HB1024 amends Oklahoma’s Unfair Sales Act, which governs below-cost sales and other pricing practices that may be considered unfair competition. The bill revises statutory definitions in 15 O.S. 2021, Section 598.2, including the meaning of “cost to the retailer,” “cost to the wholesaler,” “replacement cost,” and the treatment of bundled or promotional sales. It also adds a new definition for “unreasonably low profit margin,” describing a pricing practice where a seller sets a price above cost but with the intent or effect of eliminating competition within a reasonable geographic area.
The bill further amends Section 598.3 to make clear that sales at less than cost or at an unreasonably low profit margin, when done with the intent to induce purchases of other merchandise, divert trade, or injure competitors, are contrary to public policy and may constitute unfair competition. The act is set to take effect November 1, 2025.
Impact
HB1024 would update the legal standards used to evaluate pricing practices by retailers and wholesalers under Oklahoma’s Unfair Sales Act. It expands the statute beyond traditional below-cost sales by expressly addressing pricing at an “unreasonably low profit margin,” which could broaden the range of conduct subject to enforcement or litigation. Retailers, wholesalers, and businesses using promotional pricing, bundled offers, or aggressive competitive pricing strategies would be the primary parties affected.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests broad support for the bill. It advanced unanimously out of the House Business Committee and the House Commerce and Economic Development Oversight Committee, and it passed the House on third reading by a wide margin of 89-3. No committee transcript is available, so the record does not show detailed debate, but the votes indicate the measure was generally viewed favorably by lawmakers.
Contention
The main policy issue appears to be how far the state should go in regulating competitive pricing. Supporters likely viewed the bill as a modernization of the Unfair Sales Act to address predatory pricing and protect fair competition, while potential critics may have been concerned that the new “unreasonably low profit margin” standard could be vague or could chill legitimate discounts, promotions, or loss-leader pricing. The bill text does not identify specific opponents, but the narrow dissent on final passage suggests some concern remained about the scope of the new pricing restriction.