On September 15, Federal Trade Commission (FTC) staff published a detailed FAQ on price transparency in auto advertising, and it’s worth a close read no matter which side of the deal you sit on: sales, Finance & Insurance (F&I), or compliance.
The headline principle isn’t new: the price a dealer advertises has to be the price any consumer can actually walk in and pay. But the FAQ gets specific about what that means in practice, and a few of the details could trip up even careful dealers and their finance partners.
What has to be in the number, and what can stay out
The FTC’s bright line: government-required charges (think taxes) can be excluded from the advertised price. Everything else (document fees, dealer-required add-ons, anything the dealer requires any consumer to pay) has to be folded into that single advertised number, not disclosed separately. That includes fees the government requires the dealer to pay but that get passed on to the consumer, and it includes government-authorized (but not mandated) dealer fees too.
Doc fees get their own callout: if the mandatory doc fee varies by customer, the advertised price has to reflect the highest fee any consumer would actually be charged. Dealers can’t advertise off the discounted version and surprise someone with the full fee later.
MSRP, rebates, and discounts are still fair game — dealers just shouldn’t bury the real number
Dealers can still advertise MSRP alongside a lower actual price, or highlight a rebate or financing discount. The catch is prominence, and the FTC is explicit that prominence isn’t just about font size. If your smaller-font “actual price” is positioned somewhere a consumer’s eye naturally lands, and the larger MSRP is tucked away, that’s still a problem. The actual, walk-in price needs to be the most prominent number a consumer sees.
Leasing gets a specific mention
For anyone in leasing and F&I: upfront processing fees have to be included in any ad about the total amount due at signing, and the FTC is clear that none of this changes existing obligations under the Consumer Leasing Act, Regulation M, the Truth in Lending Act, or Regulation Z. This is a “both/and,” not an “either/or.”
Negotiation and add-ons don’t give dealers a pass
Negotiating with individual customers is fine, but the advertised price still has to be a number every consumer could actually get — not a promotional rate quietly extended to a handful of past buyers. The same logic applies to optional add-ons: protection packages and accessories are fine to offer, but dealers can’t imply they are mandatory, misstate their cost, or slip in charges a consumer never agreed to.
In-transit inventory and stock photos
Dealers can still advertise a car that’s on its way from the manufacturer, but the ad needs to make clear it’s not physically on the lot yet. And it must genuinely be available upon arrival, not already earmarked for another order. Representative photos are fine for new vehicles where units are essentially identical, but for used or antique vehicles, consumers reasonably expect the photo to be the actual car for sale.
Everyone in the chain shares responsibility
Dealers, third-party ad platforms, and original equipment manufacturers all have a piece of this. If a dealer hands a third party accurate pricing and the third party buries it under a bigger MSRP number, that’s still a problem for the dealer.
The bottom line for auto finance teams
None of this is new law. Section 5 of the FTC Act has required truthful, non-deceptive advertising for decades, and the FTC notes as much in the FAQ itself. What is new is the level of granularity: document fees, negotiated pricing, leasing disclosures, in-transit inventory, stock photos, and third-party accountability are all now addressed head-on.
As we covered here, the FTC has already sent warning letters to 97 auto groups this year and says enforcement against misleading pricing will continue.
Recent Comments