TINA.org Continues to Support FTC Efforts to Prohibit Junk Fees

These days, it seems that everywhere you look, there are “junk fees” – those sneaky charges that you didn’t expect and never planned on paying. From live event ticket fees to unexpected hotel costs, Americans are spending billions on junk fees each year.

As part of a multi-pronged effort to address these hidden and misleading fees, the FTC has proposed a rule that would prohibit junk fees. Recently, the FTC requested comments on its proposed rule and as a leader in advocating for consumers and the need to abolish these kinds of charges, TINA.org once again weighed in.

To follow-up on TINA.org’s junk fee comment filed in 2023, in which we supported the FTC’s commencement of a rulemaking proceeding, our 2024 comment filed today showcased the ongoing need for an FTC rule. In the last year alone, TINA.org has published several new ad alerts informing consumers about a variety of junk fees and deceptive pricing issues, and has tracked an additional 20 class-action lawsuits in which plaintiffs are seeking compensation for misleading fees.

In addition, TINA.org’s 2024 comment highlighted a number of complaints from our readers detailing their experiences with paying unexpected and unfair fees across a wide range of industries.

For instance, a consumer found last year that when signing up for FuboTV, which advertised regional sports as included in its prices, an additional charge for regional sports coverage was unavoidable. Moreover, the mandatory $13.99 a month “regional sports fee” wasn’t added to the advertised price of $74.99 a month until checkout, the consumer said.

Another consumer noticed that a restaurant advertising free delivery surreptitiously increased the price of food:

El Pollo Loco has been running various commercials stating that they are offering free delivery on Postmates for their Familia Dinner which they say is being offered for $20. … I pointed out to them that all delivery platforms, Door Dash and Postmates, offer the same Familia Dinner for $34.99. The only way one can receive the Familia Dinner for $20 is to go to the restaurant.

TINA.org’s comment also emphasized the disproportionate impact that these fees have on low-income people and communities of color. Not only are consumers in these segments of the population more likely to be charged certain junk and hidden fees, but they are also more greatly impacted by this deceptive marketing tactic as hidden and misleading fees drain money from those already struggling financially, which can lead to debt, housing instability and high-cost fringe financial services.

Further, TINA.org explained that consumers need accurate data to make rational economic decisions that benefit not just themselves but also lead to a balanced market economy. When sellers use deceptive advertising in their pricing, the lack of clear and accurate information can lead to market inefficiencies. Sellers charging junk fees, for instance, mask the true price of their goods and/or services to the detriment not only of consumers but also honest competitors.

TINA.org noted in its comment that opponents of the proposed rule have advocated for alternatives, such as greater enforcement and educational efforts. However, given how widespread and harmful junk fees are, these alternatives are not enough – especially considering the FTC’s mounting demands and limited resources. Only when it is no longer profitable for companies to charge such deceptive fees will Americans be free from them. And this proposed rule may provide the monetary penalty that tips the scales in favor of compliance with the law.

If finalized, the proposed rule will help to reduce the burdens on American consumers. The FTC has the authority and the duty to take all steps available to curb these fees that pad the pockets of deceptive marketers – as such, TINA.org strongly supports the FTC’s proposed rule.