If passed, transmission to the Governor for signature or veto.
  • Effective Date: If enacted, the bill would specify an effective date (often a future date or upon enactment) and any phase-in period for compliance.

Potential Impacts and Considerations

  • Could curb practices such as personalized pricing online, price optimizations based on IP address, device fingerprinting, or paid search auctions tailored to individual users.
  • May affect business models that rely on dynamic pricing for demand management, inventory, or profitability.
  • Could incentivize businesses to rely on non-personalized or transparent pricing strategies.
  • Enforcement and penalties will shape the practical impact on compliance costs and market behavior.

If you can provide the bill’s text or a fiscal note, I can offer a more detailed, line-by-line analysis of provisions, definitions, penalties, exemptions, and estimated fiscal impact.

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

Sign in to ask a question.