Lawmakers, lieutenant governor pitch bills to curb grocery pricing gaps and digital‑coupon disparities

Chairman Solomon presided as sponsors introduced House Bill 7,514 and House Bill 7,719, two measures members and witnesses said aim to protect independent Rhode Island grocers and consumers from pricing practices they described as disadvantaging small stores.

A sponsor described H-7,514 as a state-level response to dominant retailers using market power to obtain more favorable prices and contracts, saying the bill would bar suppliers from offering materially different terms for the same item "without a valid business reason." Another sponsor framed H-7,719 as a fix for a growing digital divide, arguing stores that advertise discounts available only through apps leave people without smartphones paying full price.

"When a small independent Rhode Island grocery tries to purchase the exact same product and the exact same quality, they are often charged more," a sponsor said, urging members to support H-7,514. The lieutenant governor, speaking to the committee, said the bills are part of a broader "fair price grocery" agenda and noted that roughly 10% of adults lack a smartphone — a share that rises among seniors and lower‑income households — leaving some shoppers unable to access digital coupon savings.

Industry groups and technology providers urged caution. David Shapiro, chief legal officer at Ibotta, told the committee H-7,719 "simply doesn't work" as drafted and could shrink digital offers by undermining brand-funded economics and imposing costly in‑store operational alternatives. Scott Bromberg of the Rhode Island Food Dealers Association said retailers already use multiple mitigation tools — kiosks, cashier redemption and customer service — and warned that the bill's definitions are broad and enforcement could be difficult.

Supporters said the bills do not set retail prices or punish success: H-7,514 would target discriminatory terms lacking performance justifications, and H-7,719 contains flexibility for retailers to provide parity (for example, by transmitting tax and discount data or providing later rebates). David Focarelli, testifying on behalf of the lieutenant governor, said the bills "do not require paper coupons" and include compliance options to reduce burdens on stores.

Committee members pressed witnesses on scope and enforceability, asking how the state would subpoena out‑of‑state purchasing records and whether mandatory in‑store alternatives would raise operational costs. Industry witnesses questioned the legal reach when buying departments and manufacturers are located outside Rhode Island.

The hearing closed after several pro‑ and con‑testimonies. The committee earlier took a procedural vote to hold all bills for further study, a step the chair said is neutral and intended to allow for additional review and written submissions. The committee has not advanced the bills to the House floor and no substantive votes on either measure were recorded at this meeting.