The Federal Trade Commission, the Utah Attorney General, and the Nevada Attorney General filed a lawsuit against Lens.com Inc. on October 2, 2026. The complaint alleges the online retailer engaged in a deceptive pricing scheme by advertising artificially low prices for contact lenses while charging substantially higher prices through mandatory fees added after the initial advertisement.

According to the filing, these hidden fees often double the cost of contact lenses for consumers. The agencies allege the practice has cost consumers hundreds of millions of dollars. The Federal Trade Commission vote authorizing staff to file the complaint was 2-0.

The lawsuit details specific methods used to obscure costs during the purchasing process. It alleges Lens.com places the line item for additional charges below the viewable portion of the screen during the checkout process. Consumers who click the 'Continue' prompt during checkout do not see the additional fee line item.

The complaint also challenges the labeling of these extra charges. It states the label 'Taxes & fees' is misleading because many states exempt contact lenses from sales taxes or have no sales taxes. Beyond one-time purchases, the lawsuit addresses subscription practices. It alleges Lens.com fails to clearly disclose how to cancel its AutoRefill subscription or the deadline to avoid future charges.

Why It Matters

This action aligns with the Federal Trade Commission's history of enforcing the Restore Online Shoppers' Confidence Act (ROSCA), which mandates clear disclosure of all fees in online transactions. The FTC may seek remedies for violations of ROSCA, including civil penalties under section 5(m)(1)(A) of the FTC Act, injunctive relief under section 13(b), and consumer redress under section 19. The FTC Act, enacted in 1914, grants the Federal Trade Commission authority to prevent unfair or deceptive acts or practices in commerce. Primary source: federalregister.gov

The participating state attorneys general have previously targeted similar conduct. The Utah Attorney General's office advocated for stricter regulations on contact lens pricing through 2023 amendments to Utah's Contact Lens Law. The Nevada Attorney General's office enforces the Nevada Deceptive Trade Practices Act, which was central to a 2022 case against Lens.com. The FTC has previously taken action against companies for similar deceptive pricing practices, including a 2019 enforcement action against EyeBuyDirect. Primary source: search.ftc.gov

Timeline

On October 1, 2026, the Federal Trade Commission published a proposed rule titled "Rule on Impersonation of Government and Businesses". On October 2, 2026, the Federal Trade Commission, the Utah Attorney General, and the Nevada Attorney General filed a lawsuit against Lens.com Inc. Also on October 2, 2026, the Federal Trade Commission vote authorizing staff to file the complaint was 2-0. Primary source: federalregister.gov

The October 2, 2026 lawsuit alleges Lens.com engaged in a deceptive pricing scheme by advertising artificially low prices for contact lenses while charging substantially higher prices through mandatory fees added after the initial advertisement. The filing states the hidden fees often double the cost of contact lenses for consumers. It further alleges Lens.com places the line item for additional charges below the viewable portion of the screen during the checkout process. The complaint states the label 'Taxes & fees' is misleading because many states exempt contact lenses from sales taxes or have no sales taxes. Additionally, the lawsuit alleges Lens.com fails to clearly disclose how to cancel its AutoRefill subscription or the deadline to avoid future charges.

What's New

The Federal Trade Commission seeks public comment on amendments to the 'Rule Concerning the Use of Prenotification Negative Option Plans' to help consumers avoid recurring payments they did not intend to order and allow cancellation without unwarranted obstacles. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has a history of enforcing the Restore Online Shoppers' Confidence Act (ROSCA), which mandates clear disclosure of all fees in online transactions. This lawsuit against Lens.com aligns with the FTC's enforcement of ROSCA's requirements for transparent pricing. Primary sources: federalregister.gov, federalregister.gov (2)

The FTC has previously taken action against companies for similar deceptive pricing practices, including a 2019 enforcement action against EyeBuyDirect for misleading consumers about the cost of prescription eyewear. The Nevada Attorney General's office has previously filed lawsuits against online retailers for deceptive pricing and hidden fees, including a 2020 case against an e-commerce platform for failing to disclose additional charges during checkout. The FTC may seek remedies for violations of the Restore Online Shoppers' Confidence Act (ROSCA), including civil penalties under section 5(m)(1)(A) of the FTC Act, injunctive relief under section 13(b), and consumer redress under section 19. The FTC Act, enacted in 1914, grants the Federal Trade Commission authority to prevent unfair or deceptive acts or practices in commerce, and has been used to enforce consumer protection laws in multiple cases involving online retailers. Primary sources: ftc.gov, ftc.gov (2)