Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 63.
The bill (TICKET Act) requires ticket sellers and secondary marketplaces to display an all‑inclusive total ticket price and itemize fees, bans selling tickets unless the seller has possession, and requires clear disclosure of resale status and affiliations. It mandates refund rules for canceled or postponed events, restricts misleading venue or artist affiliation and domain use, orders an FTC report on BOTS Act enforcement, and authorizes FTC enforcement as unfair or deceptive practices.
Consumer protection and anti-scalping emphasis versus secondary market freedom
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well-specified substantive policy instrument that defines clear consumer-protection obligations, integrates with existing statutes, and delegates enforcement to the Federal Trade Commission.
The bill (TICKET Act) requires ticket sellers and secondary marketplaces to display an all‑inclusive total ticket price and itemize fees, bans selling tickets unless the seller has possession, and requires clear disclosure of resale status and affiliations.
It mandates refund rules for canceled or postponed events, restricts misleading venue or artist affiliation and domain use, orders an FTC report on BOTS Act enforcement, and authorizes FTC enforcement as unfair or deceptive practices.
Technocratic consumer protections improve passage odds, but regulatory impact and platform resistance lower probability of final enactment.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well-specified substantive policy instrument that defines clear consumer-protection obligations, integrates with existing statutes, and delegates enforcement to the Federal Trade Commission.
Consumer protection and anti-scalping emphasis versus secondary market freedom
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Consumer protection and anti-scalping emphasis versus secondary market freedom
Likely broadly supportive because the bill advances consumer protection, fee transparency, and anti‑scalping measures.
Supporters will welcome refund guarantees and restrictions on deceptive affiliation, while pressing for strong FTC enforcement and resources.
Generally favorable to increased transparency and clearer refund policies, but cautious about implementation details and unintended market effects.
Will look for precise definitions, phased implementation, and clear FTC guidance to limit disruption.
Sympathetic to consumer clarity but skeptical of regulatory expansion and restraints on secondary markets.
Views bans and FTC enforcement as overreach likely to raise costs and limit lawful resale activity.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Technocratic consumer protections improve passage odds, but regulatory impact and platform resistance lower probability of final enactment.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Consumer protection and anti-scalping emphasis versus secondary market freedom
Technocratic consumer protections improve passage odds, but regulatory impact and platform resistance lower probability of final enactment.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well-specified substantive policy instrument that defines clear consumer-protection obligations, integrates with existing statutes, and delegates enforcement to…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.