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
The World is Getting Too Hot to Feed Itself
Take Action Now A new U.N. report maps how extreme heat is tearing through every layer of the global food system — and mostly overlooks the people at…
Cuba’s Fate Should Not Be in U.S. Hands
Take Action Now U.S. officials are relying on Trump’s executive order of January 29 which, without evidence, accused Cuba of being an “extraordinary…
As Opposition Grows, Oklahoma Organizers Share How They Halted an ICE Warehouse
Take Action Now Organizers also channeled mass outrage into long-haul organizing for immigration justice in Oklahoma and beyond.By Lydia…
Meet the Four Democrats Who’ll Decide If Trump Gets His Domestic Spying Law
Take Action Now “It all comes down to those four,” said an advocate, “and if they are going to continue to try to hand Trump warrantless…