Careers

Diversity

With 18 offices, from New York to Los Angeles and Seattle to Orlando, we live and work in communities all over the U.S., collaborating across locations, disciplines and even borders. Our experienced, highly ranked lawyers serve businesses wherever they are and wherever they want to go.

Offices

About Us

Pages

Professionals

Thought leadership: blogs, podcasts, videos, publications, events and news

Insights

Practices & Industries

Pro Bono

Am Law 100 firm with practices in Business, Digital Assets and Data Management, Intellectual Property, Labor & Employment, Litigation and Tax.

Home | BakerHostetler

Court Finds Temporary Section 122 Tariffs Unlawful

Chad Rutkowski Addresses ABA IPL Copyright and Tech Committee Meeting

US State Action Doctrine Narrowed by Federal Appeals Court: Megatel Homes, LLC v. Cityof Mansfield, Texas (Concurrences)

Alexander Reid Takes Part in Panel at 2026 Updates in Higher Education Taxation Live Webcast

On April 9, the Federal Trade Commission <a href="https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2026/04/stubhub-refunding-10-million-fees-consumers-after-deceptive-ticket-pricing" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">announced a settlement</a> with StubHub Holdings, Inc. resolving allegations that the company advertised live‑event ticket prices without disclosing the all-in price up front. This is the FTC’s first major settlement under its <a href="https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-16/chapter-I/subchapter-D/part-464" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Rule on Unfair or Deceptive Fees</a> (the Fees Rule), which took effect on May 12, 2025, and underscores the Commission’s heightened focus on price transparency and junk fees.

core/paragraph

The FTC’s Rule on Unfair or Deceptive Fees

core/heading

The FTC adopted the Fees Rule to combat pricing practices that hide the true cost of goods and services, including alleged junk fees. The rule applies to live‑event tickets and short‑term lodging (e.g., hotels and short-term rentals). It essentially requires businesses to utilize all-in pricing by clearly and conspicuously disclosing the total price (including mandatory fees or charges a consumer must pay) wherever the price is displayed.

Up‑Front Total Price Disclosures: Businesses must clearly and conspicuously disclose the total price, including mandatory fees, wherever the price appears.

core/list-item

Final Payment Amount Prominence: Where companies display the final payment amount (which includes taxes, shipping fees, etc.), that amount must be at least as prominent as the total price.

Prohibition on Misleading Fees: Businesses are prohibited from misrepresenting the nature, purpose, amount or refundability of any fee or charge.

core/list

In addition to injunctive and other relief, the Commission may seek civil penalties from businesses that knowingly violate the Fees Rule.

In its <a href="https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/StubHub-Complaint.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">complaint</a> filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, the FTC emphasized StubHub’s knowledge of and public support for the Fees Rule. The FTC alleged that the company made a strategic decision to delay compliance because the schedule for a major sporting event was being released the same week the Fees Rule went into effect.

Public Support for the Fees Rule: StubHub publicly supported the Fees Rule and submitted comments endorsing all‑in pricing.

Prior Experience with All‑In Pricing: StubHub previously implemented all‑in pricing voluntarily but abandoned it after deciding it placed the company at a competitive disadvantage.

Intentional Delay Tied to High-Traffic Event: StubHub chose not to immediately implement all-in pricing when the Fees Rule took effect on May 12, 2025. Instead, StubHub adopted a phased rollout because tickets for a major sporting event (which StubHub described internally as a “99th percentile traffic event”) were being released that week.

Short Duration of Alleged Noncompliance: The FTC acknowledged that the alleged noncompliance lasted for only approximately three days but claimed the short duration did not mitigate the impact, given the volume of consumer traffic.

In addition to the Fees Rule, the FTC alleged that this conduct violated <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/45" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Section 5 of the FTC Act</a>, which prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices.

To resolve these allegations, StubHub entered into a <a href="https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/StubHub-Order.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">stipulated order</a> with the FTC. Under the order, StubHub agreed to pay $10 million in monetary relief, which it will distribute to eligible consumers without requiring them to submit claims.

In addition to monetary relief, the order imposes injunctive relief on StubHub, including enjoining it from displaying prices without clearly and conspicuously disclosing the total price. The order also requires StubHub to clearly and conspicuously disclose the amount of any fees or charges that were not included in the total price, describe what they are for, and display the final payment amount before the consumer checks out. It also requires ongoing compliance with the Fees Rule, detailed recordkeeping, periodic compliance reporting and cooperation with FTC monitoring for up to 10 years.

This is the first major settlement involving the Fees Rule and highlights the FTC’s willingness to pursue enforcement actions even when the alleged noncompliance was brief, especially if that period coincides with a high-volume event. In a separate <a href="https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/stubhub-ferguson-statement.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">public statement</a>, FTC Chairman Andrew Ferguson emphasized the Commission’s commitment to implementing President Donald Trump’s directive that the FTC “ensure price transparency at all stages of the ticket-purchasing process.”

Additionally, while the Fees Rule is limited to live‑event tickets and short‑term lodging, the Commission has shown that it will use the FTC Act to combat allegedly deceptive pricing in other industries, including the <a href="https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/greystar_complaint_-_filed.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">housing rental</a> and <a href="https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2026/03/ftc-warns-97-auto-dealership-groups-about-deceptive-pricing" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">car</a> markets. This is particularly important because <a href="https://www.wsj.com/personal-finance/surcharges-are-suddenly-everywhereand-grumpy-americans-are-paying-up-d5cb0e32" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">The Wall Street Journal recently highlighted the rise of hidden fees across numerous industries</a>. Additionally, <a href="https://www.adventures-in-law.com/blogs/2025-year-in-review-junk-fee-laws/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">states remain active in this space</a>, with some adopting laws that go beyond the limited industry scope of the Fees Rule.

Businesses, especially those operating in the live-event or short-term rental markets, should consider taking proactive action, including:

Reviewing consumer purchase flows to ensure that compliant total price disclosures appear everywhere the price is displayed

Reviewing payment screens to ensure that all final payment amount disclosures comply with the Fees Rule

Vetting new consumer purchase flows to ensure compliance with price disclosure requirements

Documenting processes designed to ensure compliance with price disclosure rules, and recording when reviews were conducted

FTC v. StubHub: $10 Million Settlement Signals Aggressive Enforcement of New Fees Rule

Featured Insights

Related Services

Featured Insights