Compass Lexecon Experts Submit Comments on the FTC's Proposed Enforcement Policy Statement Regarding Personalized Pricing

The FTC released the proposed statement on August 19, 2026, inviting public comment. If adopted, the proposed statement would clarify the Commission's interpretation of Section 5 of the FTC Act and its intended enforcement approach toward businesses that collect and use consumers’ personal data to set individualized prices. It signals that failing to disclose that the price is personalized, what the basis for the personalization is, and the types of data on which the personalization is based, may violate the FTC Act’s prohibition of deceptive or unfair practices.

The two comments are as follows:

Personalized Pricing: Distinguishing Economic Effects from Consumer Protection Concerns

By Sencer Ecer and Mehmet Ekmekci

Sencer Ecer is a Senior Vice President at Compass Lexecon in Washington, DC, and Mehmet Ekmekci is a Professor at Boston College and a Senior Consultant at Compass Lexecon.

This comment examines the economic trade-off between expanding market output and preserving consumer surplus, and the implications of the proposed disclosure requirement. As personalized pricing is not a single economic phenomenon with a uniform welfare consequence, the effects of proposed policy depend on the source of the price differential, the competitive environment, and the mechanism of price determination. Disclosure is economically consequential if it can inform the consumer about the nature of the pricing mechanism that they face. The authors also discuss the potential longer-term economic consequences of widespread personalized pricing and offer recommendations for incorporating these economic considerations into the FTC’s proposed framework.

Disclosure Only Works If Consumers Are Empowered to Act on It

By Ori Heffetz

Ori Heffetz is a Professor at Cornell SC Johnson College of Business and The Hebrew University of Jerusalem and a Senior Consultant at Compass Lexecon.

This comment focuses on the behavioral and informational conditions necessary for the disclosure requirement suggested in the proposed enforcement policy statement to achieve its intended purpose. Whether disclosure changes consumer behavior in a way that improves welfare depends on what consumers believe a personalized price to mean, and on whether disclosure successfully conveys the information they need to make informed decisions. Both are empirical questions that the Commission is well positioned to study. Drawing on his research on consumer decision making and public communication, Professor Heffetz highlights tangible trade-off-relevant information as one of the key design elements to consider for effective guidance on disclosure.

The views expressed in these comments are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of Compass Lexecon or its clients.