What federal law still requires a simple way to cancel online subscriptions?

The Restore Online Shoppers' Confidence Act (ROSCA), 15 U.S.C. § 8403, still requires online negative-option sellers to provide a simple mechanism to stop recurring charges, along with clear disclosures and express informed consent. The FTC's 2021 Negative Option Enforcement Policy explains that cancellation should be at least as easy as signup and available in the same medium.

What civil penalties can apply to ROSCA or FTC Act rule violations?

Knowing violations of applicable FTC Act trade regulation rules can expose sellers to civil penalties of up to $53,088 per violation under 15 U.S.C. § 45(m)(1)(A) as adjusted in 16 CFR § 1.98 (assessments after January 17, 2025).

Updated Aug 31, 2026Educational · Not legal advice

Subscription Cancellation Rights After the FTC Click-to-Cancel Vacatur: What Still Applies in 2026

Q: Is the FTC Click-to-Cancel Rule currently in effect?

No. The 2024 amendments commonly called the Click-to-Cancel Rule were vacated by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit on July 8, 2025. On February 12, 2026, the FTC restored the narrower prenotification Negative Option Rule at 16 CFR Part 425. A 2026 ANPRM restarts rulemaking but is not binding law.

Status check (as of August 31, 2026)

The 2024 FTC “Click-to-Cancel” amendments to 16 CFR Part 425 are not current law. They were vacated by the Eighth Circuit on July 8, 2025. Online subscription traps are still fought with ROSCA, FTC Act § 5, state automatic renewal laws, EFTA/FCBA, and card-network chargebacks—not with vacated § 425.6 citations.

For years, companies made signup frictionless and cancellation a maze. In 2024 the FTC tried to hard-code nationwide “parity” cancellation rules into 16 CFR Part 425. That effort was struck down on procedural grounds. Consumers still have powerful tools—but accuracy matters. Citing a vacated regulation as if it were live law weakens your notice and misleads readers.

What happened to the Click-to-Cancel Rule?

July 8, 2025: Custom Communications, Inc. v. FTC, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, No. 24-3137 — vacated the 2024 Negative Option / Click-to-Cancel amendments in their entirety for Magnuson-Moss rulemaking defects.
February 12, 2026: FTC final action (91 Fed. Reg. 6507) restored the pre-2024 Negative Option Rule at 16 CFR Part 425, limited to prenotification negative-option plans (classic book/music club style selections)—not a general SaaS streaming cancel-parity code.
2026: FTC launched a new Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) on negative options. That process may eventually restore parity-style rules. An ANPRM is not enforceable law.

What still protects you federally: ROSCA + FTC Act § 5

The Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act (ROSCA), 15 U.S.C. §§ 8401–8405, remains fully in force for internet negative-option features. Before charging, a seller must:

Clearly and conspicuously disclose material terms;
Obtain the consumer’s express informed consent to the charge; and
Provide a simple mechanism for the consumer to stop recurring charges (15 U.S.C. § 8403).

How the FTC reads “simple”

The FTC’s Enforcement Policy Statement Regarding Negative Option Marketing (Oct. 28, 2021) states that cancellation should be at least as easy as the method used to enroll and available through the same medium (for example, the same website or app). Unreasonable “save” delays and harder pathways undermine that standard. This is interpretive enforcement policy supporting ROSCA / § 5—not a substitute for the vacated 2024 regulation text.

Separately, FTC Act § 5 (15 U.S.C. § 45) prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices. Knowing violations of applicable FTC Act trade regulation rules can carry civil penalties of up to $53,088 per violation under 15 U.S.C. § 45(m)(1)(A) as set in 16 CFR § 1.98 (assessments after January 17, 2025).

Where state law is often stronger

After the federal vacatur, state automatic renewal laws (ARLs) do much of the heavy lifting. California’s Automatic Renewal Law (as updated by AB 2863), Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17600 et seq., includes online cancellation pathways and the § 17603 unconditional gift remedy when goods/services are provided in violation of the article. New York, Illinois, Virginia, Colorado, Washington, and others maintain their own consent, reminder, and cancel-path rules.

Bank and card tools still work

EFTA / Reg E (15 U.S.C. § 1693e; 12 CFR § 1005.10(c)): stop or revoke preauthorized electronic fund transfers with timely bank notice (≥3 business days before the debit).
FCBA / Reg Z (15 U.S.C. § 1666; 12 CFR § 1026.13): credit billing-error dispute process.
Card networks: Visa Reason Code 13.2 (Cancelled Recurring Transaction) and Mastercard 4841 remain practical dispute pathways when merchants keep charging after cancel notice. See chargeback code guide.

How to use Privacy Dawg tools accurately

Generate a dated cancellation notice citing ROSCA § 8403, applicable state ARL provisions, and payment-authority revocation under EFTA/FCBA—not vacated 16 CFR § 425.6. Then escalate with AG/FTC/CFPB portals and, if needed, a bank chargeback packet.

Launch Rights Hub & Dispute Tools →

FAQ

Is the FTC Click-to-Cancel Rule currently in effect?

No. The 2024 amendments were vacated July 8, 2025. Current 16 CFR Part 425 is the restored prenotification rule. A 2026 ANPRM is pending rulemaking only.

Can a company force a phone call to cancel an online signup?

That practice is a high-risk ROSCA “simple mechanism” and FTC policy problem, and it often violates state ARLs (for example California). Document the path and send a written cancel notice citing ROSCA § 8403 and your state’s statute.

What civil penalty figure should I cite?

Use up to $53,088 per violation under 16 CFR § 1.98 / 15 U.S.C. § 45(m)(1)(A)—not outdated $50,120 figures.

Disclaimer: Privacy Dawg provides educational information and automated technical tools. We do not provide formal legal advice. For specific statutory disputes, consult with a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction. Sources summarized: Eighth Circuit vacatur (July 8, 2025); 91 Fed. Reg. 6507 (Feb. 12, 2026); ROSCA 15 U.S.C. §§ 8401–8405; FTC Negative Option Enforcement Policy (Oct. 28, 2021); 16 CFR § 1.98.