Colorado Lawmakers Aim to Stop Surveillance Pricing

Bill would ban companies from using browsing and buying data to set individualized prices and wages

Mar. 13, 2026 at 2:21am

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

Colorado state lawmakers are proposing a bill to prevent companies from using surveillance data and algorithms to set individualized prices and wages for consumers and employees. The lawmakers argue this "surveillance pricing" practice gives companies an unfair advantage and makes it impossible for people to budget or plan their finances. The bill would make this practice illegal and impose fines of up to $10,000 for violations.

Why it matters

Surveillance pricing raises concerns about fairness, transparency, and consumer protection. Critics argue it allows companies to exploit people's personal data and financial situations to maximize profits, rather than relying on the free market. The proposed legislation aims to level the playing field and prevent companies from taking advantage of consumers and workers.

The details

The bill, sponsored by Democratic state Reps. Javier Mabry and Jennifer Bacon, would make the use of surveillance data and algorithms to set individualized prices and wages an illegal deceptive trade practice. The lawmakers say companies are analyzing everything from website visits to occupation to determine what each person can afford, rather than using the traditional principles of supply and demand. Business groups argue the bill will harm consumers by limiting targeted discounts and coupons, but the lawmakers say companies are investing heavily in these technologies to make more money, not to help customers.

  • The Colorado state legislature is currently considering the bill.
  • If passed, the law would go into effect immediately.

The players

Javier Mabry

Democratic state representative in Colorado who is sponsoring the bill to ban surveillance pricing.

Jennifer Bacon

Democratic state representative in Colorado who is co-sponsoring the bill to ban surveillance pricing.

Colorado Cross-Disability Coalition

A disability advocacy group that is supporting the measure, arguing it will protect people with disabilities from being charged higher prices.

Rebecca Hernandez

Representative from the Denver Chamber of Commerce, who argues the bill will harm businesses and consumers by limiting targeted discounts and coupons.

Rachel Beck

Representative from the Colorado Chamber of Commerce, who estimates the bill could exclude millions of customers from retail discounts.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“You can't budget when the price of the same item changes based on who's looking at it. You can't plan when your paycheck is determined by an algorithm you can't see.”

— Javier Mabry, State Representative (CBS News)

“All of us are playing against a supercomputer when we go into the grocery store.”

— Jennifer Bacon, State Representative (CBS News)

“Without guardrails, companies may have both the technical ability and the financial incentive to charge people with disabilities a higher price, just because their needs are predictable and unavoidable.”

— Elsa Gartenmann, Colorado Cross-Disability Coalition (CBS News)

“These are not predatory practices; they are pro-consumer tools businesses use every day to compete for customers and help people stretch their budget.”

— Rebecca Hernandez, Denver Chamber of Commerce (CBS News)

“Our businesses estimate that you're excluding millions of customers from eligibility for retail discounts.”

— Rachel Beck, Colorado Chamber of Commerce (CBS News)

What’s next

The bill has passed the state Business Affairs Committee and will now move to the full Colorado state legislature for consideration.

The takeaway

This legislation highlights the growing concerns around the use of personal data and algorithms to set individualized prices and wages. While businesses argue these practices help consumers, critics say they unfairly exploit people's financial situations. The outcome of this bill could set an important precedent for how states approach the issue of surveillance pricing.