- within Consumer Protection topic(s)
- with readers working within the Retail & Leisure industries
- within Government, Public Sector, Tax and Strategy topic(s)
The Province of Manitoba has sent a clear signal to the retail sector that data‑driven price differentiation is under scrutiny. Proposed amendments to the Business Practices Act under Bill 49 targets “predatory” pricing models that adjust prices based on who the customer is, what their data reveals, or where they live. Retailers using or considering advanced digital pricing tools should take note.
A First‑of‑Its‑Kind Rule
If passed, charging different consumers different prices based on personal data or algorithmic profiling would become a (prohibited) unfair business practice. Individual inputs like purchase history, socio‑economic indicators, income‑related data, credit or medical information, geographic location, could not be used to offer differential pricing. The Bill also makes clear that both bricks-and-mortar and online retailers and distributors fall squarely within its scope.
Why It Matters
Under the new Bill, dynamic pricing isn’t prohibited, but personalized dynamic pricing is. Retailers can still adjust prices based on inventory, time, or market conditions. What they cannot do is use individualized data to push certain customers toward higher prices.
For national retailers, this raises the prospect of province‑specific compliance obligations, and potentially similar legislation emerging elsewhere, as several other provinces are updating similar consumer protection statutes.
Enforcement Has Teeth
The Consumer Protection Office would be empowered to investigate and levy significant penalties, including fines for corporations of up to $300,000 for a first offence and up to $1,000,000 for subsequent offences. Even unintentional discrepancies may attract scrutiny if pricing systems appear to treat consumers differently, so retailers should be ensure human oversight of AI or algorithmic pricing decisions.
What Retailers Should Do Now
- Audit pricing algorithms to identify any use of personal or inferred data in price setting
- Map data flows to confirm all consumer data being collected
- Review vendor tools to understand whether this data is being used to generate pricing
- Validate that online pricing differences are based on non‑personalized factors
The Bottom Line
Bill 49 reflects a broader shift toward regulating algorithmic decision‑making in retail. Even if it takes months to come into force, retailers should begin preparing now. Strengthening data governance and clarifying pricing logic will reduce regulatory risk and build consumer trust at a time when pricing practices are under intense scrutiny.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
[View Source]
