Fair Grocery Pricing Act
Sponsored By: Representative Frost, Maxwell [D-FL-10]
Introduced
Summary
Bans algorithmic coordination that lets food makers tacitly fix prices or choke supply. The bill would bar food producers and the software services they hire from using data or algorithms to coordinate pricing, output, or other market terms.
Personalized for You
How does this bill affect your finances?
Personalize government policy and PRIA will tell you what this bill means for your household, plus every other piece of legislation we track. PRIA reads each provision against your financial profile to show you exactly what matters to your wallet.
Bill Overview
Analyzed Economic Effects
4 provisions identified: 4 benefits, 0 costs, 0 mixed.
Triple damages for grocery price-fixing
If enacted, anyone harmed by illegal grocery price coordination could sue in federal court, no matter the dollar amount. You could seek three times your actual damages plus reasonable court costs and attorney fees. You could also ask the court for simple interest on your actual damages from when the case is served to judgment. You could choose to void any pre-dispute arbitration or class or group action waiver tied to this claim.
Ban on algorithmic grocery price coordination
If enacted, food producers would be barred from hiring or paying coordinators to help set or match prices. Coordinators would be banned from helping producers agree not to compete on price, supply, or output. Contracting for these services would be treated as a per se antitrust violation. The bill defines coordinator and coordinating function to include software that collects price data, uses algorithms, and recommends prices or supply.
FTC, DOJ and states could enforce
If enacted, the FTC, the U.S. Attorney General, and state attorneys general could enforce these rules. The FTC could sue in federal court for civil penalties and other relief. Violations would also count as unfair methods of competition under the FTC Act. The bill would not change existing federal antitrust laws. It would not preempt state, Tribal, city, or local rules that add protections.
Easier to allege grocery collusion
If enacted, a complaint could move forward by alleging facts showing consciously parallel pricing by food producers. Plaintiffs would not have to plead facts that rule out independent action. This would make it easier to start antitrust cases over food pricing.
Sponsors & CoSponsors
Sponsor
Frost, Maxwell [D-FL-10]
FL • D
Cosponsors
Rep. McGovern, James P. [D-MA-2]
MA • D
Sponsored 3/4/2025
Rep. Tlaib, Rashida [D-MI-12]
MI • D
Sponsored 3/4/2025
Rep. Cherfilus-McCormick, Sheila [D-FL-20]
FL • D
Sponsored 3/4/2025
Del. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large]
DC • D
Sponsored 3/4/2025
Rep. Fields, Cleo [D-LA-6]
LA • D
Sponsored 3/4/2025
Rep. Underwood, Lauren [D-IL-14]
IL • D
Sponsored 3/6/2025
Rep. Waters, Maxine [D-CA-43]
CA • D
Sponsored 3/6/2025
Rep. Pocan, Mark [D-WI-2]
WI • D
Sponsored 3/11/2025
Rep. Carson, André [D-IN-7]
IN • D
Sponsored 3/24/2025
Rep. Wasserman Schultz, Debbie [D-FL-25]
FL • D
Sponsored 3/24/2025
Rep. Moulton, Seth [D-MA-6]
MA • D
Sponsored 3/24/2025
Rep. Olszewski, Johnny [D-MD-2]
MD • D
Sponsored 3/25/2025
Rep. Hayes, Jahana [D-CT-5]
CT • D
Sponsored 4/3/2025
Rep. Cohen, Steve [D-TN-9]
TN • D
Sponsored 4/24/2025
Rep. Casar, Greg [D-TX-35]
TX • D
Sponsored 5/7/2025
Rep. Johnson, Julie [D-TX-32]
TX • D
Sponsored 7/17/2025
Rep. McIver, LaMonica [D-NJ-10]
NJ • D
Sponsored 10/28/2025
Roll Call Votes
No roll call votes available for this bill.
View on Congress.gov