New Jersey lawmakers moved swiftly this week. The state legislature passed the Fair Price Protection Act on July 1, making the Garden State the latest to outlaw a practice that lets grocers set unique prices for the same carton of milk or bunch of bananas based on who you are.
The bill targets what experts call surveillance pricing. Retailers collect data on browsing habits, location, purchase history, even inferred income or family size. Algorithms then adjust offers in real time. One neighbor might see a higher price simply because an app noticed repeated views of that product. Or because the system guessed they could afford it.
Gizmodo reported the legislation bans such tactics for grocery stores and third-party delivery platforms, both in stores and online. It also imposes a one-year moratorium on new electronic shelf labels, the digital tags that retailers like Walmart have rolled out nationwide. Critics fear those labels could enable rapid, individualized price shifts from a central office. Every Walmart in New Jersey already uses them. The company says it does not plan to harm shoppers with the technology.
Gov. Mikie Sherrill signaled strong support earlier. In her March budget address she labeled the practice “outrageous.” She highlighted how stores might tweak charges based on time of day, gender or phone history. Her stance suggests she will sign the bill soon. If she does, New Jersey follows Maryland and Connecticut. Both enacted similar grocery-focused bans earlier in 2026.
The vote was bipartisan. State senators Britnee Timberlake, a Republican, and Vincent Polistina, a Democrat, sponsored the measure. It passed the Senate 22-14 and the Assembly 51-20. That cross-aisle backing reflects widespread worry about food costs. Inflation outpaced wage growth in recent months. Families feel the pinch at checkout.
Advocates cheered the outcome. The United Food and Commercial Workers International Union released a statement after passage. “This legislation will protect families across New Jersey from having their personal data used against them to squeeze every cent they have,” it read. “Our state has taken a stand and made history with this legislation.” The union had pushed hard against both surveillance pricing and electronic shelf labels, partly because the latter can reduce the need for workers.
Yet not everyone sees the law as perfect. The Electronic Privacy Information Center testified in favor during hearings. It praised the core prohibition on using personal data for individualized grocery prices. Still, the group pointed to gaps. The measure relies solely on enforcement by the attorney general. That office has limited resources. Private lawsuits by harmed consumers are not allowed. Exemptions for loyalty programs and discounts also need tighter rules around consent and transparency. Otherwise they could disguise the very behavior the law aims to stop.
“If this bill is signed into law, EPIC urges the legislature to strengthen the bill in the next legislative session,” the organization stated. Similar cautions came from Consumer Reports. The group submitted testimony in late June. It defined personalized pricing as the use of data like real-time location, browsing history or estimated household income to set prices or discounts. Its analysts had investigated similar tactics at Instacart, Kroger and ride-sharing services. They urged lawmakers to close loopholes, require clear public disclosure of discount criteria, and let consumers sue directly rather than petition the attorney general.
Industry voices raised alarms months earlier when the bill first advanced. In March the Senate Commerce Committee moved the proposal forward despite pushback. Representatives from the New Jersey Food Council argued grocers set prices weeks in advance with suppliers. Algorithms do not drive shelf changes, they said. Drew Ambrogi of the Chamber of Progress warned that vague language could make routine coupons illegal. A store might not send a targeted cereal offer to a parent who buys diapers often if the bill deems that differential treatment.
Sen. Joe Cryan pushed back during those hearings. He wanted the ban to reach beyond groceries eventually. “If you looked at that tomato twice in the past two days, you’re not going to pay any more for it,” Cryan said. The goal was to stop consumers from getting “screwed over by AI online technology.” Beverly Brown Ruggia of New Jersey Citizen Action added that data used for such pricing is often inaccurate. Families already struggle. Manipulating essential food prices on flawed information only makes matters worse.
The New Jersey measure builds on a fast-moving national trend. Maryland became the first state to restrict the practice for large food retailers in April. Connecticut followed in June. New York passed its own One Fair Price Act in June, though Gov. Kathy Hochul has not yet signed it. That state already requires disclosures when algorithms use personal data to set prices. The rule helped expose The Washington Post’s subscription tactics, leading to a lawsuit under broader consumer protection statutes.
At least a dozen other states have considered bills. California, Illinois, Colorado and Pennsylvania appear on various trackers. Colorado Gov. Jared Polis vetoed a broader version last month. He appreciated the intent but worried the language swept too wide. It might block beneficial discounts along with harmful hikes. “Instead of specifically defining and targeting unethical conduct and practices, the bill takes a broader approach,” Polis wrote.
Federal interest exists too. The FTC has examined data-driven pricing. Congressional committees sent inquiries. Yet action has stayed mostly at the state level so far. Polling shows why lawmakers listen. About 68 percent of Americans express concern that surveillance pricing drives up costs. Two-thirds worry specifically about grocery prices.
Retailers defend personalization in some forms. Loyalty programs reward frequent buyers with lower prices. Senior or military discounts have long existed. The New Jersey law tries to thread that needle. Exemptions apply if discounts are widely disclosed, clear and available uniformly. George Slover, senior counsel for competition policy at the Center for Democracy & Technology, reviewed the text. He told Gizmodo the carve-outs strike a reasonable balance. Still, he would expand the prohibition beyond groceries to other online sales.
Examples illustrate the stakes. Instacart once ran tests that charged some customers 25 percent more for identical items from the same store. The company later stopped. Consumer Reports uncovered cases where delivery apps appeared to factor in device type or location data. Online hotel bookings and ride-sharing have shown similar patterns for years. The fear is that grocery aisles become the next frontier, especially with electronic labels that update in seconds.
But. The technology does not always raise prices. It can lower them for price-sensitive buyers. Opponents of broad bans argue this efficiency benefits markets overall. Data helps match supply and demand. Proponents counter that opacity erodes trust. Shoppers cannot easily compare real costs when each sees a different number. And when personal traits such as gender or zip code influence outcomes, the practice risks crossing into discrimination already barred by other statutes.
New Jersey’s law takes effect after signing, with the electronic shelf label pause beginning immediately. Enforcement will test its strength. Attorney general actions carry weight but move slowly. Future amendments could add private rights of action or stricter consent rules for discounts. Other states watch closely. A patchwork is forming. Compliance costs for national chains will rise as definitions vary.
The debate will not end here. Retail technology keeps advancing. Artificial intelligence grows more sophisticated at inferring willingness to pay. Consumers grow more aware of how their data travels. Lawmakers face pressure to act before the practice spreads from apps and websites into every physical store aisle. New Jersey drew a line at the grocery shelf. More lines may follow.
WebProNews is an iEntry Publication