The Opposite of Retail Therapy: Hidden Fees and Online Shopping Hell

In 2024, California passed a law banning hidden fees, and the Federal Trade Commission finalized a similar new rule in 2025, targeting unfair and deceptive fees. These laws aim to benefit consumers and enhance competition by increasing pricing transparency. However, they fail to adequately address variable fees, putting some businesses between a rock and a hard place as they are forced to choose between advertising a misleading price or not advertising an initial price at all, leaving some consumers with less accurate information than they would have had before the enactment of the law. These laws also vary significantly in scope: while the FTC rule applies only to two specific industries, California’s drip pricing law applies broadly—to almost every business that advertises prices to consumers. Additionally, the commercial disclosure requirements of these laws risk violating the First Amendment right to free speech. This article explores the implications of these laws for businesses that incorporate variable fees in pricing, the ways these laws may conflict with the First Amendment right to free speech, and how lawmakers may modify drip pricing regulations to adapt to these issues while encouraging accurate communication of prices.

Publication Details

Journal
eYLS (Yale Law School)
Published
2025-03-01
Primary Topic
Magnetic confinement fusion research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Opposite of Retail Therapy: Hidden Fees and Online Shopping Hell

eYLS (Yale Law School)
Magnetic confinement fusion research
article

The Opposite of Retail Therapy: Hidden Fees and Online Shopping Hell

article en

Abstract

In 2024, California passed a law banning hidden fees, and the Federal Trade Commission finalized a similar new rule in 2025, targeting unfair and deceptive fees. These laws aim to benefit consumers and enhance competition by increasing pricing transparency. However, they fail to adequately address variable fees, putting some businesses between a rock and a hard place as they are forced to choose between advertising a misleading price or not advertising an initial price at all, leaving some consumers with less accurate information than they would have had before the enactment of the law. These laws also vary significantly in scope: while the FTC rule applies only to two specific industries, California’s drip pricing law applies broadly—to almost every business that advertises prices to consumers. Additionally, the commercial disclosure requirements of these laws risk violating the First Amendment right to free speech. This article explores the implications of these laws for businesses that incorporate variable fees in pricing, the ways these laws may conflict with the First Amendment right to free speech, and how lawmakers may modify drip pricing regulations to adapt to these issues while encouraging accurate communication of prices.

eYLS (Yale Law School)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 62%
Magnetic confinement fusion research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.