Florida 2022 Regular Session

Florida House Bill H1227

Introduced
1/6/22  
Refer
1/12/22  
Refer
1/12/22  
Refer
1/12/22  
Refer
2/4/22  

Caption

Online Marketplace Transparency

Impact

The passing of HB 1227 would have significant implications for state laws regarding online commerce. It specifically amends existing statutes related to consumer protection by integrating requirements for transparency and accountability from online sellers. By preempting local regulations on the verification and disclosure of seller information, the bill centralizes authority within the Department of Legal Affairs, potentially impacting how local government entities can interact with online businesses. Opponents have expressed concerns over the reduction of local legislative control over consumer protections, suggesting that the lack of local adaptability could be detrimental to some communities.

Summary

House Bill 1227 focuses on enhancing transparency within online marketplaces by implementing stricter regulations for high-volume third-party sellers. The bill mandates that these sellers provide specific information to the online marketplace, which must then be verified within a designated timeframe. The legislation establishes a framework for ensuring that consumers are informed about the identity and legitimacy of sellers, which aims to reduce fraudulent activities on these platforms. The implementation of such measures is anticipated to protect consumers and create a safer online shopping environment.

Sentiment

There was a generally favorable sentiment surrounding HB 1227 from pro-business legislators and consumer advocacy groups who supported increased transparency as a means of protecting consumers. Supporters argue that the bill will create a more trustworthy online marketplace, enabling consumers to make informed purchasing decisions. Conversely, some opposition arose from local government representatives and other stakeholders who raise concerns about the preemption of local authority, fearing it could lead to a one-size-fits-all approach that may not accommodate local consumer needs effectively. This divergence indicates a broader debate about the balance between state and local governance in consumer protection.

Contention

One key point of contention is the bill's preemption clause, which restricts local governments from establishing their own regulations regarding online seller verification and disclosure. This aspect of the bill has stirred debate among local officials who argue that they are best positioned to understand and address the unique concerns within their communities. Additionally, while proponents emphasize consumer safety, critics point out that the swift verification process and the potential for punitive measures against non-compliant sellers could inadvertently harm small businesses that may struggle to meet the rigorous requirements imposed by the bill.

Companion Bills

FL S0944

Same As Online Marketplace Transparency

Similar Bills

CA AB1790

Marketplaces: marketplace sellers.

CA AB1402

Marketplace facilitator: fee collection.

MI HB5745

Sales tax: other; nexus of marketplace facilitators; clarify. Amends sec. 2d of 1933 PA 167 (MCL 205.52d).

MI SB0930

Sales tax: other; nexus of marketplace facilitators; clarify. Amends sec. 2d of 1933 PA 167 (MCL 205.52d).

MI SB0229

Sales tax: other; deduction or exclusion and audit of qualified delivery network sales; provide for. Amends sec. 2d of 1933 PA 167 (MCL 205.52d).

MI HB5746

Sales tax: collections; certain requirements imposed on marketplace facilitators related to tax collections; provide exceptions and waivers. Amends sec. 5c of 1937 PA 94 (MCL 205.95c).

CA SB301

Marketplaces: online marketplaces.

CA SB1312

Marketplace facilitators: passenger vehicle rental companies.