As excerpted from Food World : Just a few months ago, supporters of allowing beer and wine sales in Maryland grocery stores sounded cautiously optimistic . A renewed legislative push and fresh economic analysis had advocates predicting the long-running debate might finally move forward in Annapolis. But as the 2026 legislative session moves deeper into the calendar, the effort appears to be encountering the same familiar roadblocks. Several key lawmakers in the Maryland Senate have signaled that legislation allowing beer and wine sales in grocery stores is unlikely to advance this year. A companion proposal in the House has also struggled to gain traction, particularly among legislators concerned about the potential impact on independent liquor retailers. The issue has become something of an annual ritual in the Maryland General Assembly. Each year, lawmakers introduce bills that would permit grocery stores to sell beer and wine – and each year the proposals stall in committee. Supporters say the economic case for change continues to strengthen. A new analysis conducted by the Jacob France Institute at the University of Baltimore found that allowing beer and wine sales in grocery stores could increase retail alcohol sales in Maryland and generate millions of dollars in additional tax revenue for the state. The report estimates state government revenues could rise between $4.7 million and $6.6 million annually as more beer and wine purchases shift back into Maryland from neighboring states. “Allowing beer and wine sales in grocery stores has the potential to increase retail wine and beer sales in Maryland, thereby generating jobs and tax revenues for Maryland,” said Richard Clinch, PhD, director of the Jacob France Institute and author of the study. The study also examined the long-term effects of similar policy changes in states such as Oklahoma, Pennsylvania and Tennessee. In each case, alcohol retailer employment eventually rose above pre-reform levels after grocery store sales were permitted, suggesting that concerns about lasting damage to independent liquor retailers may be overstated. Still, opposition from the state’s independent liquor store sector remains strong, and those concerns continue to resonate with many lawmakers in Annapolis. Maryland remains one of only four states that does not allow any alcohol sales in grocery stores. Supporters argue the restriction puts the state out of step with modern retail practices and creates inconvenience for consumers. Polls have consistently shown strong public support for changing the law. A recent Maryland Now poll found roughly 80 percent of likely voters favor allowing grocery stores to sell beer and wine. Advocates say the policy shift could also help attract grocery stores to underserved communities where full-service supermarkets have struggled to take root. “Grocery stores operate with some of the smallest profit margins in retail, and this change would go a long way toward attracting and retaining stores in our communities.” said Cailey Locklair, president of the Maryland Retailers Alliance. Click here to read the full article from Food World .

As excerpted from Maryland Matters : Legislative leaders and the governor don’t think retailers should be able to charge different prices for the same product based on a customer’s personal data — but if they do, the customer should at least be warned about it. Those were among the proposals debated Tuesday during a hearing of the House Economic Matters Committee, a rare occasion when both Gov. Wes Moore (D) and House Speaker Joseline Peña-Melnyk (D-Prince George’s and Anne Arundel) came out to testify on their bills in person. Moore, Peña-Melnyk and Senate President Bill Ferguson (D-Baltimore City) announced in January that they would be working to curtail so-called “surveillance” pricing, part of a broad effort to tackle everyday affordability issues. But the speaker took it a step further Tuesday with her bill, that would ensure that shoppers know if their data has been used to set prices. House Bill 1475 would require stores to show shoppers a disclaimer to shoppers when the price of goods and services have been set based on “personalized algorithmic data.” “With the rise of artificial intelligence and advanced data collection, companies now have the ability to tailor prices to individual consumers to maximize their profits,” said Duane Bond, senior policy adviser to Peña-Melnyk, during Tuesday’s hearing. ... Cailey Locklair, president of the Maryland Retailers Alliance, suggested that the disclaimer should only occur when personalized algorithmic data is used to drive prices up, not when lowering prices, since it’s “likely to unnecessarily alarm consumers.” “Most consumers do not understand how algorithms are functioning, they may not realize that this tool is being used to generate personalized discounts, optimize our inventory, reduce waste and ultimately lower prices,” Locklair said. Peña-Melnyk’s appearance followed testimony by the governor on one of his priority bills, the Protection from Predatory Pricing Act. House Bill 895 would prohibit “dynamic pricing” defined in the legislation as “the practice of varying prices of consumer goods or services within a business day based on demand or other factors, including through the use of artificial intelligence or models that retrain or recalibrate based on received information in real-time.” The legislation would prohibit food retailers from using “surveillance data” to collect information on a “consumer’s behavior, characteristics, location or other personal attributes” to set prices for an individual or a group of people. “Here is basically how it works, prices are changing sometimes by the hour and sometimes by the minute based on where you shop and based on who is shopping,” Moore said in his testimony. “And it’s happening because digital price tags are replacing paper ones. It’s happening because we are having cameras that are watching aisles. “It’s happening because we have apps that are moving from search-based to predictive and having true curated experiences that end up harming the average shopper,” he said. “That algorithm can crunch data into one question: How much should I charge this person, and how much can I get away with charging this person?” But retail lobbyists like Locklair, as they have said before, denied that dynamic pricing as described in the bill is occurring widely in Maryland. “There is no data … of widespread surveillance-based pricing abuses,” Locklair said, reiterating that the current bill language is too broad and could eliminate loyalty programs meant to reduce prices for shoppers. Click here to read the full article from Maryland Matters .

As excerpted from Maryland Matters: Consumers looking to buy beer and wine in grocery and other retail stores may have to wait a little longer. What is practically a perennial effort to let other retailers sell some alcoholic beverages appears destined to stall again, with two key Senate Democrats saying a Senate bill is not poised to move forward, and a House version hitting a brick wall of concerns about small business owners Wednesday. “I don’t foresee us this year taking on this issue in a significant way,” Senate President Bill Ferguson (D-Baltimore City) told reporters Tuesday. “I do think probably in the next term, we’re going to have to figure out some sort of compromise here.” He said he does not see that compromise emerging in the remaining six weeks of this session, but that “in the next term, there’s probably a broader conversation about how to do this as fairly as possible, because we do know that it is that convenience is what Marylanders want.” Cailey Locklair, president of the Maryland Retailers Alliance, called Ferguson’s comments “unfortunate.” “We have independent studies stating that $75 million in new revenue would come to Maryland. This is not a new tax. This is not a new cut. This is a decision that benefits communities. It provides jobs. Neighborhood Stabilization retains existing stores and attracts new ones.” The retailers association is a member of the Consumer Freedom Coalition, which is backing the push to expand beer and wine sales and, as part of that effort, targeted Ferguson in a mail campaign. The coalition also commissioned a University of Baltimore study looking at the potential effects of expanded sales in Maryland . Supporters, undaunted, gathered in Annapolis Wednesday to push for passage of House Bill 1303 , which was being heard by the House Economic Matters Committee, and Senate Bill 75 , which was heard last month. The bills are similar, but not identical. Both bills would allow grocery stores and big box wholesale chains to sell beer and wine. The House bill also includes convenience stores and pharmacies, if they meet minimum square footage requirements. Click here to read the full article f rom Maryland Matters .

As excerpted from CBS News : Maryland lawmakers are once again pushing legislation that would allow grocery stores to sell beer and wine. The Alcoholic Beverages and Modernization Act of 2026 was filed last week in the House of Delegates and is sponsored by several state leaders. The ban on beer and wine sales in Maryland grocery stores has been in place since 1978, and continues to spark debate for business owners, lawmakers and residents. "We are seeing grocery stores close. We've seen four new grocery stores have closed across the state of Maryland," said Maryland Delegate Amprey, who is one of the supporters. "Beer and wine in these stores can be the lift that they need in order to make sure their margins are in a place where they can stay where they are, and people in the communities have access to fresh food." According to the Maryland Retailers Alliance , 80% of Marylanders support this bill. Maryland is one of four states that doesn't allow those types of sales. Delaware, Rhode Island and Alaska are the others. Several past attempts to pass that law have failed. Click here to read the full article from CBS News .

As excerpted from WYPR : Top Maryland Democrats signaled last month that banning surveillance and dynamic pricing statewide would be a high priority this legislative session, and one of the bills to begin work on the matter had its first committee hearing Tuesday. HB0148 would prohibit the use of personal or biometric data when companies set their prices. The practice — known as surveillance pricing — is used to set customized prices for individuals based on data collected around their traits and characteristics, often through artificial intelligence (AI). Del. Joe Vogel (D-Montgomery County) brought the bill forward out of concern that companies are using surveillance pricing to selectively price gouge customers based on their spending habits. “There was an investigation into Instacart recently that found they were actually grouping consumers into different buckets depending on different characteristics of personal data, and then charging them different prices depending on their personal characteristics,” Vogel said during his opening remarks. Vogel noted Instacart — a third party grocery delivery service — stopped the practice after amid outrage from customers in December, but he worries surveillance pricing tactics will only spread if not regulated. “There is discussion of a number of additional businesses that are looking to engage in AI price gouging and wage fixing,” Vogel said, also referring to workers being docked pay based on surveillance data, like tracking driving habits and workplace efficiency metrics. An amendment to the bill — that would need lawmaker approval — is proposing banning electronic shelving labels (ESLs) altogether, which are digital price tags in stores that allow companies to adjust prices without manually changing tags. “ESLs allow a company to change prices instantly, several times a day for different customers. Without this prohibition, companies will continue to implement surveillance based pricing at scale,” said Elizabeth Bobo, legislative director at the Maryland State and DC AFL-CIO. Retail and tech advocates testified in strong opposition to the bill as written, arguing banning any type of data-driven customized pricing could result in less discounts for customers. “Retailers strongly support the principle that consumer data should not be used to increase prices, and if that's what this bill said, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be sitting up here. We agree with that goal full stop,” said President of the Maryland Retailers Alliance Cailey Locklair. Locklair argues Maryland’s data privacy laws allow businesses to collect consumer data, as long as that practice is disclosed and customers are allowed to opt out. “But consumer and retail loyalty programs are different because they're more protective. They are opt-in. Consumers choose them because they want savings. Retailers use data to deliver data-driven discounts, not penalties,” Locklair said. Click here to read the full article from WYPR .