U.S. FTC Signals Renewed Interest in “Click-to-Cancel” Rulemaking

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is back at the table on “click-to-cancel,” signaling that stricter federal rules governing subscription and automatic renewal programs are very much alive, even after last year’s court setback.

On January 30, 2026, the FTC submitted a draft Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) concerning its Negative Option Rule to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) within the Office of Management and Budget.

Although the contours of any new rule remain uncertain, the FTC’s decision to reinitiate rulemaking signals a continued commitment to regulating negative option and subscription practices. Importantly, given the narrow procedural basis on which the FTC’s prior rule was vacated, any new proposal is unlikely to differ significantly from the FTC’s most recent iteration.

As a practical matter, however, this latest move does not mean new requirements are imminent. OIRA designated the ANPRM a “significant regulatory action,” which means the FTC must now obtain OIRA clearance before it can publish the proposal in the Federal Register and solicit public comment. OIRA generally has up to 90 calendar days to complete its review of draft ANPRMs, with the option to extend that period by an additional 30 days. This additional step may slow the timing of the rulemaking process and could result in revisions to the proposal based on interagency feedback.

Notably, this review requirement is new for the FTC. Until recently, independent agencies such as the FTC were not subject to OIRA review, but a 2025 executive order (EO 14215) extended OIRA oversight to significant regulatory actions issued by independent agencies.

The Long Road to Rulemaking

The FTC originally adopted its Negative Option Rule in 1973, limiting its scope to prenotification plans for physical goods. In October 2019, the FTC issued an ANPRM seeking comment on whether the rule should be expanded to address modern, automatically renewing subscriptions, including digital offerings.

In April 2023, the FTC issued a proposed rule that would have significantly expanded the rule’s reach, including detailed requirements for “clear and conspicuous” disclosures and “simple” cancellation mechanisms that were “at least as easy” as enrollment and would “immediately” cancel a subscription. The proposed rule would have also restricted the use of “save offers,” although that aspect drew significant industry criticism.

The FTC finalized the expanded Negative Option Rule in October 2024, largely tracking the proposed framework but softening certain provisions (most notably by allowing save offers without prior consumer consent). The final rule imposed strict disclosure placement requirements and mandated immediate, same-medium cancellation mechanisms.

In July 2025, however, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit vacated the final Negative Option Rule on procedural grounds. The court held that the FTC failed to conduct a required preliminary regulatory analysis after an Administrative Law Judge determined that the rule’s economic impact would exceed $100 million, depriving stakeholders of a meaningful opportunity to comment

What to Expect Next

The Eighth Circuit’s decision was not based on the FTC’s substantive authority to regulate negative option practices, nor did it criticize the policy choices reflected in the rule itself. Instead, the court focused on deficiencies in the rulemaking process under the Administrative Procedure Act.

As a result, the FTC’s renewed effort, beginning with the newly submitted ANPRM, appears aimed at curing those procedural defects rather than rethinking the substance of the rule. Companies should therefore expect that any future proposal will look similar to the vacated final rule even if the precise timing and final contours remain uncertain.

For businesses operating subscription or automatic renewal programs, the FTC’s latest move — in conjunction with recent investigations and litigation concerning companies’ subscription practices — underscores that negative option practices remain a regulatory priority. In just the past few weeks, the FTC has both revived rulemaking efforts and brought high-profile enforcement actions in this space, including the JustAnswer case, which focuses on allegedly deceptive enrollment practices. Taken together, these developments reflect a coordinated strategy: even as formal rulemaking proceeds slowly, the FTC is actively using investigations and litigation to pressure companies to align with its view of “simple” subscription cancellation and clear and conspicuous disclosures.