
Click to cancel: clear terms and easy cancelling
At a glance
US-09High15 U.S.C. §§ 8401 to 8405 (ROSCA § 8403); FTC Act § 5
Peeky reads the public pages of a site that sells subscriptions and looks for clear terms before billing and a cancellation route a visitor can find.
Last checked against the source:
The rule
The federal rule for online subscriptions is a statute, the Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act, known as ROSCA. It is short, and the FTC enforces it through its general consumer protection powers.
Section 8403 provides that “It shall be unlawful for any person to charge or attempt to charge any consumer for any goods or services sold in a transaction effected on the Internet through a negative option feature” unless the seller does three things. It “provides text that clearly and conspicuously discloses all material terms of the transaction before obtaining the consumer’s billing information”. It “obtains a consumer’s express informed consent before charging the consumer’s credit card, debit card, bank account, or other financial account”. And it “provides simple mechanisms for a consumer to stop recurring charges from being placed on the consumer’s credit card, debit card, bank account, or other financial account”.
A negative option feature is the mechanism by which silence counts as agreement: a free trial that turns into a paid plan, or a plan that renews unless the customer stops it. The three conditions line up with the order a customer meets them: terms before billing, consent before the charge, a way out afterwards.
Section 8404 provides that ROSCA is enforced as if its requirements were a rule under section 18 of the FTC Act on unfair or deceptive practices.
That brings in the civil penalty provision of Section 5(m)(1)(A), under which the Commission “may commence a civil action to recover a civil penalty” against a person who violates such a rule “with actual knowledge or knowledge fairly implied on the basis of objective circumstances that such act is unfair or deceptive and is prohibited by such rule”.
The penalty amount for each act is set by the FTC Act and adjusted for inflation each year. PeekWell does not compute an amount for a site, because the figure applies to published enforcement against other companies and is context only.
The vacated click-to-cancel rule
The FTC had also amended its Negative Option Rule in 2024, a measure known as click-to-cancel, with an “at least as easy to use” standard for cancelling. It is not in force. In Custom Communications, Inc. v. FTC (No. 24-3137), decided on 8 July 2025, the Eighth Circuit held that the Commission’s rulemaking was procedurally insufficient because it never issued the preliminary regulatory analysis the statute requires, and it vacated the Rule. The court said it did not need to reach the petitioners’ other challenges. This article therefore does not rest on that rule.
The FTC went on enforcing ROSCA. In September 2025 it announced settlements with Chegg and Amazon, and its business guidance on Chegg tells sellers to make sure consumers know where to find the cancellation method and that the process is not confusing or difficult to use.
State laws
States add their own layer. California’s Attorney General says the state’s Automatic Renewal Law was amended effective 1 July 2025. As the Attorney General describes it, a business must obtain express affirmative consent, send renewal notices within set windows, send annual reminders, and let a consumer who enrolled online cancel online without steps that obstruct or delay cancelling. California’s Attorney General, district attorneys and city attorneys enforce it. Other states have their own rules, so a site selling across the country meets more than one standard.
What PeekWell checks and how
US-09 asks two questions of a site that appears to sell subscriptions. Are the terms of the recurring charge stated where a visitor can read them before billing? Is a simple cancellation route described or linked? The scan answers from public pages, not from a signup.
The check applies when the scan sees signs that the site sells subscriptions. The scan is automated. It reads the terms of service, pricing and checkout copy for what they say about renewal and cancelling, and looks for a link to a way to cancel.
The check is the same as EU-13 for the European rule. Only the law it’s compared with differs.
The scan has limits, and the report says so. It sees the public pages it visited, and the members area when you give it a sign-in. It does not start a checkout, enter payment details, create an account or cancel one, so it cannot see whether the terms are shown beside the final button, whether consent is taken by a clear click, or how many steps the cancel flow takes. It reads wording and does not decide what the wording legally amounts to. A Passed means the expected behaviour was observed on the pages scanned. It does not say the site complies.
Why it matters for a company
The FTC has made subscriptions a regular subject. In its Chegg matter it alleged that the cancellation process was buried on its websites, took multiple clicks to find and was confusing and cumbersome, and that nearly 200,000 consumers were charged after asking to cancel since October 2020. The proposed order requires $7.5 million for refunds and simple cancellation mechanisms. In the FTC’s Amazon settlement of 25 September 2025, Amazon agreed to a $1 billion civil penalty and $1.5 billion in refunds. In March 2025 the FTC also announced a settlement with Cleo AI, a cash-advance app, whose proposed order would require clear disclosure of subscription terms, express consent before charging and a simple way to cancel.
In the Chegg and Amazon matters the FTC pleaded ROSCA, and the three conditions are checked against what a consumer sees: the terms on the page, the consent step, the route to cancel. Two of the three can be partly read from public pages, which is why a passive reading is useful, though only a live flow shows the rest.
For a company, the costs run beyond the penalty. Refund programmes, orders with monitoring, and the repeat charges that follow a failed cancellation all come from the same source: a cancel path that does not work as the page says. The Amazon and Chegg matters were both settlements filed with a court, and the Cleo AI matter was a complaint with a proposed order, so the allegations are the FTC’s and not findings of a court.
Smaller companies and larger companies
ROSCA has no size threshold. Any seller who charges online through a negative option feature is within the text.
In a small company the subscription is often a plan inside a hosted shop, an app store or a payment tool. The free-trial wording is the default template, the terms were copied from another site, and cancelling means emailing a support address that is checked weekly. Nobody has tested the path end to end, because nobody on a small team owns it. The cases listed run from Amazon to app makers such as NGL Labs and the operator of Sendit, where the FTC alleged a weekly charge that buyers were not clearly told about.
In a larger company the pieces are split. Marketing owns the offer, product owns the account area, support owns the cancel flow, and a redesign can bury the cancel link a level deeper. The Amazon and Chegg matters are about that path: in Chegg’s case the FTC alleged the cancellation process was buried and that the company did not improve the visibility of the cancellation link. Larger companies also face state attorneys general in addition to the FTC.
Enforcement cases
Published decisions about other companies, listed for context. Each links to the authority's own page. They say nothing about any particular website.

Larger companies
Amazon.com, Inc. (Prime)
The FTC alleged that Amazon used deceptive enrolment tactics to sign consumers up for Prime without their consent and made it exceedingly hard to cancel. Under a stipulated order filed for court approval and announced on 25 September 2025, Amazon agreed to pay a $1 billion civil penalty and provide $1.5 billion in consumer refunds.
Read the FTC (United States) publication about Amazon.com, Inc. (Prime)Chegg, Inc.
The FTC alleged that Chegg did not give subscribers a simple way to cancel auto-renewing subscriptions. It said that since October 2020 nearly 200,000 consumers were charged after asking to cancel.
Read the FTC (United States) publication about Chegg, Inc.Uber Technologies, Inc. (Uber One)
The complaint alleges that Uber charged consumers for its Uber One subscription without their consent and, despite a 'cancel anytime' promise, made users go through as many as 23 screens and 32 actions to cancel. It also alleges some users were charged before their free trial ended. These are allegations; the court decides the case.
Read the FTC (United States), later joined by states publication about Uber Technologies, Inc. (Uber One)Fitness International, LLC and Fitness & Sports Clubs, LLC (LA Fitness)
The complaint alleges that members who could join online had to cancel in person or by a form of mail that cost them extra, that only one specific employee could process an in-person cancellation, and that staff were trained to refuse cancellation requests by phone or email. These are allegations; the court decides the case.
Read the FTC (United States) publication about Fitness International, LLC and Fitness & Sports Clubs, LLC (LA Fitness)JustAnswer LLC
The complaint alleges that JustAnswer advertised expert advice for $1 or $5 while hiding that this enrolled consumers in a recurring monthly subscription costing $28 to $125, and charged the join fee and the subscription without affirmative consent. These are allegations; the court decides the case.
Read the FTC (United States) publication about JustAnswer LLCDoxo, Inc.
The FTC alleged that the bill payment service enrolled consumers in recurring subscriptions without explicit consent while concealing the subscription's price. Before the settlement, a federal court found that Doxo had not met ROSCA's requirements to clearly disclose the subscription terms and get consumers' authorization for the charges.
Read the FTC (United States) publication about Doxo, Inc.The Bouqs Company
The task force of California prosecutors found that the online flower delivery service did not clearly and conspicuously disclose the required subscription terms before purchase, and did not send the required acknowledgment afterwards repeating those terms and explaining how to cancel. The court-ordered judgment also imposes an injunction, and the company agreed to change its practices.
Read the Santa Barbara County District Attorney and Santa Monica City Attorney, for the California Automatic Renewal Task Force publication about The Bouqs Company
Smaller companies
NGL Labs, LLC
The FTC and the Los Angeles District Attorney alleged that the anonymous messaging app sold its NGL Pro upgrade without adequately disclosing that it was a recurring charge of $9.99 a week, and that buyers did not get the sender identities the ads suggested. The order requires a simple way to cancel any negative option subscription.
Read the FTC and Los Angeles District Attorney (United States) publication about NGL Labs, LLCIconic Hearts Holdings, Inc. (Sendit)
The complaint alleges that users of the Sendit app were not clearly told that its Diamond Membership would bill them as much as $9.99 every week rather than once, and that it was sold with the promise of revealing who sent messages, many of which the company itself had generated. These are allegations; the court decides the case.
Read the US Department of Justice, on referral from the FTC publication about Iconic Hearts Holdings, Inc. (Sendit)Aneva Gym
The Attorney General's investigation found that the Long Island City gym, open since 2022, gave members no written contract and posted terms on its website requiring them to cancel in writing and in person, 30 days ahead. State law lets members cancel by website, email, mail, phone or in person. The gym agreed to change its cancellation policies and refund members who could not easily cancel.
Read the New York Attorney General publication about Aneva Gym
How to fix it
The steps follow the three ROSCA conditions in order. Step 4 follows the FTC’s own advice to make sure consumers know where to find the cancellation method and that the process is not confusing or difficult to use.
- Walk the path as a customer. In a private window, read the pricing page, go through signup to the last step without paying, then find how to cancel. Note every place the renewal and billing terms are or are not stated.
- Put the terms before the card form. Before billing information is requested, state the price, how often it is charged, that it renews until cancelled, when a free or discounted trial turns into a paid plan, and how to cancel. Keep it in plain sight, not only in the terms page.
- Get a clear yes. Use an unticked checkbox or a button that says what it does, and keep the renewal terms on the same screen as the consent.
- Make the cancel route easy to find. Put “Cancel subscription” in the account area and the footer or help page, and describe it in the terms. If people sign up online, let them cancel online without a phone call, chat or form.
- Keep the exit short. Cut extra pages, distracting offers and repeated prompts, and send a confirmation. When someone cancels, stop the charges.
- Check state rules. If you sell in California, compare your renewal notices, annual reminder and online cancel against the Automatic Renewal Law as the Attorney General describes it. Other states may differ.
- Re-scan. Run a scan again. The finding should clear once the billing terms and a reachable cancellation route are on the public pages.
Whether your wording satisfies ROSCA or a state law is a question for your legal adviser, and Peeky reports only what it sees.
Questions
Is the FTC click-to-cancel rule in effect?
No. The Eighth Circuit vacated the rule on 8 July 2025 because the FTC had not done a required preliminary regulatory analysis. ROSCA is a statute and was not affected, and the FTC has kept enforcing it, including its Chegg and Amazon settlements in September 2025.
What does ROSCA require?
Three things for an online sale with a negative option feature. The seller has to disclose all material terms clearly and conspicuously before taking billing information, get the buyer's express informed consent before charging, and give simple mechanisms to stop recurring charges.
The text is in 15 U.S.C. § 8403, and The rule quotes it.
Does cancelling have to be as easy as signing up?
ROSCA itself asks for "simple mechanisms" to stop recurring charges. The "at least as easy to use" wording was in the vacated FTC rule, so it is not a federal rule today.
Some states ask for more. California says a person who enrolled online must be able to cancel online.
Do states have their own auto-renewal laws?
Yes, and some are stricter than ROSCA. California's Automatic Renewal Law was amended effective 1 July 2025 and asks for express consent, renewal notices at set times, and immediate online cancellation for people who enrolled online.
California's Attorney General and local prosecutors enforce it. Other states have their own versions.
How does Peeky check subscription terms and cancelling?
Peeky reads the public pages of your site, finds the sentences about billing, renewal and cancelling, and looks for a link or described route to cancel. It never signs up, enters payment details or tries to cancel. How a scan works has the full path.
Filed with
The rule
Restore Online Shoppers' Confidence Act (ROSCA), 15 U.S.C. §§ 8401 to 8405, in particular § 8403 and § 8404
Read the rule (Restore Online Shoppers' Confidence Act (ROSCA), 15 U.S.C. §§ 8401 to 8405, in particular § 8403 and § 8404)Sources
The law
- 15 U.S.C. § 8403, Negative option marketing on the Internet (ROSCA § 4)
- 15 U.S.C. § 8403, Negative option marketing on the Internet (US Code, govinfo)
- 15 U.S.C. § 8404, Enforcement by Federal Trade Commission (ROSCA § 5)
- 15 U.S.C. § 8405, Enforcement by State attorneys general (US Code, govinfo)
- 15 U.S.C. § 8402, Prohibitions against certain unfair and deceptive Internet sales practices (US Code, govinfo)
- 15 U.S.C. § 45, FTC Act section 5 (Cornell LII)
- New York General Business Law § 527-a, automatic renewal and continuous service offers (disclosure, affirmative consent, cancellation)
Guidance
- FTC Business Blog, Does your business offer subscription services? Learn about the FTC's settlement with Chegg (September 2025)
- California Attorney General, Consumer Alert on California's Automatic Renewal Law (4 September 2025)
Decisions and cases
- FTC, FTC Secures Historic $2.5 Billion Settlement Against Amazon (25 September 2025)
- FTC, Ed Tech Provider Chegg to Pay $7.5 Million to Settle FTC Allegations Concerning its Cancellation Practices (15 September 2025)
- FTC, FTC Takes Action Against Uber for Deceptive Billing and Cancellation Practices (21 April 2025)
- FTC, FTC Sues LA Fitness for Making it Difficult for Consumers to Cancel Gym Memberships (20 August 2025)
- FTC, FTC Sues JustAnswer for Deceiving Consumers into Enrolling in a Costly Recurring Monthly Subscription (13 January 2026)
- FTC, Bill Payment Firm Doxo to Pay $2.1 Million to Settle FTC Allegations of Consumer Deception and Hidden Fees (17 August 2026)
- FTC, FTC Order Will Ban NGL Labs and its Founders from Offering Anonymous Messaging Apps to Kids Under 18 and Halt Deceptive Claims Around AI Content Moderation (9 July 2024)
- FTC, FTC alleges Sendit app and its CEO collected personal data from children and deceived users about messages and subscription memberships (29 September 2025)
- FTC, Cash Advance Company Cleo AI Agrees to Pay $17 Million (27 March 2025)
- New York Attorney General, Attorney General James Secures Refunds and Policy Changes from Queens Gym that Misled Customers (Aneva Gym, 4 August 2025)
- Santa Barbara County District Attorney, press release 01-713, People v. The Bouqs Company, Santa Barbara County Superior Court No. 23CV05515 (4 January 2024)
- New York Attorney General, Attorney General James Secures $400,000 from Online Medication Provider for Deceiving Consumers (Thirty Madison, 24 August 2026)
- Georgia Attorney General, Carr Secures Settlement with Online Clothing Retailer Regarding Deceptive Advertising and Billing Practices (TFG Holding VIP membership, 7 November 2025)
Further reading
Last checked against the source:
For information only. Not legal advice.
