At the National Association of Attorneys General (NAAG) 2026 Spring Consumer Protection Conference, attorneys general and staff from across the country emphasized a clear shift in enforcement priorities toward forward-looking, behavior-based oversight. Rather than focusing primarily on one-time monetary penalties, state attorneys general (AGs) are increasingly examining how companies use consumer data, structure pricing and maintain ongoing compliance. Artificial intelligence (AI) enabled personalized pricing and “surveillance pricing” emerged as key priority areas, amid accelerating state-level legislative activity and heightened attention to transparency, data use and fairness, particularly in areas where practices are less visible to consumers. At the same time, AG offices are expanding their enforcement toolkit, making greater use of independent monitors and more detailed, litigation-style civil investigative demands (CIDs), signaling that investigations may become more complex and resource-intensive at earlier stages. Emerging areas of interest, such as online age assurance, introduce additional complexity, with regulators balancing accuracy, privacy and accessibility amid legal uncertainty. AG offices are also pairing their enforcement efforts with increased interagency coordination, reinforcing the expectation that companies should expect greater scrutiny, evolving standards and continued experimentation at the state level.

A key focus of the conference was the growing use of algorithmic pricing and its implications for consumer protection. Panelists highlighted how advances in AI now allow companies to estimate consumers’ willingness to pay in real time, often without consumers understanding how prices are set. This has raised concerns related to transparency and fairness, particularly in the context of “surveillance pricing,” where companies draw on individualized data from online activity, purchase histories and loyalty programs to tailor prices. Panelists questioned whether consumers truly consent to these practices and noted that only 22 states currently have comprehensive data privacy laws, with no near-term prospects of a federal framework on the horizon. Loyalty programs, in particular, were identified as significant drivers of data collection. Wide-spread use of these programs prompted questions about whether they deliver genuine consumer benefits or if they primarily function as large-scale, data-gathering tools, and whether the most loyal customers actually receive the best prices.