Kamala Harris’s proposed price-gouging ban might irritate academics, but it makes sense to everyone else.
By Zephyr Teachout, Portside
Last week, the economics commentariat and much of the mainstream media erupted with contempt toward Kamala Harris’s proposed federal price-gouging law. Op-eds, social-media posts, and straight news reports mocked Harris for economically illiterate pandering and warned of Soviet-style “price controls” that would lead to shortages and runaway inflation.
The strange thing about these complaints is that what Harris actually proposed was neither radical nor new—and it certainly wasn’t price controls. In fact, almost every state already has a law restricting at least some forms of price gouging. Although Harris has not specified the exact design of her proposal, one hopes that it would follow the basic outline of state-level bans: forbidding unwarranted price hikes for necessary goods during emergencies.
Price gouging in the popular imagination has a “know it when you see it” quality, but it is actually a well-developed body of law. A typical price-gouging claim has four elements. First, a triggering event, sometimes called an “abnormal market disruption,” such as a natural disaster or power outage, must have occurred. Second, in most states, the claim must concern essential goods and services. (No one cares if you overcharge for Louis Vuitton handbags during a hurricane.) Third, a price increase must be “excessive” or “unconscionable,” which most states define as exceeding a certain percentage, typically 10 to 25 percent. Finally, the elevated price must be in excess of the seller’s increased cost. This is crucial: Even during emergencies, sellers are allowed to maintain their existing profit margins. They just can’t increase those margins excessively.
Recent Posts
Putin Warns Of ‘Direct’ War As U.S. Mulls Letting Ukraine Use Long-Range Western Missiles
Take Action Now “It is a question of deciding whether or not NATO countries are directly involved in a military conflict,” said Russian…
Biden’s Legacy: The Decline Of Arms Control And Disarmament
Take Action Now The only remaining nuclear disarmament treaty—the New START Treaty—expires in February 2026, and there is no indication that U.S. and…
Both Presidential Candidates Agree: We Need To Stop Arresting People For Marijuana
Take Action Now Further proof that an issue once considered a political hot button has gone mainstream. By Paul Armentano, OtherWords At a time…
Here Are The Members Of Congress Invested In War
Take Action Now More than 50 members of Congress own stock in defense contractors whose profits are soaring from giant Pentagon budgets and…