The federal agency wants to know whether businesses use browsing history, location, loyalty programs and artificial intelligence to set individual prices or determine gig-worker pay.
The Federal Trade Commission has ordered nine major U.S. companies, including Walmart, Delta Air Lines and Uber, to disclose how they use personal information when setting consumer prices and worker compensation. The inquiry, announced October 28, 2026, examines whether businesses use artificial intelligence and other technologies to charge different customers different amounts for the same products or services.
The investigation covers three airlines, two ride-sharing platforms, two delivery services and two national retailers. Each company has 45 days after receiving its order to provide information about its pricing methods, data collection and the technology used to make decisions.
FTC Chairman Andrew N. Ferguson said the agency wants to determine whether businesses use information about individual customers to calculate how much they are willing to pay. The inquiry will also examine whether gig workers receive different compensation offers based on personal characteristics or their previous behavior.
The orders do not mean that any of the nine companies has violated federal law. The FTC is conducting a fact-finding study, and the information collected could help determine whether further consumer-protection action is necessary.
Nine Major Companies Face FTC Scrutiny
The FTC issued its information demands to Delta Air Lines, United Airlines, JetBlue, Uber, Lyft, DoorDash, Instacart, Target and Walmart. These companies serve millions of consumers who regularly purchase goods, book travel or arrange transportation through digital platforms.
The investigation focuses on whether prices vary according to information about individual consumers rather than ordinary market conditions. It also examines whether participation in loyalty programs or the use of sophisticated algorithms influences the offers people receive.
According to the FTC’s announcement, the agency wants companies to document the tools and procedures they use when setting prices. The orders are intended to uncover whether personal information plays a role in determining what customers pay for identical or comparable goods and services.
The commission approved the investigation in a unanimous 2-0 vote. It issued the orders under Section 6(b) of the FTC Act, which allows the agency to conduct broad studies without first alleging a violation of federal law.
Companies are legally required to respond to these information demands. If a recipient refuses to provide the requested material, the FTC can ask a federal court to compel compliance.
What Is Personalized or Surveillance Pricing?
Personalized pricing occurs when a business uses information about a particular consumer to determine the price that person sees. The practice is sometimes called surveillance pricing because it may rely on data collected from online activity, shopping habits or other personal information.
For example, a retailer could analyze a customer’s purchasing history and estimate whether that person would accept a higher price. Another shopper viewing the same product at the same time might receive a lower offer based on a different profile.
Companies can potentially collect information about browsing history, location, device usage, previous purchases and responses to promotions. Artificial intelligence systems can process these details to predict individual purchasing behavior and willingness to pay.
Personalized pricing differs from ordinary dynamic pricing, which adjusts prices according to broader market conditions. Airlines commonly change ticket prices based on demand, remaining seat availability and the timing of a reservation.
Dynamic pricing does not automatically mean that a business is using sensitive personal information to discriminate between individual customers. The FTC’s investigation seeks to determine whether some companies go beyond standard pricing methods by relying on data about specific people.
The distinction matters because customers may assume that an advertised price is generally available to everyone shopping under the same conditions. If a company secretly changes that price based on personal information, consumers may have difficulty recognizing or challenging the difference.
FTC Also Examines How Gig Workers Are Paid
The investigation extends beyond consumer prices to include the compensation offered to ride-sharing drivers and delivery workers. Platforms such as Uber, Lyft, DoorDash and Instacart rely heavily on automated systems to match workers with available jobs.
Those systems can calculate payments based on trip length, delivery distance, estimated completion time and other operational factors. However, regulators want to know whether personal information about individual workers also influences the amount offered.
The FTC specifically identified phone usage and previous acceptance of work offers as examples of information that might affect compensation. A platform could potentially use such details to predict whether a particular worker would accept a lower payment.
This practice is sometimes described as personalized compensation or algorithmic wage discrimination. It raises questions about transparency because workers may not understand why different people receive different offers for comparable assignments.
Unlike employees receiving fixed hourly wages, many gig workers evaluate individual offers before accepting assignments. Their earnings can vary throughout the day depending on demand, the availability of jobs and the formulas used by each platform.
The commission has requested information about the tools, data inputs and procedures companies use to calculate compensation. Its goal is to determine whether these systems rely on personal characteristics in ways that workers might not expect.
Delta, Walmart and Instacart Respond to Concerns
Several companies have publicly rejected suggestions that they use personal information to set individualized prices. Delta said it does not use customer data to determine personalized ticket prices and has not tested or planned such offers.
The airline explained that its fares depend on factors including market demand and seat availability. It maintains that these established pricing practices are different from using personal profiles to estimate what individual passengers are willing to pay.
JetBlue also said its pricing is based on conventional airline factors rather than individual customer information. Its response emphasized that ticket prices change as demand and available inventory change.
Walmart has likewise denied using personal information such as income or shopping history to establish different prices for individual customers. Company executives have said the retailer does not intend to adopt that approach.
Instacart told The Associated Press that compensation for its shoppers is calculated using job-related considerations, including the number of items in an order and the distance traveled. The company said personal characteristics are not used to decide what shoppers earn.
Instacart also emphasized that retailers determine grocery product prices on its platform. That distinction separates the company’s role as a delivery and technology provider from the pricing decisions made by individual stores.
These statements explain the companies’ publicly stated policies, but they do not replace the FTC’s independent examination. The agency is seeking detailed records that could allow it to evaluate whether actual business practices match those descriptions.
Growing Concerns About AI and Consumer Data
The investigation comes as companies increasingly rely on artificial intelligence to analyze customer behavior and automate business decisions. Retailers, airlines and digital platforms can use these tools to forecast demand, identify buying patterns and develop targeted promotions.
Such technology can offer legitimate benefits, including more relevant discounts and improved inventory management. However, it can also create concerns when consumers do not know which personal details affect the offers they receive.
Reports of shoppers seeing different prices for seemingly identical products have contributed to public concern. However, differences shown in screenshots do not necessarily prove personalized pricing because prices may also vary by location, store inventory, timing or promotional eligibility.
Consumer advocates argue that people should understand when their personal information affects what they are charged. Without disclosure, shoppers may have difficulty determining whether they are receiving an ordinary market price or an individually calculated offer.
Businesses may also face questions about whether personalized pricing creates unequal treatment for customers with similar needs. The FTC’s study is intended to gather evidence before deciding whether particular practices raise legal concerns.
FTC Previously Proposed Personalized Pricing Guidance
The new investigation follows an FTC proposal announced in August 2026 concerning the undisclosed use of personal information in pricing decisions. The proposed enforcement policy statement warned that businesses could violate consumer-protection laws if they mislead customers about how prices are determined.
The proposal did not seek to prohibit every form of personalized pricing. Instead, it focused on circumstances in which companies fail to disclose practices that could materially affect a consumer’s purchasing decision.
Ferguson said the agency does not have broad authority to ban personalized pricing in all situations. Nevertheless, he argued that existing laws may apply when companies use personal information deceptively or unfairly.
The commission initially invited public comments through September 18 and subsequently extended the deadline to September 25. The current investigation is a separate action that directly requests information from the businesses making pricing and compensation decisions.
The FTC previously studied surveillance-pricing technology by gathering information from companies that supplied pricing tools to other businesses. Ferguson criticized that approach because it did not directly examine the decisions made by retailers and service providers themselves.
The new orders are intended to address that gap by obtaining information from companies that sell products, provide transportation and employ or contract with gig workers. Investigators will be able to compare the methods used across several industries.
What Happens Next?
The nine companies must provide the requested information within 45 days of receiving their orders. The FTC can then review their responses, compare pricing practices and determine whether additional investigation or enforcement is appropriate.
The agency has not announced a timetable for publishing the results of its study. It also has not accused any of the recipients of illegally charging consumers more or improperly reducing worker compensation.
For consumers, the inquiry may eventually clarify whether personal browsing habits, shopping history or loyalty-program participation influence the prices they see. For gig workers, it could provide more information about the formulas that determine their earnings.
The FTC’s immediate next step is collecting records from the nine companies. Whether those records reveal undisclosed personalized pricing, questionable compensation practices or ordinary business methods will depend on the evidence submitted and the agency’s review.
IMAGE: Source Visit of Michael McGrath, European Commissioner, to United States Author Craig Hudson CC4