Hopper to Pay $35 Million After FTC Finds Hidden Fees, Deceptive Practices
The Federal Trade Commission announced on July 2, 2026, that Hopper Inc., the Canadian company behind one of the most widely-used travel booking apps in North America, has agreed to pay $35 million to settle allegations that it buried hidden fees inside bookings and misrepresented key service benefits to millions of consumers. For travel merchants, agents, and operators who work with or compete against app-based OTAs, the case is a pointed reminder that fee transparency is no longer optional under federal enforcement.
What the FTC Alleged
According to the complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, Hopper promoted a “no hidden fees” promise while systematically charging users for optional services they never consciously selected. At the point of booking, consumers saw a total price and a Swipe to Book button. Buried below the fold, on a screen that only appeared if the user scrolled down, were pre-selected charges for what Hopper called a “Tip” and “VIP Support” fee.
These charges generated millions in additional revenue for the company, the FTC alleged. Consumers complained repeatedly. One consumer’s complaint, cited in the FTC filing, read: “I did not intend to buy the VIP support. Honestly it feels like ya’ll snuck that in on the final screen at the bottom and opted me in.”
Internal communications were even more damaging. The FTC complaint quotes a Hopper employee who wrote: “To me, the problem here is that we’re tricking users.” Company testing reportedly confirmed that if these fees were unselected by default and clearly disclosed, most consumers would decline them.
Misrepresented VIP Support and Price Freeze
Beyond the hidden fees, the FTC alleged that Hopper misrepresented two of its paid add-on services. The VIP Support feature was marketed as providing “instant” or near-instant access to customer service. In reality, consumers who paid for VIP Support often could not reach an agent at all or faced significant wait times, the complaint said.
The Price Freeze feature, also marketed as “Hold the Room,” was advertised as allowing consumers to lock in an advertised fare for a set period. The FTC alleged Hopper failed to clearly disclose critical restrictions, including that Price Freeze only protected a price up to a certain amount and only if the booking remained available. The company also failed to apply the Price Freeze fee toward the cost of the booking as promised, according to the complaint.
What the Settlement Requires
Under the proposed consent order, Hopper must pay $35 million, which will go toward consumer redress. Beyond the monetary penalty, the company is now prohibited from misrepresenting any fees and must clearly and conspicuously disclose all charges, the total price of any transaction, and the final payment amount before consumers confirm a purchase.
The settlement also brings Hopper under the scope of the FTC’s Unfair and Deceptive Fees Rule, which took effect for short-term lodging bookings in May 2025 and targets hidden or misleading charges across the travel industry.
What Travel Merchants and Operators Should Take From This
The Hopper case is the latest signal that federal regulators are paying close attention to how travel companies present pricing. For merchants, agents, and operators who work in the shadows of large OTAs, this case carries practical implications beyond the obvious.
First, the “pre-selected and buried” fee model is now officially on the regulators’ target list. Any business practice where a consumer reasonably cannot see what they are agreeing to pay, or where consent is engineered through dark UI patterns, faces meaningful legal risk. Second, the FTC’s Unfair and Deceptive Fees Rule creates a structural obligation to disclose the full price upfront across lodging, airfare, and related travel services. Third, the harm to Hopper’s brand trust is not abstract. Consumer complaints cited in the FTC filing show that customers who felt deceived are less likely to return, less likely to recommend, and more likely to dispute charges.
For travel merchants who compete with app-based OTAs, the case opens a window. Operators who build their business on transparent pricing, upfront fee disclosure, and genuine add-on value rather than engineered defaults have a real story to tell. The Hopper settlement does not just punish one company. It reinforces the standard that the entire industry will be measured against.
Looking Ahead
Fee transparency has been a growing regulatory theme for several years, but the Hopper settlement represents one of the largest enforcement actions to date against a standalone travel app. The case is likely to accelerate scrutiny of similar practices across the OTA landscape. Travel merchants and operators who have reviewed their own checkout flows and disclosure language proactively are in a better position than those waiting to see what comes next.
The FTC’s message in this case was direct: companies that show consumers one price and charge them another will face serious consequences. For an industry built on trust and long-term customer relationships, that is a lesson worth acting on before regulators act first.
Editor’s Note: TravelMerchantNews.com provides ongoing coverage of regulatory developments affecting travel merchants, operators, and payment professionals. Recent stories have tracked FTC enforcement activity, payment fraud trends, and evolving consumer protection standards across the travel sector.
