DemocratBill · S. 2321· Senate(119-S-2321)

Price Gouging Prevention Act of 2025

Rep. Warren
Age: 77 years
Massachusetts
Introduced
7/17/2025
Last activity
7/17/2025 — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Sponsored by
Elizabeth Warren
Cosponsors
Democrat - 8Republican - 0
Commerce
  1. Introduced
  2. In Committee

What this bill would do

The Price Gouging Prevention Act of 2025 aims to make the sale of goods or services at grossly excessive prices unlawful. It establishes specific rules for when a person is presumed to be in violation of the law, particularly during exceptional market shocks. The bill expands the enforcement powers of the Federal Trade Commission to seek injunctions, civil penalties, and consumer restitution. It also provides authority to State Attorneys General to bring civil actions to enforce these provisions. Additionally, the act requires certain companies to include specific pricing and margin disclosures in their SEC filings following market shocks. Finally, the bill appropriates $1,000,000,000 to the Commission for its work.

Yes· 3 of 6

  • Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices?+6

    The bill provides strong protections against price gouging through FTC enforcement and consumer restitution.

  • Does this give the federal government more power?+5

    The bill significantly expands the enforcement authority of the FTC and requires new SEC disclosures.

  • Would households on low incomes be better off under this?+5

    Protection against price gouging during market shocks directly benefits low-income consumers.

The opposite

  • Would billionaires be better off under this?-5

    Large-revenue entities face stricter scrutiny and much higher potential civil penalties.

  • Would business owners be better off under this?-4

    The bill imposes new regulatory burdens and potential civil penalties on businesses.

  • Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts?-2

    The bill establishes presumptions of violation that require clear and convincing evidence to rebut.