Menu

Price Gouging During an Emergency: Coronavirus Edition

Antitrust and Trade Regulation   |   Coronavirus   |   March 25, 2020
Download   
Share Page

Carlton Fields Coronavirus Resource Center

 

The COVID-19 pandemic has made commodities such as hand sanitizer, disinfectant, and toilet paper in high demand. The shortages, however temporary, have left shelves empty, orders unfulfilled, and items on back order. As a result, some consumers are willing to pay a premium.

But if businesses raise their prices too much during and after the coronavirus health emergency, such a practice may be considered price gouging, which is both a crime in California and conduct that could subject businesses to any number of civil lawsuits, including class action lawsuits.

Under California law, if the government declares a state of emergency or a local emergency, businesses cannot increase the price of food, repairs, construction, housing, emergency and medical supplies, and gasoline more than 10% in the disaster area. Landlords cannot raise their month-to-month rent by more than 10% in an emergency. These restrictions are in place for 30 days from the day the emergency is declared, but state and local officials may extend the effective period of the statute beyond such time if they deem it necessary to protect the lives, property, or welfare of citizens. Local ordinances may also prohibit price gouging on their own terms.

On March 4, 2020, Gov. Gavin Newsom declared an emergency in the state of California. Therefore, anti-price gouging laws are in full effect for all of California. Indeed, various enforcement agencies and task forces have mobilized to investigate and prosecute these and other claims related to COVID-19.

Similar restrictions are in place in many other jurisdictions across the nation. Just as the pandemic is widely felt, so too is the issue of price gouging. U.S. Sen. Edward Markey, in open letters to Amazon and the Federal Trade Commission, highlighted this very issue as having national import, citing by way of example a 2000% markup for certain items as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Businesses may not be without relief, however, given that prices do not fluctuate in a vacuum. If businesses can prove that the increased price is directly attributable to increases in the cost of labor or materials needed to provide the good or service, they may not be liable, at least in California. Thus, business owners who believe a price increase is justified should consider both whether they can raise prices and whether they should raise prices. Regardless, all businesses should monitor prices closely and keep complete records of all transactions as proof, e.g., estimates, invoices, receipts, or bills. When comparing products, businesses should note as much information as possible, including the product name, size or quantity, manufacturer, item number, and unit price.

Businesses have been forced to act quickly by the ongoing health crisis, but they should also be reminded to act wisely and act proactively, when possible. While we all hope the pandemic itself subsides in short order, the legal implications of actions taken during this sensitive time will be litigated for years to come. For instance, on March 10, 2020, a class action lawsuit was filed in Miami-Dade County, Florida, against Amazon alleging that Amazon was “preying upon the public’s fear of a surging epidemic and using COVID-19 as an opportunity to pad profits by way of unlawful price increases.” The consumer class is alleged to be: “All consumers in the State of Florida who purchased hygienic products from [Amazon] following the declaration of a state of emergency, on March 9, 2020.”

While some states, like Mississippi, have price gouging statutes that prohibit class actions to challenge a business’s alleged price gouging, California’s statute — California Penal Code section 396 — does not. On the contrary, the Legislature makes clear that a violation of section 396 constitutes an unlawful business practice and an act of unfair competition within the meaning of section 17200 of the Business and Professions Code, which expressly permits class action lawsuits.

At the same time, differences in each state’s laws may also be a potential trap for businesses operating nationwide. For example, Florida prohibits a “gross disparity” between the prior price and the current charge, a so-called unconscionable price, which is a more nebulous standard than the 10% threshold in California. And even in states without anti-price gouging laws, the declaration of a state of emergency can result in emergency legislation.

Although this may be a precarious time, even in emergencies (and especially in emergencies), businesses must continue to act prudently and stay informed. Not only do consumers demand it, but also the law demands it. Please feel free to reach out to us if you need help charting a path forward or if we can address any pressing issues.


©2020 Carlton Fields, P.A. Carlton Fields practices law in California through Carlton Fields, LLP. Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please use our Contact Us form via the link below. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites.

Subscribe to Publications

Disclaimer

The information on this website is presented as a service for our clients and Internet users and is not intended to be legal advice, nor should you consider it as such. Although we welcome your inquiries, please keep in mind that merely contacting us will not establish an attorney-client relationship between us. Consequently, you should not convey any confidential information to us until a formal attorney-client relationship has been established. Please remember that electronic correspondence on the internet is not secure and that you should not include sensitive or confidential information in messages. With that in mind, we look forward to hearing from you.