A Flint senator is helping lead a push in Lansing to ban companies from charging different prices to different shoppers based on their browsing history or personal data.

Sen. John Cherry (D-Flint) joined Sen. Mallory McMorrow (D-Royal Oak) as a co-sponsor of two bills moving through the Michigan Senate that would prohibit surveillance pricing and dynamic pricing practices.

The legislation comes as affordability remains a top concern for Michigan residents and as federal regulators intensify scrutiny of how companies use consumer data to set prices.

What the bills target

The two bills address separate but related pricing practices.

Surveillance pricing occurs when companies use data collected from a consumer's internet history, location, or demographics to set individualized prices. A shopper searching for an airline ticket might see a higher price if the company's algorithm infers they are willing to pay more.

Dynamic pricing adjusts prices based on factors like time of day, day of the week, or current weather conditions. The practice is already common in rideshare and hotel industries.

"The intent of the legislation is to ensure that consumers are protected, and that the price you're being charged is the same as the price that the person sitting in the seat next to you," McMorrow said.

McMorrow cited a recent incident involving JetBlue as an example of the surveillance pricing problem. A consumer posted online that their ticket price spiked by more than $200 overnight. A JetBlue customer service representative reportedly told the user to "clear your cache, use incognito mode, search again."

"That's a dead indication of what they're doing if they're telling you what the workaround is," McMorrow said. "So we need to make sure that there isn't a workaround required."

JetBlue has denied using personal data or browsing history in its pricing and said the employee's response was incorrect.

Retail pushback

Senators heard testimony this week from retailers who oppose the bills.

Drew Beardslee, vice president of government affairs at the Michigan Retailers Association, argued that dynamic pricing is primarily a tool for offering discounts, not raising prices.

"Dynamic pricing is a tool that retailers use overwhelmingly to offer customers more discounts on more items at more times," Beardslee said. "We want to make sure we maintain our ability to do that."

Companies including Walmart and DoorDash also expressed concerns about the legislation. They told senators that the bills could hurt their ability to compete while consumers and businesses alike feel economic pressure.

"I think there's a right way to make sure that we can protect consumers without stepping on retailers," Beardslee said.

A national trend

Michigan is not alone in examining these pricing practices. Federal and state governments across the country are escalating scrutiny of surveillance pricing.

The Federal Trade Commission launched a study in 2024 to examine how companies use consumer data to implement surveillance pricing and algorithmic decision-making. In April, FTC leadership confirmed that staff work on the issue continues.

The U.S. House Oversight Committee launched a formal investigation into surveillance pricing in March. The committee sent letters to major travel and platform companies requesting documentation about their pricing algorithms and use of consumer data.

Several states have already taken action:

  • New York enacted a law requiring disclosure when personalized algorithmic pricing is used
  • Maryland passed the Protection from Predatory Pricing Act, restricting certain practices and treating violations as deceptive trade practices
  • California is pursuing surveillance pricing enforcement through a privacy-enforcement lens

What happens next

The Michigan Retailers Association said it plans to work with senators on the bills, hoping to reach a version it can support.

McMorrow used the example of a gallon of milk costing more after 5 p.m. than in the middle of the afternoon, when most people cannot shop.

"That's just simply unfair," McMorrow said. "So it is our attempt in the state of Michigan to catch up with how quickly this technology is evolving."

The bills now move forward in the Senate as negotiations continue between sponsors and industry groups.

Why it matters for Flint

Cherry's involvement puts a Flint legislator at the center of a consumer protection debate that could reshape how businesses price goods and services across the state. If passed, the legislation would apply to all retailers and service providers operating in Michigan.

For Flint residents who spend a large share of income on basics like groceries, transportation, and housing, even small price differences driven by algorithms could add up over time.

The outcome of these bills will signal whether Michigan joins the growing number of states regulating how companies use data to set prices.