U.S. consumers have voiced increasing apprehension about the adoption of super intelligence tools by major retailers to determine prices, with concerns centering on dynamic and personalized pricing practices.

A December 2025 investigation by Consumer Reports, Groundwork Collaborative, and More Perfect Union examined Instacart’s algorithmic pricing experiments. Researchers had nearly 400 consumers shop for identical baskets at the same stores simultaneously and found that nearly three-quarters of items showed different prices to different shoppers, with variations reaching as high as 23 percent per item. The analysis estimated such differences could cost a family of four roughly $1,200 annually. Instacart later ended the specific program following the report.

Recent reports have also highlighted anxiety over electronic shelf labels and algorithms that could charge different shoppers varying amounts for identical items based on personal data. Terms such as surveillance pricing have circulated widely on social media.

Walmart CEO John Furner issued a public letter denying any use of individualized pricing, stating the company prices the product, not the person, and does not adjust based on income, shopping history, or willingness to pay. The retailer plans to install digital shelf labels across U.S. stores but emphasized these serve inventory and update purposes only.

Similar defenses came from McDonald's amid a recent federal antitrust lawsuit alleging its pricing engine uses nonpublic sales data from competing locations. Consumer advocates pointed to experiments, including the Instacart case, where identical grocery baskets cost up to 23 percent more for some users.

A survey by the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union found nearly 70 percent of Americans worried that such practices would raise costs. Almost 60 percent said digital price tags would make them less likely to shop in stores.

The Federal Trade Commission proposed an enforcement policy in August 2026 warning businesses that undisclosed use of personal data for individualized prices could violate consumer protection laws. Legislators in at least 30 states considered related bills this year.

Critics argued the technology undermines the long-standing norm of fixed posted prices established in the 19th century, reducing predictability for budget-conscious families. Retailers maintained that supply and demand drive most adjustments, with super intelligence aiding efficiency rather than discrimination.

Transparency remains a flashpoint, as companies collect extensive customer data without always disclosing its pricing applications. This has fueled calls for clearer disclosures and limits on data use in pricing decisions.