14 C.F.R. § 399.84

Price advertising and opt-out provisions

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) The Department considers any advertising or solicitation by a direct air carrier, indirect air carrier, an agent of either, or a ticket agent, for passenger air transportation, a tour (i.e., a combination of air transportation and ground or cruise accommodations) or tour component (e.g., a hotel stay) that must be purchased with air transportation that states a price for such air transportation, tour, or tour component to be an unfair and deceptive practice in violation of 49 U.S.C. 41712, unless the price stated is the entire price to be paid by the customer to the carrier, or agent, for such air transportation, tour, or tour component. Though charges included within the single total price listed (e.g., government taxes) may be stated separately or through links or “pop ups” on websites that display the total price, such charges may not be false or misleading, may not be displayed prominently, may not be presented in the same or larger size as the total price, and must provide cost information on a per passenger basis that accurately reflects the cost of the item covered by the charge.

(b) The Department considers any advertising by the entities listed in paragraph (a) of this section of an each-way airfare that is available only when purchased for round-trip travel to be an unfair and deceptive practice in violation of 49 U.S.C. 41712, unless such airfare is advertised as “each way” and in such a manner so that the disclosure of the round-trip purchase requirement is clearly and conspicuously noted in the advertisement and is stated prominently and proximately to the each-way fare amount. The Department considers it to be an unfair and deceptive practice to advertise each-way fares contingent on a round-trip purchase requirement as “one-way” fares, even if accompanied by prominent and proximate disclosure of the round trip purchase requirement.

(c) When offering a ticket for purchase by a consumer, for passenger air transportation or for a tour (i.e., a combination of air transportation and ground or cruise accommodations) or tour component (e.g., a hotel stay) that must be purchased with air transportation, a direct air carrier, indirect air carrier, an agent of either, or a ticket agent, may not offer additional optional services in connection with air transportation, a tour, or tour component whereby the optional service is automatically added to the consumer's purchase if the consumer takes no other action, i.e., if the consumer does not opt out. The consumer must affirmatively “opt in” (i.e., agree) to such a service and the fee for it before that fee is added to the total price for the air transportation-related purchase. The Department considers the use of “opt-out” provisions to be an unfair and deceptive practice in violation of 49 U.S.C. 41712.

[76 FR 23166, Apr. 25, 2011, as amended by DOT-OST-2022-0109, 89 FR 34674, Apr. 30, 2024; DOT-OST-2026-0199, 91 FR 40371, July 2, 2026]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 7 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1989–2025 · leading case: Spirit Airlines, Inc. v. United States Dep't of Transp., 687 F.3d 403 (D.C. Cir. 2012).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Spirit Airlines, Inc. v. United States Dep't of Transp., 687 F.3d 403 (D.C. Cir. 2012). · cites it 10× “For one thing, DOT left unaltered the rule’s key language (though it did add language allowing airlines to state charges, fees, and taxes separately while prohibiting them from doing so “prominently” or “in the same or larger size as the total price,” 14 C.F.R. § 399.84 ). Since…”

Sabre, Inc. v. Dep't of Transp., 429 F.3d 1113 (D.C. Cir. 2005). · cites it 5× “§ 41712 and 14 CFR 399.84, Order 2004-2-5, 2004 WL 253318 (D.”

State of Alaska v. U.S. Dep't of Transp. & Samuel K. Skinner, Sec'y of Transp., 868 F.2d 441 (D.C. Cir. 1989). · cites it 3× “14 C.F.R. 399.84 (1975); J.A. at 2. The rule was aimed at eliminating deceptive advertising by requiring such advertisements to state a single price, or at most, two component prices.”

People of State of NY v. Trans World Airlines, 728 F. Supp. 162 (S.D.N.Y. 1990). · cites it 4× “The principal rule in this area is 14 C.F.R. § 399.84 , which provides: The board considers any advertising or solicitation by a direct air carrier, indirect air carrier, or an agent of either, for passenger air transportation, a tour (i.”

Bryan Ray v. Spirit Airlines, Inc., 767 F.3d 1220 (11th Cir. 2014). “” 14 C.F.R. § 399.84 (a) (“Although charges included within the single total price listed (e.”

People v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 147 Misc. 2d 697 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1990). “It has found that these advertisements are not unfair or deceptive so long as they are clear and the total amount paid by the customer can be easily determined adding the separate surcharges (14 CFR 399.84; order Nos. 85-12-68, *700 88-3-25, 88-8-2).”

Airlines for Amer v. Dept of Trans, 127 F.4th 563 (5th Cir. 2025). “20, 1984) (codified as amended at 14 C.F.R. § 399.84 ) (promulgating rule pursuant to § 411 of the Federal Aviation Act stating that any advertising by an air carrier is an “unfair or deceptive practice” unless “the price stated is the entire price to be paid by the customer”).”

— 14 C.F.R. § 399.84(a) — 1 case

Spirit Airlines, Inc. v. United States Dep't of Transp., 687 F.3d 403 (D.C. Cir. 2012). “For one thing, DOT left unaltered the rule’s key language (though it did add language allowing airlines to state charges, fees, and taxes separately while prohibiting them from doing so “prominently” or “in the same or larger size as the total price,” 14 C.F.R. § 399.84 ). Since…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.