Hawaii 2024 Regular Session

Hawaii Senate Bill SB2020

Introduced
1/17/24  
Introduced
1/17/24  
Refer
1/26/24  
Refer
1/17/24  
Report Pass
2/16/24  
Refer
1/26/24  
Report Pass
2/16/24  
Report Pass
3/1/24  
Refer
2/16/24  
Engrossed
3/5/24  
Report Pass
3/1/24  
Refer
3/7/24  
Engrossed
3/5/24  

Caption

Relating To Deceptive Trade Practices.

Impact

If passed, SB2020 would significantly impact how businesses operate concerning transparency in pricing and advertising. By making it unlawful to advertise prices without including all mandatory fees, the bill aims to protect consumers from unexpected charges and ensure that they can make informed purchasing decisions. The legislative changes will amend Section 481A-3 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes, enhancing the state's existing framework on deceptive practices and thus strengthening consumer protection laws.

Summary

Senate Bill 2020 addresses deceptive trade practices within the state of Hawaii by amending existing laws related to advertising and consumer protection. The bill explicitly defines deceptive trade practices, including but not limited to misleading representations regarding goods and services, false advertising, and the omission of mandatory fees from advertised prices. It establishes clearer guidelines for businesses to follow in order to maintain transparency and uphold consumer rights.

Sentiment

Overall, the sentiment surrounding SB2020 appears to be supportive, primarily among consumer advocacy groups and some legislators who emphasize the importance of clear communication between businesses and consumers. However, concerns have been raised by certain business sectors about the implications of stricter regulations on advertising. Supporters view the legislation as a necessary measure to promote honesty in marketing, whereas opponents express fear that such regulations could impose additional burdens on businesses, particularly small enterprises.

Contention

Noteworthy points of contention include the balance between consumer protection and business freedoms. Some stakeholders argue that increased regulatory oversight could stifle competition and innovation in the marketplace. There's also discussion around whether the bill may inadvertently lead to excessive litigation or compliance costs for businesses, potentially disadvantaging smaller firms that lack the resources to adjust to new requirements promptly. Thus, ongoing discussions are crucial as Hawaii navigates the complexities of consumer rights and business regulations.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA SB921

Political Reform Act of 1974: digital political advertisements.

CA AB868

Political Reform Act of 1974: digital political advertisements.

CA AB794

Cannabis: advertising and marketing restrictions.

CA AB2716

Cannabis: advertisements: highways.

CA AB1175

Outdoor advertising displays: redevelopment agency project areas.

CA AB2546

Commercial email advertisements.

CA SB405

Outdoor advertising displays: exemptions: City of Artesia.

CA AB1982

Outdoor advertising displays: exemptions: City of Artesia.