Consumer Fuel Price Gouging Prevention Act: Penalties and Status

The Consumer Fuel Price Gouging Prevention Act did not become law. The House passed H.R. 7688 on May 19, 2022, by a vote of 217 to 207, but the Senate never took it up, and the bill died at the end of the 117th Congress.¹ No federal statute currently bans charging excessive prices for gasoline or other consumer fuels.

What the Bill Would Have Made Illegal

The Act would have prohibited selling covered fuel at an “unconscionably excessive” price during a presidentially declared energy emergency. The President’s proclamation had to identify the geographic area, the fuels affected, and the time period, and each declaration was capped at 30 consecutive days with the option to renew.² Outside those windows, the pricing rules would not apply.

The bill set no fixed cap or percentage limit. Instead, the FTC was directed to weigh whether the seller’s price grossly exceeded what it had charged in the 30 days before the emergency, and whether it grossly exceeded what other nearby sellers were charging for the same fuel during the emergency.³ One factor cut the other way: a seller that actually increased the volume it supplied in the affected area during the emergency got credit for meeting demand.

The Cost-Based Defense

Sellers could avoid liability by showing that any price increase reasonably reflected higher costs or greater risks they took on to bring fuel to market during the emergency.¹ A distributor paying more for crude, spending extra on emergency shipping, or absorbing higher insurance costs during a hurricane could pass those real costs through.

Which Fuels and Sellers Were Covered

“Consumer fuel” was defined broadly:

Gasoline
Distillate fuel oil
Jet fuel and aviation gasoline
Home heating oil and liquid propane used for residential heating or energy generation
Biofuels such as ethanol and biomass-based diesel

The prohibition reached both wholesale and retail sellers, so the whole supply chain was technically in scope. In practice, the FTC was directed to focus enforcement on companies with total U.S. wholesale or retail fuel sales exceeding $500 million per year,³ pointing the agency at major oil companies and large regional distributors rather than independent gas stations.

Penalties the Bill Proposed

Violations would have been treated as breaches of an FTC Act rule, letting the agency investigate, subpoena, and bring administrative or civil actions. The bill also required the FTC to stand up a new Transportation Fuel Monitoring and Enforcement Unit to track crude oil and fuel market data.¹

Civil penalties scaled with the violator. A person or company that knowingly gouged consumers could face up to three times the profits from the violation, or up to $100 million, whichever was greater. For companies above the $500 million sales threshold, the Department of Justice could pursue criminal penalties up to $500 million.³ Civil penalties collected by the FTC would have gone to the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program.

How It Would Have Worked With State Laws

The bill was explicit that it would not preempt state price gouging statutes, and it gave state attorneys general the power to sue in federal court on behalf of their residents to enforce the federal provisions.¹

That matters because roughly 39 states, along with the District of Columbia and several U.S. territories, already have their own price gouging laws. They vary widely. Some set hard percentage caps (California limits increases to 10 percent during a declared emergency), while others use flexible standards like “unconscionable” or “gross disparity.” Nearly all require a governor-declared emergency to take effect. The federal bill would have layered on top of those laws rather than replacing them.

What Federal Law Actually Covers Now

Because H.R. 7688 never became law, no federal statute directly prohibits charging excessive prices for gasoline or other fuels. The closest tool is the FTC’s Prohibition of Energy Market Manipulation Rule under 16 CFR Part 317, which bans fraud and deception in wholesale petroleum markets.⁴ Authorized by the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, the rule targets fraudulent or deceptive conduct in wholesale purchases or sales of crude oil, gasoline, or petroleum distillates, including materially misleading statements or omissions that distort market conditions.⁵

The gap is significant. The existing rule reaches fraud, not simply high prices driven by market power or opportunism. A refiner that charges more because demand spiked and supply dropped is not committing fraud under the rule. H.R. 7688 would have reached that conduct; current federal law does not. Consumers who suspect fuel-related fraud can file a complaint at ReportFraud.ftc.gov, but the agency’s tools remain limited to the anti-fraud framework.

Where the Idea Stands in Congress

The concept has resurfaced. In July 2025, Rep. Janice Schakowsky introduced H.R. 4528, the Price Gouging Prevention Act of 2025, in the 119th Congress.⁶ It was referred to the House Committees on Energy and Commerce and Financial Services, where it sat as of mid-2025. The successor is broader than fuel alone, but it reflects the same push for federal pricing oversight during emergencies.

H.R. 7688 cleared the House on a near-party-line vote and never picked up the bipartisan support needed in the Senate. Until a version of this legislation actually becomes law, state price gouging statutes and the FTC’s narrow anti-manipulation rule remain the only legal backstops when fuel prices spike.

1
Congress.gov. Consumer Fuel Price Gouging Prevention Act – All Info
2
Congress.gov. Consumer Fuel Price Gouging Prevention Act – Text
3
Congress.gov. Consumer Fuel Price Gouging Prevention Act – Engrossed in House
4
Federal Trade Commission. Prohibition of Energy Market Manipulation Rule
5
Federal Register. Prohibition of Energy Market Manipulation Rule
6
Congress.gov. H.R.4528 – Price Gouging Prevention Act of 2025