Your browsing history could change the price you see
The FTC wants companies to disclose when personal data shapes a price. Its draft policy does not prohibit all personalization.
On August 19, the US Federal Trade Commission proposed an enforcement policy for companies that use personal data to set the price offered to each consumer. The draft says concealing that personalization is likely to violate Section 5 of the FTC Act when shoppers reasonably expect a widely available price.¹ ²
The proposal is still open for comment and is not a final rule. The FTC acknowledges that Congress has not authorized it to prohibit personalized pricing in every circumstance. It plans to apply existing law to deceptive representations, material omissions, unfair data practices, and collection without adequate consent.² Comments are due September 18, 2026.³
That limit defines the policy's reach. Businesses would not have to offer everyone the same price in every market. Where a common price is reasonably expected, a seller would need to disclose that the amount was personalized, explain the basis for that decision, and identify the types of data involved.²
From cursor movement to a shopping profile
The FTC had already been studying the infrastructure behind those decisions. In January 2025, its staff published preliminary findings from a Section 6(b) inquiry based on documents supplied by six technology and consulting intermediaries: Mastercard, Revionics, Bloomreach, PROS, Accenture, and McKinsey.⁴
The systems covered a wide range of uses. Some managed prices by store and market. Others supported individual segmentation, promotions, product ranking, and pricing recommendations. That range matters because a marketing tool is not automatically evidence that a retailer charged a particular shopper more.⁴
Observed inputs included IP address, device type, browser, language, and transaction history. Web pixels could record how far someone scrolled, which product name the mouse highlighted, how much of a video they watched, and how quickly they left after clicking an email. An abandoned cart or sorting products from low to high could inform estimates of purchase intent and price sensitivity.⁴ ⁵
Profiles could also incorporate account registration, email address, prior purchases, and loyalty platforms. Reservation systems, customer support, review sites, and data brokers appeared as outside sources. A cookie or checkout email could connect activity across devices, apps, and store kiosks.⁴
The intermediaries studied worked with at least 250 clients in sectors ranging from groceries to apparel.⁵ That figure describes the reviewed documents. It does not measure how much of US retail uses personalized pricing or how many shoppers paid more. The staff report is preliminary and aggregated to protect confidential business information; it explicitly makes no finding that any company acted illegally.⁴
A price, a promotion, and the order of the shelf
The same profile can influence different outputs. A retailer may change the displayed price, reserve a coupon for infrequent buyers, or reorder search results to put more expensive products first. The report gives a hypothetical example of a consumer profiled as a new parent seeing higher-priced baby thermometers at the top of a search.⁵ It illustrates capability without accusing a named retailer of using that scenario.
The 2026 draft centers on what the seller led the shopper to expect. A price presented as static may mislead when it secretly varies with an estimate of one person's willingness to pay. A “special offer” may also deceive if it claims to reward loyalty while the system actually raises the price based on disposable income or purchases from other businesses.²
Coupons and loyalty programs are judged by what they promise and deliver. An informed member receiving a genuine discount presents a different case from a personal surcharge hidden behind the word “benefit.” The FTC also distinguishes individualized pricing from broad changes caused by supply, demand, taxes, local market conditions, or time. Insurance and credit already use personal characteristics in sectors with their own rules.²
Disclosure and consent have to follow the data
Under the draft, a bare “personalized price” label would not be enough. The disclosure should cover the reason for personalization and the categories of data used. The FTC also says that collecting, using, or sharing personal information for pricing without adequate notice or consent may violate Section 5. Companies buying data would need to verify that the consumer consented to that specific use.²
One issue remains open: the Commission takes no position in this statement on whether a fully disclosed personalized price could still be unfair.² The document describes enforcement priorities. Any case would still turn on its facts, the consumer's reasonable expectation, and the applicable law.
The FTC's announcement mentions a VPN or private browsing as measures an informed shopper might try.¹ They cover only some of the signals in the study. A VPN changes the apparent IP address, while a private window limits persistent local data from that session. A login, email address, purchase history, or loyalty profile can still connect the visit to earlier information.⁴ Neither tool guarantees a neutral price.
Shoppers want a simpler rule
Discussion of the proposal included support for transparency, calls for a broader ban, and distrust of disclosures buried in terms. Some commenters also conflated personalized pricing with ordinary changes over time.⁷ In privacy forums, users ask how to shed a shopping profile and compare incognito mode, VPNs, devices, and price checks.⁸
Those conversations show how hard it is for a shopper to audit a system that merges several data sources. They do not establish that a particular store charged more or prove that a suggested technical workaround works.
Sources
- FTC seeks comment on enforcement policy statement regarding personalized pricing · Federal Trade Commission · https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2026/08/ftc-seeks-comment-enforcement-policy-statement-regarding-personalized-pricing · Aug. 19, 2026
- Proposed Enforcement Policy Statement Regarding Personalized Pricing · Federal Trade Commission · https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/p034101-ftc-enforcement-policy-statement-re-personalized-pricing-proposed-for-public-comment.pdf · Aug. 19, 2026
Show 6 more sourcesHide sources
- Public comment docket FTC-2026-1057-0001 · Federal Trade Commission · https://www.ftc.gov/policy/public-comments/federal-trade-commissions-proposed-enforcement-policy-statement-regarding-personalized-pricing · accessed Aug. 26, 2026
- Surveillance Pricing 6(b) Study: Research Summaries · Federal Trade Commission staff · https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/p246202_surveillancepricing6bstudy_researchsummaries_redacted.pdf · Jan. 2025
- FTC surveillance pricing study indicates wide range of personal data used · Federal Trade Commission · https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2025/01/ftc-surveillance-pricing-study-indicates-wide-range-personal-data-used-set-individualized-consumer · Jan. 17, 2025
- FTC proposal would require retailers to be transparent about personalized pricing · Associated Press · https://apnews.com/article/daa65642d74dc7521da0ab010820f373 · Aug. 19, 2026
- Discussion of the FTC proposal · r/news · https://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/1vtv8ag/ftc_proposal_would_require_retailers_to_be/ · Aug. 2026
- Discussion of profiles used in digital pricing · r/privacy · https://www.reddit.com/r/privacy/comments/1v6ov3f/digital_pricing_how_to_stop_feeding_the_profile/ · July 2026
— Acta Verum newsroom