From JustAnswer to Instacart: The FTC’s Latest Subscription Enforcement
Since securing a landmark $2.5 billion settlement in September 2025 against Amazon for deceptive practices relating to Prime subscriptions, the Federal Trade Commission’s subscription program compliance enforcement hasn’t slowed. Subscription programs with inadequate disclosures and consents, misleading free-trial conversions and difficult cancellation flows are squarely in the FTC’s crosshairs. Here, we round-up recent FTC activity in the subscription compliance space.
FTC Sues JustAnswer for Deceptive Subscription Practices
Last month, the FTC filed a lawsuit against JustAnswer LLC and its CEO, alleging deceptive practices related to recurring monthly subscriptions. The complaint alleges consumers were presented with low-cost “join” offers to use the JustAnswer service and receive an answer to their questions, when in fact consumers were enrolled in monthly subscriptions costing up to $125 per month when signing up for the service. The FTC alleges that the subscription terms were not clearly disclosed before payment and that the subscription terms flatly contradict express representations that consumers can join the service and receive an answer for a low cost ($1 or $5). The complaint notes that (i) JustAnswer made changes to the platform over time to remove disclosures or make them less prominent, and (ii) paid search ads driving consumers to sign-up made no mention about the platform’s subscription model.
Instacart Agrees to $60 Million Settlement
In December 2025, Instacart reached a $60 million settlement with the FTC over alleged violations of the FTC Act and the Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act (ROSCA). In addition to deceptive “free delivery” and “100% satisfaction guarantee” claims, the FTC alleged Instacart failed to clearly disclose material terms of the Instacart+ subscription, including that customers’ free trials would automatically convert to a paid subscription program. As a result, Instacart failed to secure informed consent before charging customers for paid memberships.
FTC and Multiple States File Amended Complaint Against Uber
In December 2025, the FTC—joined by 21 states and the District of Columbia—filed an amended complaint seeking civil penalties alleging further violations of ROSCA and related state laws. The original complaint, filed by the FTC in April 2025, alleged the company engaged in deceptive and misleading practices with respect to billing and cancellation for its Uber One subscription program. The amended complaint highlights similar allegations, including unauthorized charges and excessive user steps required to cancel. The complaint notes Uber promises that consumers may “cancel anytime” but, in practice, bills customers before the stated billing date, during the free trial. The complaint further alleges Uber used tactics to frustrate cancellation, alleging the cancellation process is “time-restricted, time intensive, and often ineffective.”
Negative Option Rulemaking: FTC ANPRM Under Review
On January 30, 2026, the FTC submitted a draft Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) to the Office of Management and Budget regarding negative option agreements, which include automatic renewals and free trial conversions. This signals an intention by the Republican FTC to restart the rulemaking process after the FTC’s “click-to-cancel” Negative Option Rule issued under the Biden administration was struck down on procedural grounds last year.
What Next?
Features available through popular e-commerce platforms make it easier than ever for companies to roll out subscription programs, however companies must ensure those programs are compliant. Whether subscription offerings have long been part of your business or are something new, most companies could benefit from a compliance audit.
Key Compliance Considerations:
Prominent and Clear Disclosures: Display all material terms — pricing, renewal, billing cadence, free trial conversion, and cancellation process — before collecting payment information.
Affirmative Consumer Consent: Secure clear, unambiguous consent to the material terms of the subscription program.
Easy Cancellation Mechanisms: Cancellation should as easy as enrolling (e.g., same channel, number of steps). Avoid burying cancellation links behind excessive screens or customer service interactions. Don’t overlook state specific requirements, including those in states like California and Minnesota that limit “save attempts” during cancellation.
Free Trial Conversions: Clearly and conspicuously disclose when charges will occur and how to cancel to avoid charges. Additional consents and reminders may be required under state law depending on the trial length.
Maintain Records: Track consumer consent and subscription disclosures in compliance with applicable law and to help defend against enforcement.
Don’t Forget State Law Compliance: A majority of states regulate auto-renewing and negative option products and services in some capacity. Many have comprehensive and nuanced requirements with respect to disclosures, consents, renewal reminder timing, cancellation and record-keeping, among other requirements.
Originally published by InfoLawGroup LLP. If you would like to receive regular emails from us, in which we share updates and our take on current legal news, please subscribe to InfoLawGroup’s Insights HERE.