Illinois legislators introduce bills to regulate pricing based on
personal data
[February 25, 2026]
By Jenna Schweikert and UIS Public Affairs Reporting (PAR)
As top legislators emphasize affordability this session, several
lawmakers are taking aim at regulating algorithmic pricing that uses
consumers’ personal data.
Algorithmic pricing is a price-setting practice where companies use
everything from mouse movements to website searches and messages to set
unique, individualized prices using an algorithm.
House Bill 4248, co-sponsored by Reps. Kam Buckner, D-Chicago, and Maura
Hirschauer, D-Batavia, would require corporations to disclose the use of
algorithmic pricing and give consumers the chance to opt out. House Bill
4544, sponsored by Rep. Eva Dina Delgado, D-Chicago, would only require
disclosure.
Algorithmic pricing is a “modern tool for an age-old tactic,” to raise
prices, said Erion Malasi, director of policy and research for Economic
Security Illinois.
“Back in the day, business leaders would have gotten in a smoke-filled
room together and decided not to drop their prices below a certain
benchmark,” Malasi said. “In modern times, they’re not. … They can just
feed all their information into an algorithm.”
The practice is widespread, Malasi added. It’s been used in housing,
online retail, airlines, fast food, rideshares and more.
“Disclosure is a great first step in order to really expose just how
prevalent this is in the economy,” Malasi said of the proposed
legislation.
The bills have both been introduced and are awaiting committee hearings.
Algorithmic pricing legislation
Delgado’s bill would require companies that use an individual’s personal
data — defined as any data that identifies or could be linked with a
specific person, excluding location — to disclose that the price was set
using that data.
“Affordability is an issue that I keep hearing about every day when I’m
in the district talking to folks,” Delgado said. “We’re protecting
consumers, because at the end of the day, if there are secret price
hikes that are happening that you can’t see, then it’s very hard for you
to be a consumer.”
California and New York have both passed laws regulating algorithmic
pricing, with California banning the practice in some cases.
The idea behind disclosure is that transparent prices allow consumers to
shop responsibly, Delgado said. Banning the use of personal data
entirely could tamper with loyalty programs and discounts, but
transparency discourages predatory pricing, she added.
The bill also excludes insurers and financial institutions from the
required notice because those industries are already highly regulated,
Delgado said.
Buckner’s bill requires companies to disclose the use of consumer-linked
information, including browsing history, geolocation data and
demographic profile data in price setting.
The bill would also give consumers the opportunity to opt out of
personalized prices.
“I think disclosure is a start to at least see that, you know, people
know. They can then make decisions with their dollars and decisions with
where they’re buying things,” Buckner said.
This disclosure must state that the price is personalized, identify what
data was used and provide an explanation of how the company uses
algorithmic pricing.
“People are using algorithms for everything and, you know, companies are
using data, your clicks, your location, your device, who you are, your
shopping history, even your inferred income to show different people,
different prices for the same thing,” Buckner said. “It can be
personalized pricing for consumers or rent setting software in housing.
Either way, it quietly turns affordability into a real game.”
HB4248 also bans companies from using data on race, religion, sexual
orientation, immigration status, medical information and criminal
history when setting prices.
[to top of second column]
|
The state capitol building is seen in Springfield. (CNI file photo)
Anticompetitive history
There are different types of algorithms companies can use, but some use
third-party platforms that analyze and communicate with other companies
to recommend prices to the user. Malasi says these platforms engage in
anticompetitive behavior that raises consumer costs.
“At the end of the day, algorithmic pricing is cooperation,” Malasi
said. “It’s collusion between corporations, and when big corporations,
when landlords are cooperating with each other, we do not get a
competitive economy. We don’t get an affordable economy.”
Opponents of pricing regulation — namely retailers and industry groups
for those who use algorithmic pricing — argue that the practice benefits
consumers by delivering competitive prices and enhancing cost
reductions, according to Alec Laird, senior vice president of government
relations for the Illinois Retail Merchants Association.
“It’s important to recognize that retailers are hyper-focused on
maintaining competitive, fair, and transparent pricing — an essential
factor in attracting and retaining customers. In today’s marketplace,
where consumers have endless options, those conditions are essential, as
shoppers will quickly turn elsewhere if those expectations aren’t met,”
Laird said in a statement.
In January 2025, Attorney General Kwame Raoul joined a civil antitrust
lawsuit against RealPage Inc. and five landlord companies, alleging that
through pricing algorithms on RealPage, the landlords set rental pricing
using sensitive information from the other companies.
The case, which included nine other attorneys general and the U.S.
Department of Justice, was settled in November 2025.
Algorithmic pricing is dangerous, Malasi says, because it doesn’t lower
prices as it claims to, and instead removes competition by allowing
companies to set prices together.
“(Business leaders) can just feed all their information into an
algorithm, into some software that will tell them, you know, what prices
they can all agree to and drive up their revenue without having to
respond to market downturns or other factors that they normally would,”
Malasi said. “It removes competition from the equation.”
Laird said the IRMA is concerned that pricing regulation would have the
opposite effect by cutting cost-lowering practices.
“Efforts to regulate retail pricing often reflect an incomplete
understanding of how modern pricing systems operate — particularly the
distinction between the displayed price and the discounts that may be
available to individual customers through coupons, loyalty rewards,
temporary promotions, price-checking, or other pro-consumer incentives,”
he said.
Delgado and Buckner emphasized that disclosure was a first step in the
process, but that they were open to discussion about the best version of
their individual bills.
“We’ve talked a lot about affordability, you know, being it’s going to
be one of our focuses this year,” Buckner said. “And so we’ve got to be
smart by how we address this and do something about it in a way that’s
proven.”
Capitol News Illinois is
a nonprofit, nonpartisan news service that distributes state government
coverage to hundreds of news outlets statewide. It is funded primarily
by the Illinois Press Foundation and the Robert R. McCormick Foundation. |
