On July 10, 2026, New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani and Department of Consumer and Worker Protection (“DCWP”) Commissioner Samuel Levine announced the adoption of a new “Click to Cancel” rule governing how businesses disclose, bill, and cancel subscriptions. The rule takes effect October 1, 2026.

For companies already tracking the requirements of New York State’s autorenewal statute, GBL § 527-a, the new City rule will feel familiar. The DCWP explained that the rule is designed to be “consistent with the approach codified in New York State law” and its substantive provisions largely mirror state law. But it is not a carbon copy: it narrows cancellation options for certain businesses, increases potential civil penalties, and defines the measure of restitution. Businesses that focus solely on state law compliance may be caught off guard by the new City rule.

Cancellation Options

Where a consumer signs up in person, GBL § 527-a requires the business to offer cancellation through an online mechanism or a telephone number. The City rule tightens this requirement: it mandates an online mechanism, “such as a website or email,” and drops the telephone option altogether. Businesses that rely on phone-based cancellation for in-person enrollments will therefore need to add an online cancellation channel to comply with the City rule.

Civil Penalties

Under GBL § 527-a, maximum civil penalties are $100 for a single violation and $500 for multiple violations arising from a single act or incident, rising to $500 and $1,000, respectively, for knowing violations. The statute also provides a bona fide error defense for unintentional violations resulting from a genuine mistake despite reasonable procedures.

The City rule increases potential civil penalties. Enforced as a deceptive and unconscionable trade practice under the Consumer Protection Law, a violation is subject to the penalty schedule in § 6-47 of the Rules of the City of New York. Unlike the state statute, which sets a ceiling on multiple violations arising from a single act, the City imposes a fixed amount per violation, as defined in § 20-703: $525 for a first violation, $1,050 for a second, and $3,500 for a third or subsequent violation. The City rule also lacks an express bona fide error defense.

Restitution

GBL § 527-a leaves restitution to the court’s discretion in an Attorney General enforcement action. The City rule, by contrast, provides a defined restitution measure: a business that violates the rule is liable for the amount charged to the consumer after the consumer’s first attempt to cancel. Check back here for more updates on autorenewal law developments.  If you have any questions about click-to-cancel compliance, please contact members of our Advertising and Consumer Protection Investigations practice.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Laura Kim Laura Kim

Laura Kim has a proven track record of successfully resolving clients’ most important consumer protection matters before the FTC, State AGs, and the NAD. She is well-known for her insider knowledge of the FTC as well as her practical approach to accomplishing her…

Laura Kim has a proven track record of successfully resolving clients’ most important consumer protection matters before the FTC, State AGs, and the NAD. She is well-known for her insider knowledge of the FTC as well as her practical approach to accomplishing her clients’ objectives.

As chair of Covington’s Advertising & Consumer Protection Investigations practice group, Laura represents corporate and individual clients in investigations before the FTC and State Attorneys General. She also provides pragmatic compliance advice on a wide range of consumer protection issues, including substantiating claims involving generative artificial intelligence, environmental benefits, and “Made in USA.” She counsels brands on emerging issues involving influencers, consumer reviews, AI-generated content, and subscription autorenewals. Laura regularly represents both challengers and advertisers before the NAD, achieving favorable outcomes in matters involving artificial intelligence, influencers, and claim substantiation.

During her twelve-year tenure at the FTC, Laura served as Assistant Director in two divisions of the Bureau of Consumer Protection, Attorney Advisor to Chairman William E. Kovacic, and Chief of Staff to Bureau Director Jessica Rich. She oversaw major rulemakings—including the Green Guides and the Telemarketing Sales Rule—and supervised dozens of investigations and enforcement actions. As Assistant Director in the Division of Enforcement, Laura also supervised compliance monitoring and enforcement proceedings for companies under federal court or Commission order.

Photo of Andrew Siegel Andrew Siegel

Andrew Siegel defends clients in FTC, DOJ, and State AG consumer protection investigations and enforcement actions, including against allegations relating to advertising and marketing practices, subscription autorenewals, and unfair and deceptive trade practices.

Andrew has extensive experience representing clients across industries, including in…

Andrew Siegel defends clients in FTC, DOJ, and State AG consumer protection investigations and enforcement actions, including against allegations relating to advertising and marketing practices, subscription autorenewals, and unfair and deceptive trade practices.

Andrew has extensive experience representing clients across industries, including in the technology, consumer products, and financial services sectors, in high-stakes government investigations by federal and state regulators. He defends clients against allegations relating to the marketing of online subscriptions, the use of algorithms and artificial intelligence, undisclosed endorsements, claim substantiation, and other unfair and deceptive practices. He also counsels clients on proactive compliance with FTC and state regulations governing consumer interactions.

In addition, Andrew advises clients on the protection of customer information and other sensitive data as they respond to demands from U.S. and international law enforcement agencies and government regulators, as well as private plaintiffs. Andrew assists clients in navigating U.S. and international data privacy requirements as they respond to federal grand jury subpoenas, international legal demands, and discovery requests.

Photo of Alexandra Remick Alexandra Remick

Alexandra Remick is a member of the Advertising and Consumer Protection Investigations Group. Her practice focuses on regulatory and compliance matters related to consumer protection. She has experience advising clients on topics including endorsements, social media influencers, native advertising, automatically renewing subscriptions, consumer…

Alexandra Remick is a member of the Advertising and Consumer Protection Investigations Group. Her practice focuses on regulatory and compliance matters related to consumer protection. She has experience advising clients on topics including endorsements, social media influencers, native advertising, automatically renewing subscriptions, consumer reviews, and claim substantiation in a variety of contexts. She frequently provides advice on specific advertising compliance questions and works with companies on developing internal advertising compliance policies. She has also represented multiple clients in FTC investigations involving consumer protection issues, has conducted regulatory due diligence on multiple transactions, and has drafted comments on multiple rulemakings.

Photo of Munseong Park Munseong Park

Munseong Park is an associate in the London office. His practice focuses on trademark matters, with an emphasis on counseling and litigation, as well as regulatory matters related to consumer protection.