Stop AI Price Gouging and Wage Fixing Act (H.R.4640) — prohibiting surveillance-based price setting and wage setting, while stating it neither preempts state law nor touches collective bargaining
A House bill prohibiting the setting of prices or wages on the basis of individual surveillance data. Price differences based on cost, discounts for broadly defined groups, and loyalty programmes a consumer affirmatively joined fall outside the prohibition where conditions such as disclosure and uniform availability are met. The text states it does not preempt state law and does not diminish collective bargaining rights.
Bill overview (primary data)
- Bill numberH.R. 4640
- TypeHouse Bill
- Congress119th Congress
- Latest actionReferred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on the Judiciary, and Education and Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.（2025-07-23）
Key points
- Prohibits surveillance-based price setting and surveillance-based wage setting in separate sections drafted the same way.
- Cost-based differences, discounts for broadly defined groups, and loyalty programmes joined affirmatively fall outside, subject to conditions.
- The conditions are clear disclosure of criteria, uniform availability to all who meet them, and no other use of surveillance data.
- Section 4 states the Act does not preempt state law and that stronger state protections do not conflict.
- Section 5 states collective bargaining rights are not diminished and the provisions are a minimum standard.
- Surveillance-based pricing and wage setting are prohibited in the same form, since regulating one moves it to the other.
1Prices and wages handled in the same structure
The bill prohibits surveillance-based price setting and surveillance-based wage setting in separate sections drafted in the same form. What is charged to a buyer and what is paid to a worker are set side by side as one problem.
Gathering individual conduct and attributes and varying terms person by person works the same way on a consumer and on a worker. Regulate one and the practice moves to the other. Placing the two together states that judgment.
2The exclusions carry three conditions
Three situations fall outside the prohibition, each with conditions layered on: that eligibility criteria are clearly and conspicuously disclosed, that any discount is offered uniformly to everyone meeting those criteria, and that surveillance data is used solely to offer and administer the discount and not for profiling, targeted advertising or individualised price setting.
Further, not later than 180 days before engaging in any of them, procedures including a process for ensuring data accuracy must be made publicly available. The drafting closes the route by which taking the form of a discount would become an exception.
3State law and collective bargaining protected explicitly
Section 4 provides that the Act does not preempt state law and that a state law providing additional protections does not conflict with it. It answers head-on the concern that a federal statute nullifies state regulation.
Section 5 provides that collective bargaining rights are not diminished and that the provisions are a minimum standard, leaving labour organisations and employers free to agree stronger protections. Of the 114 AI-related bills this site holds as of 2026-09-01, among the 44 not yet covered, this is the only one whose title begins with prohibit.
It carried 40 cosponsors as of 2026-09-01, high among the records this site holds as of 2026-09-01.
4Buyers and workers handled in the same form
The bill prohibits surveillance-based pricing and surveillance-based wage setting in separate sections written in the same form. Placing them side by side is itself the bill's reading of the problem.
The exclusions are layered threefold as well: eligibility criteria disclosed clearly and conspicuously, the discount offered uniformly to everyone meeting them, and surveillance data used solely to offer and operate the discount. It is written to close the escape route of calling something a discount to fall outside the prohibition.
Why it matters
Varying terms person by person rests on the same technology whether the output is a consumer price or a wage. Prohibiting both together is an attempt to capture that commonality institutionally. The three layered conditions on the exclusions make how to treat personalisation dressed as a discount the practical question.
FAQ
Why treat prices and wages together?
Would membership discounts end?
What happens to state regulation?
Sources (primary)
Source: Congress.gov (Library of Congress; U.S. legislative materials, public domain). Links go to the official site.
- Congress.gov (bill page, original)
- H.R. 4640（119th Congress）