Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Consumer Protection topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Automatic renewal bill fails after industry and consumer groups clash over telecom exemption
Summary
A draft requiring simple cancellation and advance notice for automatic subscription renewals failed in committee after close debate and a 3–4 vote; industry witnesses asked to exempt communications and utilities while consumer groups opposed broad exemptions.
The committee debated a draft (26 LSO 61) that would require companies offering automatic subscription renewals to obtain affirmative consumer consent, provide a clear cancellation mechanism at least as easy as the sign‑up method, and give written notice ahead of renewal for contracts six months or longer. Talies Hansen, staff attorney, walked the committee through the draft and noted the committee might decide whether to include trial‑offer rules like Colorado’s.
The draft required affirmative consent before automatic renewal, a simple cancellation mechanism, and a written notice between 30 and 60 days before renewal for agreements with renewal terms of six months or more. It also made violations unlawful deceptive trade practices under state law and proposed a July 1, 2026 effective date.
Public testimony divided along predictable lines. Industry witnesses — including Jody Levin for Verizon and Charter and Mike Blank for CTIA — urged exemptions for communications providers, saying telecom and bundled services already include disclosures and that accidental disconnection can cause consumer harm. Several witnesses asked exemptions for entities regulated by the Federal Communications Commission, the Wyoming Public Service Commission, or the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and proposed tailoring the bill to avoid duplicative regulation.
Consumer advocates and state consumer groups disagreed. Erin Witte of the Consumer Federation of America urged the committee to reject telecom and FCC exemptions, citing past enforcement actions (she cited an FTC case involving Vonage) and arguing that existing federal oversight does not guarantee a simple cancellation mechanism for consumers. Multiple speakers urged protections for trial period offers and a short notice before trial expiration so consumers are not unintentionally charged.
Committee members debated whether to require notice for renewal terms shorter than six months and whether to include trial‑offer language. Representative Feiler said he wanted a mechanism to alert customers before a short free trial converted into a paid subscription. Some members supported a 6‑month threshold; others noted states use anywhere from universal notice (Colorado) to a 12‑month threshold (California, Idaho).
After amendments (including clarifying which entities are exempt and adding language focused on in‑state financial institutions), the committee voted by roll call and the bill failed, 3 ayes, 4 nos, 1 excused. Committee members recorded concerns about regulatory overreach and practical implementation; proponents said the bill aimed to protect consumers from difficult cancellation processes and surprise renewals.
The committee did not advance the draft; supporters and opponents said they will continue discussion in and outside the interim.
