HB 2299 would create a new consumer-fraud-related prohibition governing how businesses advertise and display prices for goods and services in Arizona. It requires advertised prices to include all mandatory fees or charges, and it requires sellers to provide a clear refund process on receipts, including whether the full amount paid may be refunded and the applicable timeframe. The bill also defines “mandatory fees or charges” broadly, while excluding government-imposed taxes.
The bill further adds two major pricing restrictions. First, if the governor declares a state of emergency, prices for goods or services could not increase by more than 10 percent above the price immediately before the emergency declaration. Second, businesses would be prohibited from using digital shelf labels, including digital price tags or similar remote-update technology. Violations would be treated as unlawful practices under Arizona’s consumer fraud laws, allowing the attorney general to investigate, seek injunctive relief, and impose civil penalties of up to $5,000.
Impact
HB 2299 would amend Title 44, Chapter 10, Article 7 of the Arizona Revised Statutes by adding a new section on pricing practices and consumer fraud. It would expand the attorney general’s enforcement authority over pricing disclosures and emergency-period price increases, and it would create a new civil penalty framework for violations. The measure would directly affect retailers, service providers, and any business that advertises or displays prices in Arizona, especially those using digital pricing systems or charging mandatory add-on fees.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the limited available legislative history, the measure appears to be framed as a consumer-protection and anti-price-gouging proposal. There are no recorded committee transcripts or votes in the provided materials, so there is no documented public debate to gauge support or opposition. The bill’s sponsors suggest an intent to increase price transparency and limit rapid price changes during emergencies.
Contention
The most likely points of contention are the breadth of the pricing restrictions and their practical effect on businesses. Retailers may object to the ban on digital shelf labels because such systems are commonly used to update prices efficiently and reduce labor costs. Businesses may also challenge the emergency-period 10 percent cap as a rigid price-control measure that could interfere with normal market adjustments, supply-chain fluctuations, or seasonal pricing. Consumer advocates, by contrast, would likely support the mandatory-fee disclosure and refund transparency provisions as protections against hidden charges and confusing pricing practices.