Pennsylvania House Bill HB2383

Pennsylvania 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/15/26
• Refer: 4/15/26

Caption

Further providing for definitions; and providing for petroleum product price gouging prohibited.

Summary

HB2383 would amend Pennsylvania’s Price Gouging Act to add specific rules for petroleum products and related businesses. It defines a new “market emergency” for petroleum products, covering disruptions such as shortages, severe weather, supply manipulation, power failures, strikes, civil disorder, war, terrorism, or other extraordinary adverse events. It also defines “petroleum product” and “petroleum-related business,” and revises the meaning of “unconscionably excessive” pricing to compare prices against those charged in the ordinary course of business during the seven days before a disaster or market emergency. The bill creates a new prohibition on petroleum product price gouging. During a Governor-declared market emergency, petroleum-related businesses would be barred from selling or offering petroleum products or heating fuel products at an unconscionably excessive price. The bill also prohibits petroleum-related businesses from changing the price of a petroleum product or its derivatives more than once in any 24-hour period. A market emergency would last 30 days unless ended sooner by the Governor, with authority to extend it in additional 30-day periods. The act would take effect 60 days after enactment.

Impact

The bill would expand Pennsylvania’s existing price gouging law by adding petroleum-specific definitions and enforcement standards, and by creating a separate petroleum product price gouging prohibition. It would affect producers, suppliers, wholesalers, distributors, and retail sellers of motor fuel, liquefied petroleum gas, fuel oil, and heating fuel products, especially during declared market emergencies. The measure would also give the Governor explicit authority to declare and extend a petroleum market emergency, which would trigger the new pricing restrictions.

Sentiment

Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes in the provided materials, the bill appears to be framed as a consumer-protection measure aimed at limiting sudden fuel price spikes during emergencies. The sponsors and the structure of the proposal suggest support for stronger oversight of fuel pricing in crisis conditions. No contrary sentiment is documented in the provided record, but the bill’s regulatory approach implies likely interest from both consumer advocates and the petroleum industry.

Contention

The main points of contention would likely center on the scope of the Governor’s emergency-declaration authority, the practical enforceability of the 24-hour price-change limit, and whether the “unconscionably excessive” standard is too vague or too restrictive for a volatile fuel market. Petroleum-related businesses may object that the bill could constrain normal market pricing and inventory management, while supporters would argue that it is needed to prevent exploitation during shortages and disasters. Another likely issue is whether the bill’s definitions are broad enough to cover all relevant fuel products and market disruptions.