In one paragraph
Maryland's HB 148 (2026) would have barred surveillance-based price setting (new Commercial Law section 14-1330) and surveillance-based wage setting (new Labor and Employment section 3-718): using surveillance data with an automated decision system to offer or inform a customized price or wage for an individual or group. It was pre-filed August 14, 2025, introduced January 14, 2026 and referred to Economic Matters, where the last recorded action was a February 10 hearing notice. It died when the 2026 session ended.
Plain-English summary, written with AI assistance. The official text controls.
What it means for business
None: the bill died when the 2026 session ended and never became law. It would have barred businesses from using surveillance data and automated decision systems to set customized prices or wages.
Key provisions
- Would have added Commercial Law section 14-1330: "A person may not engage in surveillance-based price setting" (using surveillance data with an automated decision system to offer or inform a customized price for an individual or group in the State)
- Price-setting exemptions: pricing that reflects differences in the cost of serving different consumers, and discounts or rewards offered to all consumers on equal terms based on information the consumer voluntarily provides (e.g. senior, student, teacher, veteran or military status); data used for an exempt price could not be used for profiling, targeted advertising or other pricing
- Would have added Labor and Employment section 3-718: "An employer may not engage in surveillance-based wage setting"; exempt if the wage is based on data directly related to the task or on work location and cost of living, and the employer discloses before hiring, in plain language, what data the automated decision system considers
- A violation of section 14-1330 would have been an unfair, abusive or deceptive trade practice under the Maryland Consumer Protection Act (new Commercial Law section 13-301(14)(xlix)); the bill states no separate penalty amounts
- Wage setting: the Commissioner could mediate or ask the Attorney General to sue; the Attorney General could seek injunctive relief, damages or other relief in the county where the violation allegedly occurred
- Would have taken effect October 1, 2026; the bill has no sunset
Latest legislative action
Jan 19, 2026. Hearing 2/10 at 1:00 p.m.
Sponsors (showing 5 of 77)
| Name | Role |
|---|---|
| Allen | Primary |
| Attar | Primary |
| Atterbeary | Primary |
| Bagnall | Primary |
| Boyce | Primary |
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