Food and beverage service establishments exempted from mandatory fee advertisement requirement.
Summary
HF2676 amends Minnesota’s deceptive trade practices law governing price advertising to create a specific exemption for food and beverage service establishments, including hotels, from the state’s mandatory fee advertisement requirement. Under current law, advertised prices generally must include all mandatory fees or surcharges. The bill keeps that general rule in place but adds a carveout for restaurants, bars, cafes, and similar establishments so they are not treated as deceptive for failing to include certain fees in the advertised price, so long as they clearly and conspicuously disclose the percentage of any automatic and mandatory gratuities charged.
The bill also preserves and clarifies several existing compliance pathways and exemptions for other industries, including delivery platforms, shipping charges, auctions, customized services, broadband internet service, and cable-related pricing requirements. It specifically adds food and beverage service establishments to the list of entities exempt from the statute’s fee-in-advertising mandate, alongside motor vehicle dealers, regulated utilities, and settlement services. The measure would amend Minnesota Statutes section 325D.44, subdivisions 1a and 1b, which are part of the state’s deceptive trade practices framework.
Impact
If enacted, the bill would narrow the reach of Minnesota’s mandatory all-in pricing rule by exempting food and beverage service establishments from the requirement to advertise a single total price that includes all mandatory fees. Instead, those businesses would be allowed to advertise prices without bundling certain charges, provided they disclose mandatory gratuity percentages clearly and conspicuously. This would alter enforcement under Minnesota’s deceptive trade practices law and reduce the risk that restaurants and similar establishments face liability for fee-based pricing disclosures.
Sentiment
The available record shows no committee transcript or recorded vote, so there is no direct evidence of debate or formal support/opposition in the materials provided. Based on the bill text, the measure appears designed to relieve a specific industry from a broader consumer-pricing mandate while retaining disclosure obligations, suggesting a targeted regulatory adjustment rather than a major policy overhaul. The caption and drafting indicate a business-friendly approach focused on food and beverage service establishments.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely to be consumer transparency versus industry flexibility. Supporters would likely argue that restaurants and hotels need an exemption because mandatory service charges and gratuities are common and difficult to fit into a single advertised price. Opponents would likely argue that exempting these establishments weakens price transparency for consumers and could make it harder to compare costs across businesses. The bill’s requirement for clear disclosure of mandatory gratuity percentages appears intended to address that concern, but the extent to which that disclosure is sufficient would likely be the central policy dispute.