Nevada senators hear bill to require ‘all‑in’ ticket pricing, clearer refunds and penalties for bad actors

Senators on the Nevada Senate Committee on Commerce and Labor heard testimony on Senate Bill 338 on transparency and consumer protections for live‑event ticket sales, including requirements to show the total price up front, clearer refund rules, and stronger enforcement tools for the state. Senator Julie Pizzina, sponsor of SB 338, presented the measure.

Pizzina said the bill has three parts: incorporating a recently finalized Federal Trade Commission rule that requires advertisers to disclose the total price of live‑event tickets upfront; a statutory requirement for clear ticket refund policies when events are canceled or postponed; and civil and criminal penalties to give Nevada’s attorney general enforcement tools. “This practice known as drip pricing has become widespread in the ticketing industry,” Senator Julie Pizzina said, arguing the FTC rule should be incorporated into state law to protect consumers from surprise mandatory fees during checkout.

Why it matters: proponents said the changes would reduce bait‑and‑switch pricing and speed refunds to consumers. Myron Martin, president and CEO of the Smith Center, described historic cases in which patrons were turned away with invalid tickets and said primary venues have invested in technology to reduce fraud, but that secondary‑market practices still harm regular buyers. “This isn’t a fight against secondary ticketing,” Martin said. He and other speakers framed the bill as targeted at bad actors who defraud consumers.

Industry and stakeholder support: supporters included representatives for major primary sellers and sports teams, ticket broker groups and resale firms. Alfredo Alonso (Womble Bond Dickinson), representing the Las Vegas Golden Knights and other sports properties, said the refund provisions largely align with current practice for cancellations but noted refunded fees are sometimes not restored on secondary marketplaces. Rocky Finseth and Ryan Johnson, representing Nevada Ticket Brokers Association and locally based brokerages, said they worked with the sponsor and supported modernization of the state law. Roger Jones of Vegas Tickets and other resellers described Nevada’s existing statutes as a foundation and urged clarity for all sellers.

Opposition and carve‑outs: Burning Man testified in opposition only to the refund timing provision (section 5) and asked to be excluded from that section because its large, multi‑agency planning and early expenditures create unique cash‑flow constraints. The Nevada Resort Association supported the price‑transparency portions but said it still had implementation questions and wanted the bill to target secondary market bad actors rather than primary sellers that already comply.

Enforcement and penalties: Pizzina said the bill increases the monetary penalties in current law—moving from previously lower statutory amounts to higher fines for repeat violations—and would permit the attorney general’s Bureau of Consumer Protection to pursue civil and, where appropriate, criminal deceptive‑practice charges under chapter 598 of the Nevada Revised Statutes. Committee counsel noted deceptive trade practice penalties in chapter 598 may include criminal fines and, in some circumstances, felony exposure, although counsel did not opine that SB 338 specifically would reach that level.

Process and next steps: committee members asked technical questions about language (one member flagged an awkward phrasing describing an “unavoidable” disclosure), and the sponsor said she would file clarifying amendments before a work session. The committee took testimony and closed the hearing; there was no committee vote at the hearing.

Votes at the hearing: None — the committee held a public hearing and took testimony but did not vote on SB 338.