H. Rept. 118-496 - TRANSPARENCY IN CHARGES FOR KEY EVENTS TICKETING ACT118th Congress (2023-2024)

118th Congress }                                          { Report 
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
  2d Session   }                                          { 118-496

======================================================================
 
          TRANSPARENCY IN CHARGES FOR KEY EVENTS TICKETING ACT

                                _______
                                

  May 10, 2024.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

Mrs. Rodgers of Washington, from the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 3950]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Energy and Commerce, to whom was referred 
the bill (H.R. 3950) to require sellers of event tickets to 
disclose comprehensive information to consumers about ticket 
prices and related fees, and for other purposes, having 
considered the same, reports favorably thereon with an 
amendment and recommends that the bill as amended do pass.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
Purpose and Summary..............................................     4
Background and Need for Legislation..............................     4
Committee Action.................................................     5
Committee Votes..................................................     6
Oversight Findings and Recommendations...........................     8
New Budget Authority, Entitlement Authority, and Tax Expenditures     8
Congressional Budget Office Estimate.............................     8
Federal Mandates Statement.......................................    13
Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives............    13
Duplication of Federal Programs..................................    13
Related Committee and Subcommittee Hearings......................    13
Committee Cost Estimate..........................................    13
Earmark, Limited Tax Benefits, and Limited Tariff Benefits.......    13
Advisory Committee Statement.....................................    14
Applicability to Legislative Branch..............................    14
Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation...................    14
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............    15

    The amendment is as follows:
  Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 
following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

  This Act may be cited as the ``Transparency In Charges for Key Events 
Ticketing Act'' or the ``TICKET Act''.

SEC. 2. ALL INCLUSIVE TICKET PRICE DISCLOSURE.

  Beginning 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, it 
shall be unlawful for a ticket issuer, secondary market ticket issuer, 
or secondary market ticket exchange to offer for sale an event ticket 
unless the ticket issuer, secondary market ticket issuer, or secondary 
market ticket exchange--
          (1) clearly and conspicuously displays the total event ticket 
        price, if a price is displayed, in any advertisement, 
        marketing, or price list wherever the ticket is offered for 
        sale;
          (2) clearly and conspicuously discloses to any individual who 
        seeks to purchase an event ticket the total event ticket price 
        at the time the ticket is first displayed to the individual and 
        anytime thereafter throughout the ticket purchasing process; 
        and
          (3) provides an itemized list of the base event ticket price 
        and each event ticket fee prior to the completion of the ticket 
        purchasing process.

SEC. 3. SPECULATIVE TICKETING BAN.

  (a) Prohibition.--Beginning 180 days after the date of the enactment 
of this Act, a ticket issuer, secondary market ticket issuer, or 
secondary market ticket exchange that does not have actual or 
constructive possession of an event ticket shall not sell, offer for 
sale, or advertise for sale such event ticket.
  (b) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section shall be construed 
to prohibit a secondary market ticket issuer or secondary market ticket 
exchange from offering a service to a consumer to obtain an event 
ticket on behalf of the consumer if the secondary market ticket issuer 
or secondary market ticket exchange complies with the following:
          (1) Does not market or list the service as an event ticket.
          (2) Maintains a clear, distinct, and easily discernible 
        separation between the service and event tickets through 
        unavoidable visual demarcation that persists throughout the 
        entire service selection and purchasing process.
          (3) Clearly and conspicuously discloses before selection of 
        the service that the service is not an event ticket and that 
        the purchase of the service does not guarantee an event ticket.
          (4) In the event the service is unable to obtain the 
        specified event ticket purchased through the service for the 
        consumer, provides the consumer that purchased the service, 
        within a reasonable amount of time--
                  (A) a full refund for the total cost of the service 
                to obtain an event ticket on behalf of the consumer; or
                  (B) subject to availability, a replacement event 
                ticket in the same or a comparable location with the 
                approval of the consumer.
          (5) Does not obtain more tickets in each transaction than the 
        numerical limitations for tickets set by the venue and artist 
        for each respective event.

SEC. 4. DECEPTIVE WEBSITES.

  A ticket issuer, secondary market ticket issuer, or secondary market 
ticket exchange--
          (1) shall provide a clear and conspicuous statement, before a 
        visitor purchases an event ticket from the ticket issuer, 
        secondary market ticket issuer, or secondary market ticket 
        exchange that the issuer or exchange is engaged in the 
        secondary sale of event tickets;
          (2) shall not state that the ticket issuer, secondary market 
        ticket issuer, or secondary market ticket exchange is 
        affiliated with or endorsed by a venue, team, or artist, as 
        applicable, unless a partnership agreement has been executed, 
        including by using words like ``official'' in promotional 
        materials, social media promotions, search engine optimization, 
        paid advertising, or search engine monetization unless the 
        issuer or exchange has the express written consent of the 
        venue, team, or artist, as applicable; and
          (3) shall not use a domain name, or any subdomain thereof, in 
        the URL of the ticket issuer, secondary market ticket issuer, 
        or secondary market ticket exchange that contains--
                  (A) the name of a specific team, league, or venue 
                where concerts, sports, or other live entertainment 
                events are held, unless authorized by the owner of the 
                name;
                  (B) the name of the exhibition or performance or of 
                another event described in subparagraph (A), including 
                the name of a person, team, performance, group, or 
                entity scheduled to perform at any such venue or event, 
                unless authorized by the owner of the name;
                  (C) any trademark or copyright not owned by the 
                ticket issuer, secondary market ticket issuer, or 
                secondary market ticket exchange, including any 
                trademark or copyright owned by an authorized agent or 
                partner of the venue or event identified in 
                subparagraph (A) and (B); or
                  (D) any name substantially similar to those described 
                in subparagraphs (A) and (B), including any misspelling 
                of any such name.

SEC. 5. REFUND REQUIREMENTS.

  (a) Cancellation.--Beginning 180 days after the date of the enactment 
of this Act, if an event is canceled or postponed (except for a case in 
which an event is canceled or postponed due to a cause beyond the 
reasonable control of the ticket issuer, including a natural disaster, 
civil disturbance, or otherwise unforeseeable impediment), a ticket 
issuer, secondary market ticket issuer, or secondary market ticket 
exchange shall provide the consumer, at the option of the purchaser, at 
a minimum--
          (1) a full refund for the total cost of the event ticket, any 
        event ticket fee, and any tax; or
          (2) subject to availability, if the event is postponed, a 
        replacement event ticket in the same or a comparable location 
        once the event has been rescheduled, with the approval of the 
        consumer.
  (b) Disclosure of Guarantee and Refund Policy Required.--Beginning 
180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, a ticket issuer, 
secondary market ticket issuer, or secondary market ticket exchange 
shall disclose clearly and conspicuously before the completion of an 
event ticket sale the guarantee or refund policy of such ticket issuer, 
secondary market ticket issuer, or secondary market ticket exchange, 
including under what circumstances any refund issued will include a 
refund of any event ticket fee and any tax.
  (c) Disclosure of How to Obtain a Refund Required.--Beginning 180 
days after the date of the enactment of this Act, a ticket issuer, 
secondary market ticket issuer, or secondary market ticket exchange 
shall provide a clear and conspicuous explanation of how to obtain a 
refund of the total cost of the ticket, any event ticket fee, and any 
tax.

SEC. 6. REPORT BY THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION ON BOTS ACT OF 2016 
                    ENFORCEMENT.

  Not later than 6 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, 
the Commission shall submit to Congress a report on enforcement of the 
Better Online Ticket Sales Act of 2016 (Public Law 114-274; 15 U.S.C. 
45c), including any enforcement action taken, challenges with 
enforcement and coordination with State Attorneys General, and 
recommendations on how to improve enforcement and industry compliance.

SEC. 7. ENFORCEMENT.

  (a) Unfair or Deceptive Act or Practice.--A violation of this Act 
shall be treated as a violation of a rule defining an unfair or 
deceptive act or practice under section 18(a)(1)(B) of the Federal 
Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 57a(a)(1)(B)).
  (b) Powers of Commission.--
          (1) In general.--The Commission shall enforce this Act in the 
        same manner, by the same means, and with the same jurisdiction, 
        powers, and duties as though all applicable terms and 
        provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 41 et 
        seq.) were incorporated into and made a part of this Act.
          (2) Privileges and immunities.--Any person who violates this 
        Act shall be subject to the penalties and entitled to the 
        privileges and immunities provided in the Federal Trade 
        Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 41 et seq.).
          (3) Authority preserved.--Nothing in this Act shall be 
        construed to limit the authority of the Commission under any 
        other provision of law.

SEC. 8. DEFINITIONS.

  In this Act:
          (1) Artist.--The term ``artist'' means any performer, 
        musician, comedian, producer, ensemble or production entity of 
        a theatrical production, sports team owner, or similar person.
          (2) Commission.--The term ``Commission'' means the Federal 
        Trade Commission.
          (3) Domain name.--The term ``domain name'' means a globally 
        unique, hierarchical reference to an Internet host or service, 
        which is assigned through centralized Internet naming 
        authorities, and which is comprised of a series of character 
        strings separated by periods, with the right most string 
        specifying the top of the hierarchy.
          (4) Event; event ticket; ticket issuer.--The terms ``event'', 
        ``event ticket'', and ``ticket issuer'' have the meaning given 
        those terms in the Better Online Ticket Sales Act of 2016 
        (Public Law 114-274).
          (5) Event ticket fee.--The term ``event ticket fee''--
                  (A) means a charge for an event ticket that must be 
                paid in addition to the base event ticket price in 
                order to obtain an event ticket from a ticket issuer, 
                secondary market ticket issuer, or secondary market 
                ticket exchange including any service fee, charge and 
                order processing fee, delivery fee, facility charge 
                fee, and any other charge; and
                  (B) does not include any charge or fee for an 
                optional product or service associated with the event 
                that may be selected by a purchaser of an event ticket.
          (6) Optional product or service.--The term ``optional product 
        or service'' means a product or service that an individual does 
        not need to purchase to use or take possession of an event 
        ticket.
          (7) Resale; secondary sale.--The terms ``resale'' and 
        ``secondary sale'' mean any sale of an event ticket that occurs 
        after the initial sale of the event ticket by a ticket issuer.
          (8) Secondary market ticket exchange.--The term ``secondary 
        market ticket exchange'' means any person that operates a 
        platform or exchange for advertising, listing, or selling 
        resale tickets, on behalf of itself, vendors, or a secondary 
        market ticket issuer.
          (9) Secondary market ticket issuer.--The term ``secondary 
        market ticket issuer'' means any person, including a ticket 
        issuer, that resells or makes a secondary sale of an event 
        ticket to the general public in the regular course of the trade 
        or business of the person.
          (10) Total event ticket price.--The term ``total event ticket 
        price'' means, with respect to an event ticket, the total cost 
        of the event ticket, including the base event ticket price and 
        any event ticket fee.
          (11) URL.--The term ``URL'' means the uniform resource 
        locator associated with an internet website.
          (12) Venue.--The term ``venue'' means a physical space at 
        which an event takes place.

                          PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

    H.R. 3950, the ``Transparency In Charges for Key Events 
Ticketing Act'' was introduced by Representatives Bilirakis and 
Schakowsky on November 2, 2023, and referred to the Committee 
on Energy and Commerce. This bill requires sellers of event 
tickets, on the primary and secondary markets, to disclose 
comprehensive information to consumers about ticket prices, 
ticket procurement service, and refunds. Additionally, the bill 
will provide an enforcement mechanism for fake and deceptive 
websites claiming to be selling legitimate event tickets. The 
Federal Trade Commission (FTC) will enforce the provisions of 
the Act.

                  BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    According to the Wall Street Journal, nearly 60 percent of 
Americans have had to cut back on spending on live 
entertainment because of rising costs, with 37 percent of 
survey respondents saying they cannot keep up with the rising 
price of events they would like to attend, and 20 percent being 
willing to take out debt to continue to afford their favorite 
entertainment activities.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\Robbie Whelan and Anne Steele, It's Getting Too Expensive to 
Have Fun, Wall Street Journal (Oct. 2023), https://www.wsj.com/economy/
consumers/its-getting-too-expensive-to-have-fun-a59e9df8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Junk fees associated with event ticketing are commonplace 
and allow ticket sellers to increase their revenue without 
providing clear and timely disclosures about the actual cost of 
buying tickets.\2\ In addition to encouraging consumers to 
spend more than they had intended to, these fees make it nearly 
impossible for consumers to comparison shop for the best deal 
across ticketing platforms. Consumers find these fees to be 
frustrating, and that they lack transparency leading to 
material information being omitted from pricing information. 
This often harms consumers who are price shopping for the best 
value and misleads consumers about total cost they will pay. 
These fees is that they are often levied after the checkout 
process has been nearly completed. One expert, Jeff Galak, a 
professor of marketing at Carnegie Mellon University's Tepper 
School of Business, explained that ``[b]y the time the fee is 
tacked on, it's too late . . . It's either actually too late, 
like `I'm standing at the hotel check-in desk, I don't have a 
choice anymore.' Or it's apparently too late.''\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\Clear Barrett, `Drip Pricing' is a Scandal, Financial Times 
(Sept. 2023), https://www.ft.com/content/44ae564c-2758-415f-9728-
20a8bc092ffb.
    \4\Stacey Vanek Smith, What my $30 Hamburger Reveals About Fees and 
how Companies use them to Jack Up Prices, NPR (July 2023), https://
www.npr.org/2023/07/27/1189665392/fees-
inflation-white-house-service-hidden.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    H.R 3950 requires a ban on speculative ticket sales. A 
speculative ticket is a ticket that the seller does not have 
constructive possession of at the time of sale. Speculative 
tickets can artificially drive up the price of tickets on 
secondary markets and cause confusion for consumers who believe 
they are purchasing an event ticket at the time of sale.\5\ 
This legislation would not prohibit a secondary market ticket 
issuer and secondary ticket exchange from offering a service to 
a consumer to obtain an event ticket on behalf of the consumer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\Rolling Stone, Beyonce Tickets Aren't on Sale Yet. Scalpers Are 
Trying to Sell Them. (February 2023) (https://www.rollingstone.com/
music/music-news/beyonce-tickets-scalpers-specula tive-tickets-
ticketmaster-stubhub-1234672209/).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Consumers have expressed frustration with receiving refunds 
for postponed or cancelled events.\6\ H.R. 3950 would require a 
refund for any event that is postponed or cancelled. It would 
also require ticket sellers to disclose clearly and 
conspicuously their policy regarding issuing refunds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\Angry Fans Say First the Concerts Were Canceled, Then the 
Refunds, New York Times (January 21, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Deceptive URLs are another major issue in the event 
ticketing industry. These deceptive websites look like they are 
affiliated with a venue or team but are not. These URLs can 
deceive consumers and cause confusion.\7\ H.R 3950 would ban 
deceptive URLs and require secondary market ticket issuers and 
exchanges clearly state that they are engaged in the secondary 
sale of an event ticket.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Testimony of David 
Touhey, Principal, Connett Consulting, Hearing on Proposals to Enhance 
Product Safety and Transparency for Americans, 118th Cong. (September 
27, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    By requiring sellers of event tickets on the primary and 
secondary markets to disclose comprehensive information to 
consumers about ticket prices, ticket procurement service, 
refunds, and by curbing deceptive websites claiming to sell 
event tickets, H.R. 3950 will enhance the transparency of the 
event ticketing market for consumers. Additionally, it will 
provide an enforcement mechanism for fake and deceptive 
websites claiming to be selling legitimate event tickets.

                            COMMITTEE ACTION

    On September 27, 2023, the Subcommittee on Innovation, 
Data, and Commerce held a hearing on H.R. 3950, as well a 
discussion draft to address speculative ticketing reforms. The 
hearing title was ``Proposals to Enhance Product Safety and 
Transparency for Americans.'' The Subcommittee received 
testimony from:
           Kathleen Callahan, Owner, Xpertech Auto 
        Repair;
           Scott Benavidez, Chairman, Automotive 
        Service Association;
           Steven Michael Gentine, Counsel, Arnold & 
        Porter, LLP;
           John Breyault, Vice President of Public 
        Policy, Telecommunications and Fraud, National 
        Consumers League; and,
           David Touhey, Principal, Connett Consulting, 
        appearing on behalf of International Association of 
        Venue Managers.
    On November 2, 2023, the Subcommittee on Innovation, Data, 
and Commerce met in open markup session and forwarded H.R. 
3950, without amendment, along with a separate bill to restrict 
speculative ticketing, to the full Committee by voice vote.
    On December 5 and 6, 2023, the full Committee on Energy and 
Commerce met in open markup session and ordered H.R. 3950, as 
amended (including of H.R. 6568, the Speculative Ticketing 
Oversight and Prohibition Act, to restrict speculative 
ticketing), favorably reported to the House by a record vote of 
45 yeas and 0 nays.

                            COMMITTEE VOTES

    Clause 3(b) of rule XIII requires the Committee to list the 
recorded votes on the motion to report legislation and 
amendments thereto. The following reflects the record votes 
taken during the Committee consideration:


                 OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

    Pursuant to clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of 
rule XIII, the Committee held a hearing and made findings that 
are reflected in this report.

   NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY, ENTITLEMENT AUTHORITY, AND TAX EXPENDITURES

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII, the Committee 
finds that H.R. 3950 would result in no new or increased budget 
authority, entitlement authority, or tax expenditures or 
revenues.

                  CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE ESTIMATE

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII, the following is 
the cost estimate provided by the Congressional Budget Office 
pursuant to section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974:


    Summary of legislation: On December 6, 2023, the House 
Committee on Energy and Commerce ordered reported 41 bills. 
This document provides estimates for 7 of those bills.
    The bills would require the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) 
to enforce new prohibitions and requirements or would direct 
the Department of Commerce to study various issues and report 
to the Congress.
    Estimated Federal cost: The bills' costs fall within budget 
function 370 (commerce and housing credit).
    Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that the 
bills will be enacted near the middle of fiscal year 2024. The 
estimated costs do not include any interaction effects among 
the bills. If all seven bills were combined and enacted as a 
single piece of legislation, the estimated costs would be 
different from the sum of the separate estimates, although CBO 
expects that any difference would be small.
    CBO estimates that implementing each of the seven bills 
would cost between $1 million and $4 million over the 2024-2029 
period; that spending would be subject to the availability of 
appropriated funds.
    Four bills--H.R. 2964, H.R. 3950, H.R. 6125, and H.R. 
6543--would each increase revenues by an insignificant amount. 
Entities that fail to meet each of those bills' new 
requirements could face civil penalties, which are recorded in 
the federal budget as revenues. To some extent, collection of 
any civil fines would depend on the amount of appropriations 
provided by future appropriation acts to pay for enforcement. 
In addition, whether the FTC would pursue civil penalties or 
some other remedy for violations is unclear. In any event, CBO 
expects that companies would generally comply with the new 
requirements and that any additional revenues collected over 
the 2024-2034 period would be insignificant for each bill.
    H.R. 2964, WIPPES Act: The bill would require manufacturers 
and suppliers of disposable wipes to clearly mark their 
products with a ``do not flush'' label and symbol. The FTC 
would enforce those requirements.
    Based on the cost of similar provisions, CBO estimates that 
implementing H.R. 2964 would cost the FTC $4 million to issue 
guidance and to monitor and enforce violations. In addition, 
CBO estimates that enacting the bill could increase civil 
penalty collections, which are recorded in the federal budget 
as revenues, by an insignificant amount.
    H.R. 3950, TICKET Act: The bill would require companies 
that issue tickets or that sell tickets on the secondary market 
to clearly display the total price of any ticket, including 
itemizing any fees not included in the base ticket price. That 
requirement would apply to live events at venues with an 
attendance capacity of 200 people or more. The FTC would 
enforce those requirements.
    Based on the cost of similar provisions, CBO estimates that 
implementing H.R. 3950 would cost the FTC $4 million to issue 
guidance and to monitor and enforce violations. In addition, 
CBO estimates that enacting the bill could increase civil 
penalty collections, which are recorded in the federal budget 
as revenues, by an insignificant amount.
    H.R. 5146, Advancing Gig Economy Act: The bill would 
require the Department of Commerce to study and report to the 
Congress within two years of enactment on how the gig economy 
affects U.S. businesses.
    Based on the cost of similar studies, CBO estimates that 
implementing H.R. 5146 would cost $2 million over two years for 
the work of four employees, at an annual cost of about $220,000 
each, along with purchases of data and survey contracts.
    H.R. 5390, Critical Infrastructure Manufacturing 
Feasibility Act: The bill would require the Department of 
Commerce to study and report to the Congress within one year of 
enactment on the feasibility of manufacturing in the United 
States products in critical infrastructure sectors that now are 
imported because of supply chain constraints.
    Based on the cost of similar studies, CBO estimates that 
implementing H.R. 5390 would cost $1 million for one year for 
the work of four employees, at a cost of about $220,000 each, 
along with purchases of data and survey contracts.
    H.R. 5398, Advancing Tech Startups Act: The bill would 
require the Department of Commerce to study and report to the 
Congress within two years of enactment on how technology 
startup companies affect the U.S. economy.
    Based on the cost of similar studies, CBO estimates that 
implementing H.R. 5398 would cost $2 million over two years for 
the work of four employees, at an annual cost of about $220,000 
each, along with purchases of data and survey contracts.
    H.R. 6125, Online Dating Safety Act of 2023: The bill would 
require providers of online dating services to notify a user if 
they are contacted by a member whose account was suspended or 
terminated because of fraudulent activity. The FTC would 
enforce those requirements.
    Based on the cost of similar provisions, CBO estimates that 
implementing H.R. 6125 would cost the FTC $4 million to issue 
guidance and to monitor and enforce violations. In addition, 
CBO estimates that enacting the bill could increase civil 
penalty collections, which are recorded in the federal budget 
as revenues, by an insignificant amount.
    H.R. 6543, No Hidden FEES Act of 2023: The bill would 
require providers of short-term lodging and websites that 
advertise or offer such lodging to display each mandatory fee 
required to complete a booking. The FTC would enforce those 
requirements.
    Based on the cost of similar provisions, CBO estimates that 
implementing H.R. 6543 would cost the FTC $4 million to issue 
guidance and to monitor and enforce violations. In addition, 
CBO estimates that enacting the bill could increase civil 
penalty collections, which are recorded in the federal budget 
as revenues, by an insignificant amount.
    Pay-As-You-Go considerations: CBO estimates that enacting 
H.R. 2964, H.R. 3950, H.R. 6125, and H.R. 6543 would each 
increase revenues by less than $500,000 over the 2024-2034 
period; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures apply to those 
bills.
    Increase in long-term net direct spending and deficits: 
None of the bills would increase net direct spending or on-
budget deficits in any of the four consecutive 10-year periods 
beginning in 2035.
    Mandates: The following bills--H.R. 2964, H.R. 3950, H.R. 
6125, and H.R. 6543--would impose mandates as defined in the 
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA).
    H.R. 2964, WIPPES Act: The bill would impose 
intergovernmental and private-sector mandates, but CBO 
estimates that the costs to comply with those mandates would 
not exceed the thresholds established in UMRA ($100 million and 
$200 million in 2024, respectively, adjusted annually for 
inflation).
    H.R. 2964 would preempt some state and local laws governing 
the labeling of certain disposable wipes. Although the 
preemptions would limit the application of state and local 
laws, they would impose no duty on state or local governments 
that would result in significant spending or loss of revenues.
    The bill would require manufacturers of certain disposable 
wipes to clearly mark their products with a ``do not flush'' 
label and symbol. Because manufacturers already are complying 
with similar laws enacted in California, Illinois, and several 
other states, CBO estimates that the cost for manufacturers to 
comply with the mandate would be small.
    H.R. 3950, TICKET Act: The bill would impose private-sector 
mandates as defined in UMRA on ticket sellers and resellers by 
requiring certain changes, including new refund policies, to 
the ticketing process. CBO estimates that the aggregate cost to 
comply with the mandates would be above the threshold 
established in UMRA for private-sector mandates ($200 million 
in 2024, adjusted annually for inflation).
    Under the bill, if an event is canceled, ticket sellers and 
resellers would be required to refund the full ticket price, 
including taxes and fees, to purchasers. If an event is 
postponed, sellers and resellers would be required to offer 
customers either a full refund or a replacement ticket, if 
available, subject to the customer's preference. Sellers also 
would be required to disclose this refund policy. The bill 
allows for exceptions to this policy in cases where the 
cancellation or postponement is beyond the control of the 
ticket issuer, such as natural disasters. Based on discussions 
with industry sources, a substantial share of sellers and 
resellers already provide full refunds for canceled events but 
few offer refunds for postponed events. Considerable 
uncertainty surrounds the ways that federal regulations might 
define what is within the control of a ticket issuer in the 
event of a cancellation or postponement or what might 
constitute comparable replacement events. Given the large size 
of the industry and the amount of revenue generated by ticketed 
events, CBO estimates that the cost of the mandate would exceed 
the threshold for private-sector mandates.
    H.R. 3950 also would require ticket sellers and resellers 
to make certain up-front disclosures to consumers. They would 
need to disclose the total ticket prices, including taxes and 
fees. Those disclosures would occur when the ticket is first 
displayed to the consumer and in any advertisements or 
marketing. The bill also would require sellers and resellers to 
provide purchasers with an itemized list of the base price and 
all fees. Information from the industry indicates that most 
ticket sellers have already begun to provide the total cost to 
consumers in advance; thus, CBO expects that the additional 
requirements in the bill would have small costs for ticket 
sellers and resellers.
    The bill also would require ticket resellers to disclose to 
consumers that they are resellers before any purchase is 
complete. Sellers and resellers would be prohibited from 
advertising or selling any ticket that the seller does not 
actually or constructively possess. In certain instances, 
sellers also would be prohibited from revealing to consumers 
and using the names of venues, teams, artists, and events in 
their online domain names. CBO expects that those disclosures 
and prohibitions would impose minimal costs on the sellers.
    The bill contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined 
in UMRA.
    H.R. 6125, Online Dating Safety Act of 2023: The bill would 
impose intergovernmental and private-sector mandates, but CBO 
estimates that the costs to comply with those mandates would 
not exceed the thresholds established in UMRA ($100 million and 
$200 million in 2024, respectively, adjusted annually for 
inflation).
    The bill would preempt state laws governing fraud 
notifications issued by online dating services. Although the 
preemptions would limit the application of state and local 
laws, they would impose no duty on state or local governments 
that would result in significant spending or loss of revenues.
    H.R. 6125 would require providers of online dating services 
to send a fraud notification to consumers who receive a message 
from any member who has been banned by the service. Because 
some states already require those fraud notifications, most 
dating services have implemented the policy regardless of the 
consumer's location. Therefore, CBO expects that the cost to 
comply with the mandate would be small.
    H.R. 6543, No Hidden FEES Act of 2023: The bill would 
impose intergovernmental and private-sector mandates, but CBO 
estimates that the costs to comply with those mandates would 
not exceed the thresholds established in UMRA ($100 million and 
$200 million in 2024, respectively, adjusted annually for 
inflation).
    The bill would preempt state and local laws governing the 
display of prices for short-term lodging. Although the 
preemptions would limit the application of state and local 
laws, they would impose no duty on state or local governments 
that would result in significant spending or loss of revenues.
    H.R. 6543 would prohibit providers, online booking 
websites, and advertisers of short-term lodging from displaying 
prices that do not include all mandatory fees. Information from 
industry sources and the FTC indicates that several lodging 
providers already comply with provisions in the bill, and CBO 
expects the cost for other entities to comply would be small 
because they already possess the fee information required to be 
displayed.
    Previous CBO estimate: On October 25, 2023, CBO transmitted 
a cost estimate for S. 1303, the TICKET Act, as reported by the 
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation on 
September 12, 2023. Under H.R. 3950, regulated companies would 
be required to fulfill requirements that are additional to 
those specified in S. 1303; for example, if an event is 
canceled or postponed, a ticket seller would need to provide a 
full refund or replacement ticket. In addition, H.R. 3950 would 
require the FTC to report to the Congress on its enforcement of 
the Better Online Ticket Sales Act of 2016. CBO's estimated 
federal costs for both bills are the same. Because of the 
additional refund requirements on ticket sellers and resellers 
in H.R. 3950, CBO has determined that the cost of the private-
sector mandates is above the threshold.
    Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: David Hughes, 
Mandates: Rachel Austin and Grace Watson.
    Estimate reviewed by: Justin Humphrey, Chief, Finance, 
Housing, and Education Cost Estimates Unit; Kathleen 
FitzGerald, Chief, Public and Private Mandates Unit; H. Samuel 
Papenfuss, Deputy Director of Budget Analysis.
    Estimate approved by: Phillip L. Swagel, Director, 
Congressional Budget Office.

                       FEDERAL MANDATES STATEMENT

    The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of Federal 
mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act.

         STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general 
performance goal or objective of this legislation is to provide 
the following in the field of event ticketing: upfront, all-
inclusive ticket price disclosures; speculative ticketing ban; 
limit the use of deceptive websites in the sale of event 
tickets; provide refund requirements; and study the FTC's 
enforcement of the Better Online Ticket Sales Act of 2016.

                    DUPLICATION OF FEDERAL PROGRAMS

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(5) of rule XIII, no provision of 
H.R. 3950 is known to be duplicative of another Federal 
program, including any program that was included in a report to 
Congress pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111-139 or the 
most recent Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance.

              RELATED COMMITTEE AND SUBCOMMITTEE HEARINGS

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(6) of rule XIII, the following 
related hearing was used to develop or consider H.R. 3950:
           On September 27, 2023, the Subcommittee on 
        Innovation, Data, and Commerce held a hearing on H.R. 
        3950, as well a discussion draft to address speculative 
        ticketing reforms. The hearing title was ``Proposals to 
        Enhance Product Safety and Transparency for 
        Americans.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from:
                   Kathleen Callahan, Owner, 
                Xpertech Auto Repair;
                   Scott Benavidez, Chairman, 
                Automotive Service Association;
                   Steven Michael Gentine, Counsel, 
                Arnold & Porter, LLP;
                   John Breyault, Vice President of 
                Public Policy, Telecommunications and Fraud, 
                National Consumers League; and,
                   David Touhey, Principal, Connett 
                Consulting, appearing on behalf of 
                International Association of Venue Managers

                        COMMITTEE COST ESTIMATE

    Pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII, the Committee 
adopts as its own the cost estimate prepared by the Director of 
the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 402 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974

       EARMARK, LIMITED TAX BENEFITS, AND LIMITED TARIFF BENEFITS

    Pursuant to clause 9(e), 9(f), and 9(g) of rule XXI, the 
Committee finds that H.R. 3950 contains no earmarks, limited 
tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits.

                      ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

    No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b) 
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act were created by this 
legislation.

                  APPLICABILITY TO LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

    The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to 
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public 
services or accommodations within the meaning of section 
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act.

             SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF THE LEGISLATION

Section 1. Short title

    Section 1 provides that the Act may be cited as the 
``Transparency In Charges for Key Events Ticketing Act'' or the 
``TICKET Act.''

Section 2. All inclusive ticket price disclosure

    Section 2 makes it unlawful for a ticket issuer, secondary 
market ticket issuer, or secondary market ticket exchange to 
offer for sale an event ticket unless: (1) the issuer or 
exchange clearly and conspicuously displays the total event 
ticket price; (2) clearly and conspicuously discloses to a 
prospective purchaser the total event ticket price the first 
time the price is displayed and anytime thereafter throughout 
the ticket buying process; and (3) provides an itemized list of 
the base event ticket price and each ticket fee prior to the 
completion of the purchase of a ticket.

Section 3. Speculative ticketing ban

    Section 3 prohibits an issuer or ticket exchange from 
selling, offering for sale, or advertising such sale of an 
event ticket for a ticket that the issuer or exchange does not 
have actual or constructive possession of. This section does 
not prohibit an issuer or exchange from offering a service to 
consumers to obtain an event ticket on behalf of the consumer 
so long as the issuer or exchange complies with the following: 
(1) does not list the service as an event ticket; (2) maintains 
clear, distinct, and easily discernable separation between the 
service and event tickets through unavoidable visual 
demarcation that persists throughout the entire service 
selection and purchasing process; (3) clearly and conspicuously 
discloses before selection of the service that the service is 
not an event ticket and the purchase of such a service does not 
guarantee an event ticket; (4) should the service be unable to 
obtain the specified event ticket, provides the consumer that 
purchased the service, within a reasonable amount of time, a 
full refund for the total cost of the service, or subject to 
availability a replacement ticket in the same or comparable 
location with customer approval; and (5) does not exceed ticket 
numerical limitations set by the venue and artist for each 
respective event.

Section 4. Deceptive websites

    Section 4 states that issuers and exchanges must: (1) 
provide a clear and conspicuous statement before purchase that 
the issuer or exchange is engaged in the secondary sale of 
tickets; (2) not state that the issuer or exchange is 
affiliated with or endorsed by a venue, team, or artist, unless 
such a partnership agreement has been executed; (3) shall not 
use a domain name or any subdomain thereof, in the URL of the 
issuer or exchange that contains the name of a specific team, 
league, or venue where live events are held, the name of the 
exhibition or performance, or any trademark or copyright not 
owned or licensed by the issuer or exchange unless authorized 
by the owner.

Section 5. Refund requirements

    Section 5 details refund requirements in the event of a 
cancellation or postponement of an event. It requires 
disclosure of guarantee and refund policies, in addition to how 
to obtain a refund required by the Act or pursuant to the 
policies.

Section 6. Report by the Federal Trade Commission on BOTS Act of 2016 
        enforcement

    Section 6 requires the FTC to submit a report to Congress 
on the enforcement of the Better Online Ticket Sales Act of 
2016 (Pub. L. 114-275; 15 U.S.C. 45c), including any 
enforcement action taken, challenges with enforcement and 
coordination with State Attorneys General, and recommendation 
on how to improve enforcement and industry compliance.

Section 7. Enforcement

    Section 7 requires the FTC to treat a violation of the Act 
as a violation of a rule defining an unfair or deceptive act or 
practice under Section 18(a)(1)(B) of the Federal Trade 
Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 57a(a)(1)(B)).

Section 8. Definitions

    Section 8 provides relevant definitions related to the Act.

         CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

    This legislation does not amend any existing Federal 
statute.

                                  [all]