Don’t ban surveillance pricing. Here’s how to fix it.

Surveillance pricing is getting a bad rap as an evil scheme to squeeze a few extra dollars from you. Maryland is weighing a first-of-its-kind ban on the practice for groceries. And JetBlue is facing a federal lawsuit accusing it of using passengers’ personal data to raise fares. 

But banning surveillance pricing is the wrong approach. Instead, why not fix it?

What surveillance pricing?

Surveillance pricing (sometimes called personalized pricing or dynamic pricing) is what happens when a company uses everything it knows about you to decide how much to charge you.

That includes your location, browsing history and income. It might also factor in how often you’ve shopped there and what device you’re using. All of it goes into a model that projects how much you’d be willing to pay. 

So, let’s say you searched for flights to Miami three times this week on JetBlue. Congratulations. You may have just told the airline you’ll pay more for that seat.

Live in a wealthy ZIP code? Your grocery store’s app may have adjusted the value of your digital coupon before you reach the checkout. 

The Federal Trade Commission released a report in early 2025 documenting how eight major companies, including retailers, financial services firms and a car rental company, were piloting or actively using surveillance pricing powered by third-party data brokers.

Here’s what’s wrong with surveillance pricing

The trouble with banning this practice is that it doesn’t fix anything. 

Airlines already charge different prices to different customers based on when they book, what loyalty tier they occupy, and which device they’re using. Hotels do it. Rental car companies do it. Online retailers have been doing it for years. 

If Maryland bans it at the grocery checkout, the algorithms will simply migrate to a place regulators can’t easily see, away from dynamic price displays at the store and to coupons or online purchases.

It’s like a game of whack-a-mole, and companies have all the resources, so they’ll always win.

It’s time for a pricing transparency principle

Surveillance pricing is enriching businesses at your expense because it’s invisible. Consumers can’t comparison-shop against a price tailored specifically to them unless they know it’s happening. 

So here’s what might work.

First, a company should always tell you if it’s using your personal data to create a “custom” or “just for you” price. And it should happen as soon as you start the shopping experience, not as a P.S. later in the process.

Second, a business must disclose exactly what data it used and how it affected your price, before you buy.

And finally, the company needs to disclose the exact type of data it used to determine the price. 

It doesn’t have to be complicated. Something like: “Based on your location, search history and purchase behavior, we’re offering you this price.”

These simple requirements would level the playing field. 

Give consumers a fighting chance

It comes down to fairness. If you’re allowed to use my data against me, shouldn’t I be able to do the same to your business?

It would be nice if companies revealed how they determine their custom prices, too. Are they considering your ZIP code? Device type? Search frequency? Loyalty status? Browsing behavior? 

With that information, a reasonably savvy consumer, or a consumer app, stands a fighting chance against these troublesome pricing practices. They can delete their cookies, switch to a browser that masks their device or use a virtual private network. 

This kind of disclosure has a precedent. It’s what we already demand of lenders under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, which requires creditors to explain why they denied a loan. We should expect the same transparency from any company that uses a scoring model to set the price we pay.

Fixing surveillance pricing is dead simple: It’s disclosure, disclosure, and more disclosure. 

Any company using personal data to set consumer prices must tell you, in plain language, at the point of sale, what data it collected, what data it used to set your price.

If companies believe personalized pricing is efficient and fair, they should have no problem explaining themselves to you or to an appropriate federal regulatory body. 

And if they’re not willing to, well, maybe they shouldn’t be doing it.