The FTC alleged that General Motors and its OnStar subsidiary collected and sold drivers' precise geolocation and driving behavior data (e.g., hard braking, speeding) to consumer reporting agencies without adequately notifying consumers or obtaining their affirmative consent. A proposed consent order bans the companies from disclosing this sensitive data to consumer reporting agencies for five years and requires them to implement clearer consent mechanisms, data access/deletion processes, and opt-out options.
The proposed order prohibits GM and OnStar from misrepresenting their data practices, bans disclosure of covered driver data to consumer reporting agencies for five years, requires affirmative express consent prior to collecting connected vehicle data (with limited exceptions), mandates a process for consumers to access and delete their data, and requires providing consumers the ability to disable precise geolocation collection and opt-out of geolocation/driver behavior data collection.
In-house legal teams should review all vendor agreements (particularly with data brokers or consumer reporting agencies), customer-facing terms of service/privacy policies, and data processing agreements. Focus on clauses governing data sharing, consent mechanisms (especially for sensitive data like precise geolocation and driving behavior), opt-out rights, data retention, and disclosures to third parties. Changes needed include: adding explicit, affirmative consent requirements for collecting and sharing sensitive connected vehicle data; prohibiting disclosure of such data to consumer reporting agencies for five years; implementing clear, accessible opt-out processes; establishing robust data access and deletion procedures; and ensuring enrollment processes are not misleading.
Entity
General Motors LLC, General Motors Holdings LLC, and OnStar LLC
Also known as: General Motors
Industry
AutomotiveOfficial Press Release
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2025/01/ftc-takes-action-against-general-motors-sharing-drivers-precise-location-driving-behavior-data
242 3052 general motors decisionandorder
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/242_3052_-_general_motors_decisionandorder.pdf
242 3052 general motors complaint
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/242_3052_-_general_motors_complaint.pdf
Federal Trade Commission Enforcement Page
https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement
"General Motors LLC, General Motors Holdings LLC, and OnStar LLC"
"GM failed to clearly disclose that it collected consumers’ precise geolocation and driving behavior data and sold it to third parties, including consumer reporting agencies, without consumers’ consent."
"GM monitored and sold people’s precise geolocation data and driver behavior information, sometimes as often as every three seconds."
"The proposed order would prohibit GM and OnStar from misrepresenting information about how they collect, use, and share consumers’ location and driver behavior data."
"The proposed order would ban GM and OnStar from disclosing consumers’ geolocation and driver behavior data to consumer reporting agencies for five years from the date the order is entered."
"The companies must obtain affirmative express consent from consumers prior to collecting connected vehicle data, with some exceptions such as providing location data to emergency first responders."
The FTC, Utah, and Nevada sued Lens.com Inc., alleging that it advertised artificially low contact lens prices while hiding mandatory checkout charges and misleading consumers about its AutoRefill subscription. The complaint seeks to stop the alleged practices; the court has not yet decided the case, and no penalty or remedy has been imposed.
The FTC issued an advance notice of proposed rulemaking seeking public comment on whether ad-optimization tools offered by online platforms may help scammers impersonate businesses and government agencies. This is a proposed regulatory inquiry, not an enforcement action against a named company; no penalty or remedy was imposed.
$2.5B
A federal court approved a revised order in the FTC's Amazon Prime case under which Amazon will accelerate and expand redress payments under the September 2025 $2.5 billion settlement, which resolved allegations that Amazon enrolled millions of consumers in Prime subscriptions without their consent and knowingly made cancellation difficult. More consumers now qualify for refunds, the maximum payment cap rises from $51 to $200, and all future payments will be distributed automatically starting October 1, 2026, with potential supplemental $149 payments by April 2027. Amazon has already issued more than $845 million in redress payments as of September 2026.
$225.0M
The FTC and the state of Washington filed a joint complaint and proposed stipulated order requiring Amway Corp. and two affiliates—World Wide Group, L.L.C. (WWG) and Leadership Team Development Inc. (LTD)—to pay a $225 million judgment, the largest monetary recovery ever obtained from an MLM in an FTC action, over allegations that they used deceptive earnings claims and unfair tactics to recruit Independent Business Owners. The complaint alleges the companies falsely promised substantial income and recruitment success, pressured IBOs to buy products they could not resell, and instructed IBOs to falsely report sales. Nearly all of the judgment will be used as redress for IBOs who lost money, and the proposed order imposes structural reforms including a 70% resale requirement, independent audits of sales records, and a ban on approved providers charging new IBOs for first-year training.
$100.0M
FleetCor Technologies Inc. (now Corpay Inc.) and its CEO Ronald Clarke agreed to pay $100 million to settle an FTC administrative action alleging the company charged small business customers hidden and unauthorized fees for fuel cards and misrepresented gas savings, fraud-control features, and fees. A federal district court granted the FTC summary judgment on all counts in 2023, and a federal appeals court upheld that judgment and the permanent injunction in 2026. The settlement funds will be used to provide redress to harmed business customers.
FTC staff published FAQs on price transparency to help the automobile industry comply with the FTC Act, reiterating that an advertised vehicle price must be the actual price any consumer can pay, excluding only government-required charges. The guidance follows warning letters the FTC sent to 97 auto dealership groups earlier in 2026 and signals continued litigation against dealers that advertise one price but charge more through undisclosed fees. No specific entity was charged and no penalty was imposed.