Consumer-protection rules tighten

The Federal Trade Commission is reopening two fronts in consumer protection at once: harder-to-hide fees on grocery delivery apps and easier-to-exit subscriptions. (ftc.gov) On April 14, the FTC said it is seeking public comment on whether it should write a rule for unfair or deceptive fees in online food and grocery delivery, with comments due by May 18. The agency’s notice says it is examining fees and charges tied to food and grocery items ordered through online platforms. (ftc.gov) A month earlier, on March 11, the FTC opened a separate comment process on its Negative Option Rule, the rulebook for automatic renewals, free trials, and other recurring-payment offers. The agency asked whether amendments are needed to stop consumers from getting stuck in recurring charges and to let them cancel without “unwarranted obstacles.” (ftc.gov) The subscription fight centers on “click to cancel,” shorthand for a simple idea: if a company lets you sign up online in a few steps, it should not force you through a longer maze to leave. That standard was part of the FTC’s 2024 final rule on recurring subscriptions and other negative-option programs. (ftc.gov) EPIC, the Electronic Privacy Information Center, said on April 22 that it joined a coalition comment urging the FTC to move quickly toward a “robust” click-to-cancel rule across industries. EPIC said the filing responds to the FTC’s March request for comment on possible amendments to the older Negative Option Rule. (epic.org) The grocery-fee track grew out of enforcement cases as much as rulemaking. FoodNavigator reported this week that the FTC’s push follows settlements or cases involving Instacart, Grubhub, Walmart, and Amazon over pricing, refunds, subscriptions, or fee disclosures on delivery services. (foodnavigator-usa.com) The FTC’s own record is more specific on some of those cases. In December 2025, Instacart agreed to pay $60 million in refunds to settle allegations that it used deceptive tactics, including false advertising, refund failures, and unlawful subscription enrollment processes. (ftc.gov) Amazon settled the FTC’s Prime case in September 2025 for $2.5 billion, and the agency said the company had used confusing interfaces to enroll consumers and made cancellation difficult. Amazon did not admit wrongdoing in the stipulated order, but the settlement locked in refunds and injunctive terms that put subscription design under federal scrutiny. (ftc.gov) Business groups are pushing back on how far the FTC should go. The Association of National Advertisers said last week that the agency should avoid mandating “easy” cancellation tools in a way that overrides legitimate retention efforts. (mediapost.com) For companies that sell memberships, auto-renew plans, or app-based delivery, the immediate task is less abstract than a Washington rulemaking docket. The FTC is asking detailed questions about how prices are shown, when fees appear, how refunds work, and how many steps it takes to cancel, and those answers now sit closer to product design than to legal fine print. (ftc.gov)