The Federal Trade Commission has ordered nine companies, including Walmart and Target, to provide information on how they use personal data to set prices, expanding a broader investigation into what regulators call surveillance pricing. The orders were also sent to several airline companies, ride-sharing firms, and food delivery entities.
The 15-page orders require the companies to detail whether pricing for a ticket, ride share, food delivery, or other product or service varies from one person to the next based on analysis of personal data, including data processed with artificial intelligence. They also ask how companies adjust or set compensation based on personal information, and how prices can vary based on factors such as loyalty programs, which the FTC said could be used to estimate what individual consumers are willing to pay.
What the FTC is demanding
We intend to scrutinize the opaque methodology that some companies in these industries may be using to determine how much consumers pay or how much gig workers are paid for the same product or service, FTC Chairman Andrew Ferguson said in a statement. Consumers deserve to know whether companies use their web surfing habits or other personal data to estimate the highest price they can charge each consumer. Workers also deserve to know if their compensation is affected by how companies use their personal data.
Recipients have 45 days from receipt of the orders to respond, and the FTC said it has the power to compel compliance in federal court if needed. Walmart did not immediately respond to a request for comment; the retailer has spent the past month publicly defending itself against allegations of personalized pricing, including concerns about how digital price tags on store shelves could play a role. Target directed questions to a fact sheet it published earlier this month, which states that Target does not use personal information to raise prices for guests based on who they are, where they live, or when they shop. The sheet notes that Target prices can vary based on factors such as local costs, pricing regulations, and competition, and says the Target Circle loyalty program uses shopping history to surface deals and offers that help guests save, not to raise their prices.
Growing regulatory pressure on pricing algorithms
The orders come amid a widening federal effort to examine algorithmic pricing. The FTC in August began seeking public comment on personalized pricing, and earlier this week the agency joined 20 US states in suing Dollar General over what it alleges are deceptive pricing practices. Congressional pressure has also been building: a House Energy and Commerce Committee ranking member launched a surveillance pricing inquiry in May, sending letters to 25 companies including Target and Walmart.
The distinction the FTC is drawing matters for retailers and brands. Regulators are not objecting to dynamic pricing in general, which adjusts prices in response to market conditions, inventory, or demand. The focus is on personalized pricing, where the price shown to a consumer is set using that individual's data, including browsing history, location, shopping habits, or device type. The agency has warned that machine learning has made it cheaper and easier for companies to collect and process large volumes of personal data for such purposes, and that consumers often have no way of knowing the price they see has been shaped by what the company knows about them.
What businesses should watch
For retailers, brands, and the marketing technology vendors that serve them, the investigation carries practical compliance implications. Companies that run loyalty programs, personalized offers, or AI-assisted pricing should be prepared to document exactly what data feeds into pricing decisions and how loyalty data is used, since the FTC is explicitly asking how program data may influence price. The line between personalization that lowers prices for shoppers and personalization that raises them is central to the inquiry, and marketing teams should make sure their pricing and offer systems can demonstrate which side of that line they sit on. The 45-day response clock also suggests the agency expects companies to move quickly on data inventories, meaning pricing, data, and legal teams should align on their answer now rather than after a notice arrives.
The broader signal is that pricing algorithms are becoming a regulated area of commerce. As AI makes personalized pricing cheaper to deploy, the FTC is signaling that it will treat the practice as a consumer protection issue, not just a pricing strategy, and the nine orders issued this week are likely the opening phase of a longer examination.
The agency's authority for the action comes from its 6(b) powers, which allow the FTC to require companies to file special reports on how they use detailed consumer data. The FTC first used that authority to open a study of surveillance pricing practices in 2024, citing media reports that a growing number of grocery stores and retailers were using algorithms to set targeted prices. Its proposed enforcement policy statement on personalized pricing, released for public comment in August, warned that personalized pricing runs contrary to longstanding marketplace practice in categories where consumers reasonably expect uniform or posted prices. The orders issued this week operationalize that policy, moving from comment-gathering to information-gathering against named companies, and the inclusion of gig economy and airline players signals the agency's focus on any market where personal data can influence what individuals pay or earn.
