Concerning the maximum amount that a transportation network company may retain in relation to the amount paid for transportation services provided through the transportation network company, and, in connection therewith, reducing an appropri...
HB26-1273 would cap the amount a transportation network company (TNC) may keep from a consumer’s fare at 20% for any transportation task. The bill defines key terms such as “consumer fare,” “take amount,” and “take rate,” and specifies that the fare subject to the cap excludes tips, pass-throughs, taxes, airport fees, and payments to a certified driver support organization. It also requires TNCs to pay drivers at least 80% of the consumer fare and to remit pass-through amounts in full to drivers.
The bill also expands disclosure and enforcement requirements under Colorado’s TNC law. TNCs would have to provide annual disclosures to the Division of Labor Standards and Statistics, including sampled data showing fare components and the company’s take rate and take amount. The division’s disclosures would be public records, and complaints against TNCs would be handled through the existing administrative review process. The bill includes a legislative declaration stating that high take rates can contribute to price gouging, reduce driver pay, and shift profits out of Colorado.
In terms of state law impact, the bill amends Colorado Revised Statutes section 8-4-127 and related appeal provisions in section 8-4-111.5, creating a new statutory cap on TNC retention and driver fees. It also makes a small general fund appropriation reduction to the Department of Labor and Employment to reflect implementation costs. If enacted, it would directly affect ride-hailing platforms, drivers, consumers, and the Division of Labor Standards and Statistics.
The general sentiment reflected in the bill text is strongly supportive of drivers and consumers and skeptical of TNC pricing practices. The legislative declaration frames the measure as a response to hidden algorithms, low driver pay, and allegedly excessive corporate take rates. The bill’s stated purpose is to prevent price gouging and ensure fair treatment for both drivers and riders.
The main point of contention is the proposed 20% cap itself, which would significantly limit how much TNCs can retain and may constrain their pricing and fee structures. The bill anticipates opposition by emphasizing that TNCs are not subject to the same rate-setting or employment rules as common carriers and by directing broad interpretation of the new cap. No committee transcript or vote record was provided, but the last action was a Senate committee postponement indefinitely, indicating the bill did not advance in that chamber.
The bill would amend Colorado’s wage and labor statutes governing transportation network companies by imposing a hard 20% ceiling on the amount a TNC may retain from a consumer fare and by requiring at least 80% of the fare to be paid to the driver. It would also require more detailed annual reporting to the Division of Labor Standards and Statistics, make those disclosures public, and route complaints and appeals through the existing administrative review framework. In addition, it reduces a related general fund appropriation and associated FTE for implementation.
The bill’s tone and stated findings are strongly pro-driver and pro-consumer, with the General Assembly’s declaration portraying current TNC practices as opaque and potentially exploitative. The measure is framed as a response to rising fares, low driver compensation, and excessive corporate take rates. Because no committee discussion or vote details were provided, the only procedural signal is the Senate committee’s postponement indefinitely, suggesting the bill faced resistance or lack of support in committee.
The central controversy is whether the state should impose a statutory cap on TNC take rates and fee structures. Supporters, as reflected in the bill text, argue that high take rates amount to price gouging, suppress driver earnings, and move profits out of Colorado. Likely opponents would be TNCs and those concerned about regulatory overreach, reduced platform flexibility, or unintended effects on fares, service availability, and business operations. The bill also raises potential disputes over how to calculate consumer fare, pass-throughs, taxes, airport fees, and driver support organization payments.