A09396, the “Protecting Consumers and Jobs from Discriminatory Pricing Act,” would amend New York’s General Business Law to restrict how prices are displayed and set in certain retail settings. The bill focuses on food retail establishments and drug retail establishments, prohibiting the use of electronic shelving labels and other digital shelf display technology in those stores and requiring a non-digital presentation of price instead. It also bars those retailers from engaging in “surveillance pricing,” defined as algorithmic pricing that uses consumer data to offer different prices for the same goods or services, while preserving bona fide discounts and certain loyalty- or membership-based custom discounts.
The bill further prohibits food and drug retailers from using protected class data in pricing, marketing, or selling goods or services when that data is used to deny benefits or to charge different prices based on characteristics such as age, disability, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion, national origin, and reproductive health care status. It includes definitions for algorithms, consumer data, dynamic pricing, electronic shelving labels, and various retail categories, and it exempts financial institutions and insurers from its coverage. Enforcement would be handled by the Attorney General through special proceedings for injunctive relief, with civil penalties of up to $10,000 per violation per day, and penalties would be deposited into a dedicated consumer and worker protection fund.
If enacted, the bill would create a new section 349-a-1 in the General Business Law and significantly expand state consumer-protection rules around algorithmic pricing and digital price displays. It would directly affect grocery stores, supermarkets, pharmacies, and drug retailers operating in New York, while also shaping how retailers use customer data, loyalty programs, and electronic pricing systems. The measure is drafted to take effect immediately and to be construed broadly to maximize its reach.
The general sentiment reflected in the available history is favorable. The Assembly Consumer Affairs and Protection Committee advanced the bill by an 11-1 vote, suggesting substantial support for the bill’s consumer-protection goals and its stated concern about discriminatory pricing and job impacts. The bill text itself frames the issue as both a privacy and labor matter, arguing that algorithmic and surveillance pricing can harm consumers, undermine competition, and threaten jobs.
The main points of contention are likely to center on the breadth of the restrictions and the operational burden on retailers. Critics may question the ban on electronic shelving labels in covered stores, the limits on dynamic pricing, and the scope of the protected-class pricing prohibition, while supporters are likely to emphasize fairness, privacy, and anti-discrimination concerns. The bill’s exceptions for bona fide discounts, loyalty programs, and certain self-identified groups appear designed to address some of those concerns, but the line between permissible discounts and prohibited surveillance pricing remains a likely area of dispute.
The bill would add a new consumer-protection provision to New York’s General Business Law that regulates pricing practices in food retail and drug retail establishments. It would prohibit electronic shelving labels and other digital shelf display technology in those stores, ban surveillance pricing and the use of protected class data in pricing decisions, and authorize Attorney General enforcement with injunctive relief and civil penalties. It would also create a dedicated consumer and worker protection fund to receive penalty revenue, while leaving existing criminal and civil liability intact and expressly exempting financial institutions and insurers.
The available voting history indicates generally favorable sentiment toward the bill, with the Assembly Consumer Affairs and Protection Committee reporting it out 11-1. The bill’s findings and structure suggest a strong pro-consumer, anti-discrimination rationale, and the committee action implies broad support for that approach. At the same time, the narrow committee dissent and the bill’s extensive restrictions suggest that some lawmakers may have concerns about implementation, retailer flexibility, and the effect on pricing technology.
The most notable contention is between consumer advocates who support banning surveillance pricing and digital shelf pricing in essential retail settings, and opponents or skeptics who may view the bill as overly restrictive or difficult to administer. Retailers are likely to object to the prohibition on ESLs and the limits on algorithmic pricing, especially where they rely on dynamic pricing, loyalty discounts, or data-driven promotions. Another likely point of dispute is the bill’s broad definition of protected class data and whether the pricing restrictions could inadvertently limit legitimate marketing or discounting practices.