Going “Paperless” May Soon Be Mandatory in California
Time 2 Minute Read

On January 7, 2019, California Assemblyman Phil Ting introduced Assembly Bill 161 which would prohibit businesses from providing paper receipts except upon request, citing “significant positive environmental and public health effects.” The goal of the Bill is to reduce consumers’ exposure to chemicals contained on paper receipts, such as BPA, and to reduce the carbon footprint.

The Bill is part of a series of legislative actions taken in California involving energy concerns facing the state. If the Bill passes, it would require all retailers, small and large, to comply by January 1, 2022. Additionally, the Bill provides that a retailer’s first and second violations will result in a warning, and each subsequent violation shall result in “a fine of twenty-five dollars ($25) for each day the business is in violation, but not to exceed three hundred dollars ($300) annually.” Notably, many large retailers have already implemented this electronic receipt practice, including Apple, Macy’s, Nordstrom, and Best Buy. In fact, through their e-receipt practice, these retailers have access to information that allows them to better consumers’ experiences.

Notwithstanding the sustainable impact on the environment, the Bill does pose some risks. There are privacy concerns involved in an electronic receipt system that retailers and legislators must be mindful of. For example, retailers typically require a consumer to provide an e-mail address in order to receive an electronic receipt which could require additional analysis regarding privacy issues. As consumers’ data have become increasingly targeted by bad actors, it is important that retailers have reasonable cyber-security programs in place to avoid attempted data breaches prior to implementing any electronic receipt system.

You May Also Be Interested In

Time 2 Minute Read

California has introduced Assembly Bill 2244, proposing a pioneering “California Certified” labeling standard for foods not classified as ultra-processed. The bill relies on forthcoming regulatory definitions and imposes retail placement requirements for qualifying products. As California continues to advance UPF regulation, this initiative is expected to shape food law trends nationwide.

Time 1 Minute Read

As reported on the Hunton Employment & Labor Perspectives blog, SB 574 is a California bill that would set specific duties for attorneys who use generative artificial intelligence and would restrict how arbitrators may use such tools in decision-making.

Time 1 Minute Read

The California Consumer Privacy Act continues to drive significant enforcement activity—particularly when minors’ data is involved. In a recent action, the California Privacy Protection Agency imposed a $1.1 million fine on youth sports platform PlayOn Sports for alleged violations involving student data and inadequate opt-out mechanisms. The case highlights growing regulatory scrutiny around how companies collect, share, and provide transparency about personal information—especially when schools and students are involved. 

Time 2 Minute Read

On March 3, 2026, the CalPrivacy announced its first enforcement action involving student privacy, requiring PlayOn Sports to pay a $1.10 million fine for alleged violations of the CCPA’s opt-out rights and requirements.

Search

Subscribe Arrow

Recent Posts

Categories

Tags

Authors

Archives

Jump to Page