MRA In The News

As published by The Shelby Report : The Maryland Retailers Alliance (MRA) is challenging public comments by Gov. Wes Moore regarding so-called “predatory pricing” in grocery stores, arguing his characterization has created confusion about the law and scope of newly signed legislation. The pushback follows Moore’s signing April 28 of the Protection From Predatory Pricing Act, which made Maryland the first state to ban price manipulation practices driven by surveillance data. Disputing description In describing the issue, Moore stated that two people could be charged different prices for the same item based on personal data – a characterization that the MRA noted is inaccurate under state law. The alliance stated that such practices are already prohibited under the Maryland Consumer Protection Act, which clearly defines unfair or deceptive trade practices – including misleading or discriminatory pricing – as illegal. Any retailer engaging in the conduct described is subject to pre-existing enforcement action. The alliance also emphasized that the newly enacted Protection From Predatory Pricing Act does not address or prohibit individualized grocery pricing as Moore described it. Suggesting otherwise, it said, misrepresents the scope and legal effect of the legislation. Economic realities The industry response also pointed to the highly competitive nature of the grocery sector as a check on the kind of pricing practices Moore described. Grocery stores operate within one of the most competitive sectors of the economy, typically sustaining profit margins of 1 to 3 percent. The alliance said this environment benefits consumers by keeping prices low and limiting the ability of any single retailer to artificially inflate prices without losing business. The notion that widespread, individualized price gouging could occur in such a market is inconsistent with the economic realities, the group said. The alliance further noted that the Maryland Office of the Attorney General has no record of substantiated complaints indicating a pattern of grocery stores engaging in unlawful predatory pricing increases. Other industries The alliance contends that policy discussions about individualized or dynamic pricing models would be more appropriately focused on other industries. Sectors such as third-party delivery platforms, hotels, rideshare apps and airlines have long relied on variable pricing based on demand, timing and consumer data. These sectors are where such pricing practices are most prevalent. Call for accuracy The alliance closed its statement with a call for clearer communication from public officials about consumer protection laws. “Accurate public communication about consumer protection laws is essential. Maryland residents deserve clarity about their rights and confidence that existing laws already safeguard them from unfair and deceptive practices,” the group said. It urged public officials to ensure that statements regarding consumer protection and pricing practices reflect the law as written and enforced. Click here to read the article on The Shelby Report .

As published by The Center Square : Maryland Gov. Wes Moore has signed hundreds of bills into law following the 2026 legislative session, approving measures tied to grocery pricing practices, voting rights, public safety and financial regulations. Among the measures signed this spring is the Protection From Predatory Pricing Act. The governor’s office said it is intended to limit certain pricing practices tied to consumer data. The law applies to some large food retailers and third-party delivery platforms and covers certain tax-exempt food items. Moore’s office said the measure makes Maryland the first state in the country to restrict some forms of what it describes as surveillance-based pricing practices in the food retail sector. Moore also signed the Voting Rights Act of 2026, Senate Bill 255, which authorizes legal action against local voting practices alleged to dilute the votes of protected groups. The legislation was backed by the Legislative Black Caucus of Maryland and voting rights advocacy organizations, including the Legal Defense Fund. Other bills signed include House Bill 284, which requires licensed firearm dealers to notify the Secretary of State Police within 24 hours if they become aware certain security features have been compromised or if certain crimes occur involving firearms. Moore also signed additional requirements tied to Maryland’s Ignition Interlock System Program for some drivers convicted of alcohol-related offenses under House Bill 286. Under the law, certain individuals with suspended or revoked licenses tied to alcohol violations will be required to use a breathalyzer device connected to their vehicle before it can start. Moore also signed Senate Bill 94 regulating earned wage access providers, companies that allow workers to access earned wages before payday. The governor’s office said the measure makes Maryland the first state in the nation to prohibit providers from requesting tips on those products. The grocery pricing measure drew debate during the legislative process. The Maryland Retailers Alliance said existing Maryland consumer protection laws already prohibit deceptive or discriminatory pricing practices. The group also said the new law does not ban individualized grocery pricing as described by supporters. Consumer Reports, meanwhile, said the final version of the law contained loopholes and weak enforcement provisions, while still supporting the broader effort to limit what it described as surveillance pricing practices. Several of the measures, including the grocery pricing law, take effect Oct. 1.  Click here to read the article on The Center Square .

ANNAPOLIS, MD – Recent public comments by Governor Wes Moore regarding so-called “predatory pricing” in grocery stores have created confusion about both existing law and the scope of newly signed legislation. In describing the issue, Governor Moore stated that two individuals could be charged different prices for the same item based on personal data. This characterization is inaccurate under current Maryland law. Such practices are already prohibited under the Maryland Consumer Protection Act, which clearly defines unfair or deceptive trade practices including misleading or discriminatory pricing as illegal. Any retailer engaging in the conduct described would already be subject to pre-existing enforcement action. Importantly, the newly enacted “Protection from Predatory Pricing Act” does not address or prohibit individualized grocery pricing as described. Suggesting otherwise misrepresents both the scope and the legal effect of the legislation. Grocery stores also operate within one of the most competitive sectors of the economy, typically sustaining profit margins of just 1–3 percent. This highly competitive environment benefits consumers by keeping prices low and limiting the ability of any single retailer to artificially inflate prices without losing business. The notion that widespread, individualized price gouging could occur in such a market is inconsistent with the economic realities of the industry. Further, even prior to this law the Maryland Office of the Attorney General has no record of substantiated complaints indicating a pattern of grocery stores engaging in unlawful “predatory pricing increases” of the type described. It is also important to distinguish where individualized or dynamic pricing models are more commonly used. Industries such as third-party delivery platforms, hotels, rideshare apps, and airlines have long relied on variable pricing based on demand, timing, and consumer data. These sectors, unlike traditional grocery retail, are actually where such pricing practices are most prevalent and where policy discussions would be more appropriately focused. Accurate public communication about consumer protection laws is essential. Maryland residents deserve clarity about their rights and confidence that existing laws already safeguard them from unfair and deceptive practices. We urge public officials to ensure that statements regarding consumer protection and pricing practices reflect the law as written and enforced.

As published by The Hill : MARYLAND ( WDCW ) – Maryland is on track to become the first state to ban so-called dynamic pricing in grocery stores across the state. The practice, officials say, allows prices to change based on demand or even customer data. Earlier this month, the state legislature passed the Protection from Predatory Pricing Act, introduced as part of Gov. Wes Moore’s (D) legislative agenda . The bill targets a system whereby retailers can use technology to adjust prices throughout the day or show different prices to different customers, especially in online shopping. Lawmakers said the goal is to prevent that type of pricing from being used in grocery stores across Maryland. Moore said last week that he is excited to sign the new bill. The move comes as consumers say grocery costs are already stretching their budgets. “It’s literally kind of out of hand, almost to the point where it’s like I’m coming twice a week, and twice a week you’re spending easily $125 on a little bit of items,” shopper Deshawn Singleton told Nexstar’s WDCW. “I feel as though it’s a little bit high. … I feel like we can save on the food if we can just, I guess, cut down on the prices,” Latasha Johnson added. Moore has warned that without regulation, shoppers could end up paying different prices for the same items without knowing it. “Digital price tags are replacing paper ones… cameras are watching aisles… apps are moving from search-based to predictive and having true curated experiences that end up harming the average shopper,” Moore said during testimony last month. “If Myles [a member of Moore’s staff] and I were to go in a supermarket at the same time… we could pick up the exact same item and be charged a different price for it, because they know that I’ll pay it. This type of manipulation of data is not fair.” Some shoppers say the bill could make grocery costs more predictable, especially for families on tight budgets. “You never know what the price is going to be… it fluctuates week on week. So that will be a strong basis to have a set number for families to play around with,” one customer said. Justin Brookman, director of marketplace policy at Consumer Reports, says the bill is a step in the right direction but raises concerns about enforcement. “Another problem is there’s no real enforcement. Like, if you got caught doing it, all you need to do is stop once you get caught, and then there can’t be any fines,” Brookman said. The Maryland Retailers Alliance said the bill is a “workable framework.” “The final bill reflects a workable framework that achieves the stated policy goal of prohibiting the use of consumer data to increase prices while preserving the ability for retailers to offer discounts and promotions that benefit consumers,” a statement from the alliance reads. If signed into law, Maryland would become one of the first states in the country to restrict dynamic pricing in grocery stores. Once the bill is signed, it will go into effect in October. Click here to read the full article from The Hill .

The body content of your post goes here. To edit this text, click on it and delete this default text and start typing your own or paste your own from a different source.

As published by Newsmax : Maryland has become the first state to ban "surveillance pricing" in grocery stores after lawmakers passed the Protection from Predatory Pricing Act earlier this month. The legislation, which takes effect Oct. 1, bans dynamic pricing and the use of surveillance data to tailor individual prices in grocery stores, protecting residents from intrusive data practices and sudden price swings that drive up the cost of groceries. "Marylanders deserve to know that the price they see on the shelf is the price they will pay at the register," Maryland Gov. Wes Moore said in a statement Monday. "Our administration is laser-focused on protecting Marylanders from skyrocketing costs. At a time when Marylanders are already stretched by the rising cost of groceries, housing, and everyday necessities, we must ensure that new technologies are not used to drive up the bill for working families." "I can't wait to sign it," Moore wrote in an April 14 post on X . Moore said the legislation can help shield Marylanders "from invasive data practices and unpredictable price spikes." Businesses that don't follow the new guidelines could be fined up to $10,000 for their first offense. Consumer Reports says the final draft of the bill falls short in its protection of consumers. "While it's encouraging to see the Maryland legislature take up this issue, this bill has loopholes that will limit its real-world impact," the organization said in a press release. "We urge other state legislatures considering personalized pricing legislation to build in stronger consumer protections and avoid loopholes that weakened this bill," the release added. The Maryland Retailers Alliance said the bill is a "workable framework."  "The final bill reflects a workable framework that achieves the stated policy goal of prohibiting the use of consumer data to increase prices while preserving the ability for retailers to offer discounts and promotions that benefit consumers," a statement from the alliance read. Click here to read the article from Newsmax .

As excerpted from Newsweek : Maryland lawmakers have are debating a bill that would require many retailers to accept cash for in-person purchases, with potential effects for about 6.1 million residents statewide. House Bill 191 would bar merchants from refusing cash in most in-person transactions and set civil penalties for violations, a change intended to preserve access for unbanked and underbanked consumers. Supporters said cashless policies can exclude low-income households, undocumented residents, and people without bank accounts from buying essentials, while opponents warned of added costs and potential safety risks for retailers. Cash usage has declined across the U.S. in recent years, though plenty of Americans still use it frequently. According to a 2025 report by the Federal Reserve, 14 percent of transactions in 2024 were completed in cash, and more than 90 percent of U.S. consumers intend to use cash as either a means of payment or store of value in the future. HB 191, titled "Consumer Protection—Retail Transactions—Cash Payments," was pre-filed by Delegate Greg Wims, a Montgomery County Democrat, and assigned to the House Economic Matters Committee. The measure would prohibit merchants, in covered transactions, from declining cash , requiring card payments, or charging a fee to customers who pay with cash, and violations would be enforced as unfair or deceptive practices under the Maryland Consumer Protection Act. The bill applies to in-person retail transactions between $5 and $300, with exclusions for phone, mail, internet, and parking transactions, according to the legislative summary. ... Delegate Gregory Wims said: "Cash is the staple of our country. No person should be prohibited from using legal tender when trying to buy groceries at the supermarket or clothes at a clothing store." Cailey Locklair, president of the Maryland Retailers Alliance , said: "There are many reasons why businesses are moving toward a cashless model," said, citing concerns about safety, organized retail crime, and costs such as safes and deposit fees. She said many retailers are using "app based, mobile kiosk-kind of models that are designed to be cashless for efficiency and speed." Click here to read the full article from Newsweek .

As excerpted from Maryland Matters : A Montgomery County delegate is pushing a bill that would require businesses to accept cash payments for purchases less than $300, a move that supporters said keeps the economy open to all Marylanders. “Cash is the staple of our country,” Del. Gregory Wims (D-Montgomery) said at a House hearing last month on House Bill 191 . “No person should be prohibited from using legal tender when trying to buy groceries at the supermarket or clothes at a clothing store.” The bill, the “Consumer Protection – Retail Transactions – Cash Payments,” would address the growing number of incidents in which merchants do not accept cash payments at brick-and-mortar stores, said Wims, the sponsor of the bill. But some opponents argue a cash mandate could heighten safety risks for retailers and increase the cost of running a business. Since its Feb. 10 hearing in the House Economic Matters Committee the bill appears to have stalled. The legislation comes as more and more retailers refuse to accept cash, a policy bill supporters said could exclude undocumented people, low-income households and those without bank accounts from making purchases. The bill would also prohibit merchants from charging additional fees for customers paying with cash. The requirement would not apply to purchases made online, over the phone or by mail. Among other provisions, it would not include transactions when merchants are operating at a temporary location, including at an event. Advocates said the bill could help many low- and middle-income families who use cash or those who have maxed out their credit cards and are unable to use them. ... Cailey Locklair, president of the Maryland Retailers Alliance, said there are many reasons why businesses are moving toward a cashless model. She pointed to concerns, including employee safety, organized retail crime, robbery and theft. Many retailers are using “app based, mobile kiosk-kind of models that are designed to be cashless for efficiency and speed,” she said. There are also other costs associated with using cash, such as cash registers, safes, deposit fees and staff time to count the money, Locklair said. “For smaller retailers who operate on really thin margins, those costs can be significant,” she said. Click here to read the full article from Maryland Matters .

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 .