HB26-1210 relies on extremely broad definitions of “surveillance data” and “automated decision systems” that could unintentionally ban routine, pro-consumer practices such as personalized discounts, recommendation systems and common pricing software. The bill also creates significant legal risk through large per-transaction penalties and a private right of action that would invite costly litigation over ordinary business conduct. As a result, the measure could discourage companies from operating in Colorado, reducing competition, innovation and consumer benefits rather than addressing genuine predatory pricing practices.
NetChoice Testimony in Opposition to CO HB26-1210
March 12, 2026
Colorado Legislature
House Business Affairs and Labor Committee
Dear Chair Ricks, Vice Chair Camacho and Members of the House Business Affairs and Labor Committee,
NetChoice, a trade association of leading internet companies committed to free expression and free enterprise online, appreciates the opportunity to provide testimony on House Bill 26-1210. We respectfully urge the Committee to oppose this legislation, which, while well-intentioned, would create serious harm to Colorado businesses, consumers and workers through overbroad restrictions on common and beneficial commercial practices.
The Bill’s Definitions are Dangerously Overbroad
The bill’s core definitions sweep so broadly that they would effectively prohibit a wide range of routine, legitimate and pro-consumer business activities. The definition of surveillance data encompasses virtually any information a business might gather about its customers — including purchase history, web browsing behavior and even publicly available information. Similarly, the definition of an automated decision system is expansive enough to capture basic pricing software, inventory management tools and ordinary recommendation algorithms that have nothing to do with the exploitative practices the bill’s sponsors rightly want to address.
As written, the bill could prohibit a retailer from offering a returning customer a personalized discount based on past purchases — a practice consumers overwhelmingly appreciate and expect. It could disrupt logistics-based pricing that reflects real differences in delivery costs. And it could expose businesses to crushing per-transaction penalties of up to $10,000 for conduct that is genuinely beneficial to consumers. The private right of action, with its statutory damages floor and class action mechanism, virtually guarantees litigation over ambiguous conduct rather than deterrence of actual bad actors.
The Bill Would Harm the Workers and Consumers It Purports to Protect
Personalized pricing and targeted compensation structures often benefit consumers and workers. Personalized discounts and offers help price-sensitive consumers access goods and services they might otherwise forgo. Performance-based compensation systems, including many bonus and incentive structures that this bill could reach, give workers meaningful opportunities to earn more based on their skills and output. Restricting these practices does not level the playing field — it removes tools that frequently work in favor of everyday people.
Dynamic pricing, which the bill attempts to carve out, is difficult to cleanly separate from the practices the bill prohibits. In practice, a business’s understanding of consumer demand is informed by behavioral data. Drawing a workable legal line between lawful dynamic pricing and prohibited “individualized price setting” will be extremely difficult, creating compliance uncertainty that will chill innovation and investment in Colorado.
Colorado has worked hard to build a competitive environment for technology and commerce. This bill — layered on top of the Colorado Privacy Act and other recent legislation — adds yet another compliance regime with vague standards, broad enforcement authority and severe penalties. Businesses, particularly those operating nationally, may simply choose to structure their operations to avoid Colorado customers and workers rather than navigate this uncertain legal landscape. The result would be less competition, fewer jobs and ultimately higher prices for Colorado consumers, the precise opposite of the bill’s stated goals.
We share the sponsors’ concern about genuinely predatory uses of personal data — charging a diabetic consumer more for medical supplies, or exploiting a desperate worker’s financial circumstances to suppress wages. These are serious harms that deserve serious attention. But the remedy should be targeted at those specific, demonstrable harms, not a sweeping prohibition that treats beneficial personalization as equivalent to predatory exploitation. We urge the Committee to work with stakeholders to craft narrower legislation that addresses documented abuses without placing Colorado businesses at a competitive disadvantage or depriving consumers of the benefits of modern commerce.
For these reasons, we respectfully ask the Committee to oppose HB26-1210 in its current form.
Amy Bos
Vice President of Government Affairs, NetChoice (The views of NetChoice expressed here do not necessarily represent the views of all NetChoice members.)
NetChoice is a trade association that works to protect free expression and promote free enterprise online.