Click-to-Cancel, Coast to Coast: The 2026 Subscription Crackdown Comes From Every Direction
by: Mindy Abern
If your business bills customers on a recurring basis, 2026 has been a wakeup call. At the beginning of the year, Sara Chubb summarized FTC’s subscription enforcement, and it is definitely not slowing down. The Federal Trade Commission, state attorneys general, city regulators, and the plaintiffs' bar have set their sights set on the same target: recurring charges and hidden fees including autorenewal and negative-option programs. The good news is that the risk is manageable. Across nearly every action so far this year, the problem was not the subscription itself, but rather how the recurring charge was disclosed, how consent was obtained, and how hard it was to cancel.
In May, Shutterstock agreed to pay $35 million to resolve FTC allegations over its automatic renewal and cancellation practices. In July, travel app Hopper also agreed to pay $35 million to settle claims that it charged fees without consent and overstated the value of what customers were buying, a reminder that the FTC's fee-transparency principles reach beyond classic subscriptions to pre-selected, hidden charges. In June, at the FTC's request, a federal court temporarily halted an enterprise of alleged deceptive subscription schemes, including 15 corporations and eight individuals. The lesson from each of these matters is the same: tell people clearly what they are signing up for, and get their consent, before you charge them.
States and cities are getting in on the action, too. In May, the Washington attorney general secured a $2.25 million settlement with cleaning service Homeaglow over its automatic-renewal practices, paired with allegations about deceptive review claims, a reminder that regulators can bundle subscription and endorsement issues together. Also in May, New York City closed the public comment period on its version of a click-to-cancel rule, signaling that compliance down to the municipal level is on the rise.
Private class actions are following suit. A California suit against the maker of the cannabis-infused beverage Brez alleges the company hid its auto-renewal terms in small gray font to lock a shopper into a recurring $54.21 charge. A New York class action claims Match.com advertised its "most compatible" matches to draw subscribers in without first disclosing that the feature costs extra. A proposed class action against Anthropic alleges its Claude Max "5x" and "20x" plans deliver far less usage than the marketing implies, bringing AI and technology subscriptions into the fire as well.
There is an encouraging part. In July, a Washington federal court granted summary judgement dismissing a proposed class action accusing Amazon and its subsidiary Audible of deceptively enrolling customers in audiobook subscriptions on the grounds that the plaintiff had not shown she was actually misled. The takeaway from that ruling is that companies with clear and conspicuous disclosures and a genuine consent flow can prevail. This is a solvable compliance problem, not an existential threat to the subscription model.
What companies should do now:
1. Disclose recurring charges, their amount, and frequency legibly, clearly and conspicuously, before you collect payment information.
2. Get separate, express consent to recurring charges. Do not bury it in the terms and conditions or use pre-checked boxes.
3. Make the total cost and what is included evident. Overstating value or hiding that a certain feature costs extra draws the same scrutiny as a hidden fee.
4. Allow people to cancel as easily as they signed up (i.e., a one-click sign-up should not lead to a multi-step cancellation maze).
5. Know your obligations across authorities including the FTC, state laws, and emerging local rules.
Enforcement is not going to stop, and it is coming from all directions, but the solution is the same regardless of who is knocking: clear disclosures, actual consent, and an easy exit. Businesses that build those three things into their sign-up and cancellation flows are in great shape.
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. This summary does not constitute legal advice.