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

Authors

Claire Hiegel

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.

First Page

132

Recommended Citation

Claire Hiegel, The Opposite of Retail Therapy: Hidden Fees and Online Shopping Hell, 9 Bus. Entrepreneurship & Tax L. Rev. 132 (2025).
Available at: https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/betr/vol9/iss1/8