Consumer protection: unfair trade practices; disclosure of automatic renewal provisions in consumer contracts; require. Amends 1976 PA 331 (MCL 445.901 - 445.922) by adding sec. 3j. TIE BAR WITH: HB 4827'25
HB 4826 would amend the Michigan Consumer Protection Act to create new disclosure and cancellation rules for consumer contracts that automatically renew. The bill requires businesses that sell or lease goods or services under an automatic-renewal contract to clearly disclose, in at least 14-point type, that the contract renews automatically, the length of the initial and renewal terms, pricing details including promotional rates and post-trial charges, any changing terms, the cancellation procedure, the deadline to cancel, and a practical cancellation contact method.
The bill also limits automatic renewals for contracts longer than two months unless the consumer receives electronic notice 30 to 60 days before the cancellation deadline. That notice must repeat key renewal and cancellation information and give the consumer at least 30 days to cancel. In addition, businesses must send periodic electronic reminders: every six months for most services, and annually for certain equipment-related services used outside the consumer’s home. The bill prohibits cancellation fees or penalties, requires an easy-to-use cancellation mechanism with prompt confirmation, and makes contracts that violate the section voidable by the consumer. It applies only to contracts entered into, renewed, extended, or modified after the effective date and excludes certain insurance-related contracts, pro rata cancellable contracts, and telephone, wireless, and broadband services regulated by the Michigan Public Service Commission.
If enacted, the bill would add a new section to the Michigan Consumer Protection Act and impose specific marketing, disclosure, notice, and cancellation obligations on businesses that use automatic-renewal provisions in consumer contracts. It would affect a broad range of sellers and service providers, while carving out regulated insurance contracts, certain service contracts, and PSC-regulated telecom and broadband providers. Consumers would gain stronger rights to understand renewal terms, cancel more easily, and avoid surprise charges or penalties.
The available context shows no recorded committee discussion or votes, so there is no direct evidence of support or opposition in the materials provided. Based on the bill text, the measure appears consumer-protection oriented and likely intended to address confusion around subscription renewals, trial offers, and recurring charges. The overall framing suggests a favorable policy goal of improving transparency and consumer control.
The main points of potential contention are the compliance burdens on businesses and the scope of the required notices and cancellation systems. Businesses that rely on subscriptions, memberships, or trial-to-paid conversions may object to the 14-point disclosure requirement, recurring reminder notices, and the mandate for an easy-to-use cancellation mechanism. Another likely issue is the bill’s coverage and exemptions, especially the exclusion for PSC-regulated telephone, wireless, and broadband services and the carve-outs for insurance-related contracts and pro rata refundable contracts.