When the price isn’t right: ACCC targets misleading retail pricing tactics September 1, 2025

Misleading pricing strategies and promotional practices may lead to ACCC enforcement action

The Australian Competition & Consumer Commission (ACCC) has continued to scrutinise misleading retail pricing strategies and discount pricing claims as part of the watchdog’s enforcement priorities for 2025-26. .

What constitutes misleading retail pricing practices?

Under the Australian Consumer Law (ACL), businesses are prohibited from making false or misleading representations about the price of goods or services. This includes representations about:

• the actual price of products,
• the nature and extent of discounts or savings, and
• the duration of sale periods.

Misleading retail pricing practices can occur through various tactics, such as displaying inflated “was” prices, or misrepresenting the scope of sales promotions.

Importantly, businesses cannot rely on fine print disclaimers or terms and conditions to correct headline claims that are fundamentally misleading.

How do recent ACCC enforcement actions highlight common pitfalls?

Emma Sleep’s misleading discount campaign

The ACCC commenced proceedings against mattress supplier Emma Sleep Pty Ltd (and related entities) in December 2023, alleging that its sales advertisements were false or misleading.

Emma Sleep has admitted to breaching the ACL by making the following representations about sale prices between June 2020 and March 2023:

• Savings representations – The retailer advertised that 74 products were on sale online by displaying a purchase price, with a higher ‘strikethrough’ price, and a percentage discount or dollar savings amount. However, the ACCC found that 58 of these products had never been sold at the strikethrough or non-sale price, and the remaining products had almost never been available at those higher prices.
• Limited time sale representations – Emma Sleep represented through countdown timers that the sale prices would only be available for limited periods. In reality, the countdown timers would reset after reaching zero, or products would continue to be offered at the same or a similar discounted price.

The ACCC will seek penalties against Emma Sleep for these admitted breaches of the ACL.

Black Friday “sitewide” sales that weren’t sitewide

Last year, the ACCC conducted a sweep of Black Friday and post-Christmas sales advertisements which revealed misrepresentation of discounts available, including through use of the terms “sitewide” and “storewide”. 

Three prominent businesses – Michael Hill Jeweller, MyHouse, and Hairhouse Warehouse Online – each paid penalties of $19,800 after being issued infringement notices for engaging in misleading sales promotions:

• Michael Hill advertised a “Member Event 25% off Sitewide” sale on its website, implying that all products sitewide were discounted by 25% for members, when some products were not discounted. 
• MyHouse promoted their sale with ads stating “Up to 60% OFF RRP EVERYTHING ON SALE“, followed by “+EXTRA 20% OFF”. The ACCC considered this misleading as the additional 20% off did not apply to all products. 
• Hairhouse Online’s “SAVE 20% to 50% SITEWIDE” promotion was misleading because more than a quarter of the products available on its website were excluded from the sale offer.

Businesses should take care to remember that the ACCC can issue infringement notices as a means of addressing alleged breaches of the ACL without the need to issue formal legal proceedings.

Looking ahead: Best practices for compliant pricing

Sales and other promotions are a strong driver of consumer purchases. Promotional advertising must be clear and accurate to allow consumers to compare offers from other businesses and determine whether they are getting the best deal. 

To avoid falling foul of the ACL, businesses should implement robust procedures around pricing and promotional activities:

• Ensure discount claims are genuine: Only advertise discounts where products have been genuinely offered at the higher price for a meaningful period. Avoid creating artificially inflated “was” prices solely to support discount claims. This also applies to displaying the RRP price next to a discounted price – if the product has not recently been sold at the RRP price, this could be misleading. 
• Be precise about sale scope: Terms like “sitewide” and “storewide” should only be used when they accurately describe the extent of the sale. If exclusions apply, they should be clearly and prominently disclosed (not through fine print disclaimers).
• Avoid artificial urgency: Any representation of a limited time offer, including through use of a countdown timer, must be accurate and reflect genuine promotional end dates. Don’t create a false sense of urgency to encourage impulse purchases.
• Document pricing decisions: Maintain records of previous pricing to support any discount claims and demonstrate compliance with ACL requirements.

The final word

For businesses operating in the retail sector, now is the time to review pricing strategies and promotional practices to ensure full compliance with the ACL, as well as to build consumer trust and brand reputation.

Businesses concerned about pricing compliance or promotional practices should seek legal advice. Contact our commercial law team to find out more about misleading retail pricing issues.

By Madeline Wyre and Rebecca Cameron