Skip to content

Session Expired

Your session has expired. Please sign in again to continue where you left off.

Sign In Again

HI HB2611: Relating To Antitrust.

Dead/Failed Hawaii

Last verified Oct 10, 2026 · official bill text

HB2611 · where it stands

This bill did not become law (dead/failed) · last action Feb 11, 2026.

What do these statuses mean?
Introduced
Filed in the legislature; may be waiting for a committee hearing.
Passed a chamber
Approved by one or both chambers; awaiting further action.
Enacted
Signed into law, or became law without a signature or over a veto.
Effective date
The date the law says it takes effect. Once it has passed, the page shows "Effective" and the date. A court order can still block a law; if we know of one, the summary says so.
Dead / vetoed
Vetoed, failed, or the session ended without action.

In one paragraph

Hawaii's House Bill 2611 (2026) would have made it unlawful for a software or data analytics service to collect rent, supply or lease-date data from two or more landlords, process it with computation (including to train an algorithm) and recommend rents, lease terms or occupancy levels, and for two or more landlords to engage in consciously parallel pricing coordination. It would have amended the penalty section with fines up to $100,000 for individuals and $1,000,000 for entities. HSG deferred it February 11, 2026 and it was not enacted.

Plain-English summary, written with AI assistance. The official text controls.

What it means for business

None: the bill was not enacted. If enacted, rental pricing software or data services and landlords sharing pricing data would have faced antitrust liability and criminal fines.

Key provisions

  1. Would have made it unlawful for a 'coordinator' to perform a coordinating function, to facilitate an agreement among rental owners restricting competition on pricing, lease terms or occupancy, and for two or more owners to engage in consciously parallel pricing coordination
  2. 'Coordinating function' means collecting prices, supply or lease dates from two or more owners, analyzing them with a system, software or process that uses computation (including to train an algorithm), and recommending rents, renewal terms or occupancy levels
  3. Would have added the section to the penalty provision, section 480-16: individuals up to $100,000, up to three years in prison or both; entities up to $1,000,000
  4. Would have required the Attorney General to run a public education program and adopt rules, and eased the pleading standard for civil complaints
  5. Referred to HSG, JHA, FIN February 2, 2026; deferred by HSG February 11, 2026; stated effective upon approval; same measure as SB 157 (2025), which passed the Senate but also died

Latest legislative action

Feb 11, 2026. The committee(s) on HSG recommend(s) that the measure be deferred.

Sponsors (showing 5 of 43)

NameRole
Primary
Primary
Primary
Primary
Primary

Related and companion bills

Topics and industries

Related topics

Affected industries

This page is general information, not legal advice. Summaries are AI-assisted and may contain errors; read the statute for the controlling text and talk to a lawyer about your situation. Full disclaimer · Report an error