Court Rules
All enforcement actions
Consent DecreeLow Risk

FTC Bars GM, OnStar from Selling Vehicle Data Without Consent

General Motors LLC, General Motors Holdings LLC, and OnStar, LLCJanuary 14, 2026Federal Trade Commission

Summary

Privacy enforcement action where the FTC settled with General Motors and OnStar for collecting and selling consumers' geolocation and driving behavior data without adequate notice or consent. The order prohibits sharing data with consumer reporting agencies and requires transparency and consumer choice measures.

Remedy

GM is banned from disclosing consumers' geolocation and driver behavior data to consumer reporting agencies for five years. For 20 years, GM must obtain affirmative consent before collecting or sharing connected vehicle data, provide data access and deletion options, allow disabling geolocation collection, and offer opt-out capabilities with limited exceptions.

InjunctionConsent DecreeCompliance ProgramData DeletionBan

Contract Impact

In-house legal teams should review customer-facing agreements (e.g., vehicle purchase/lease agreements, OnStar subscription terms) and vendor/data sharing agreements to ensure they contain clear, unambiguous clauses regarding the collection, use, and sale of sensitive geolocation and driving behavior data. Specific clauses to scrutinize include those governing consumer consent (requiring affirmative, not implied, consent), third-party data sharing (especially prohibitions on sharing with consumer reporting agencies), data transparency obligations (disclosing what data is collected and for what purposes), and consumer choice mechanisms (opt-out rights). Agreements may need amendments to explicitly list geolocation and driver behavior data as sensitive, mandate separate consent for their sale, restrict sharing with consumer reporting agencies, and provide layered, conspicuous privacy notices.

Contract Search Terms

geolocation data consentdriving behavior data sharingaffirmative consent mechanismconsumer reporting agency data sharing prohibitionconnected vehicle data transparencyopt-out mechanismdata processing addendumprivacy notice requirementsthird-party data sharing clausedata minimization

Violation Types

Entity Details

Entity

General Motors LLC, General Motors Holdings LLC, and OnStar, LLC

Also known as: General Motors

Industry

Automotive

Official Sources

Source Evidence

Entity Name
"General Motors LLC, General Motors Holdings LLC, and OnStar, LLC (collectively GM)"
Violation Types
"collected, used, and sold consumers’ precise geolocation data and driving behavior data from millions of vehicles without adequately notifying consumers and obtaining their affirmative consent."

Related Enforcement Actions

FTC

Federal Trade Commission

The FTC rescinded its 2021 Policy Statement on Breaches by Health Apps and Other Connected Devices, which had purported to apply the Health Breach Notification Rule to health apps and connected devices that collect consumer health information. The rescission follows the Commission's 2024 update to the Health Breach Notification Rule, which already covers health apps and connected devices like fitness trackers, and implements an executive order directing agencies to eliminate obsolete guidance documents. No company was charged or penalized; this is a deregulatory action.

FTC

Humboldt Merchant Services

$12.0M

The FTC alleged that payment processor Humboldt Merchant Services knowingly processed payments for more than 1,000 shell merchant entities serving as fronts for fraudulent companies engaged in unauthorized billing scams, despite red flags including chargeback rates nearly 10 times higher than card-brand thresholds. Under the proposed stipulated order filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, Humboldt will pay $12 million for consumer redress and is permanently banned from processing payments for merchants with a heightened risk of potential fraud.

FTC

Nuvei Corporation

$4.8M

The FTC charged Canada-based payment processor Nuvei Corporation and its subsidiaries with knowingly processing payments for fraudulent merchants, including more than $30 million in payments for the Reimage tech support scam from 2017 to 2023, as well as merchants making false earnings claims and impersonating government tax authorities. Under the stipulated order filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona, Nuvei will pay $4.85 million for consumer redress, is banned from serving tech support telemarketers, and must implement robust merchant screening and chargeback monitoring practices. Note: this is a payments-fraud facilitation action under the FTC Act and Telemarketing Sales Rule, not a data privacy violation.

FTC

N/A (no entity named - agency policy announcement)

The FTC announced a seven-day extension of the public comment period on its proposed enforcement policy statement regarding personalized pricing, pushing the deadline from Sept. 18, 2026 to Sept. 25, 2026. Personalized pricing refers to using personal data to set prices based on what the company believes an individual consumer is willing to spend. This is a procedural announcement about draft agency guidance, not an enforcement action against any company, and no entity was named, no violation found, and no penalty imposed.

FTC

Amazon.com, Inc.

Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser joined the FTC and 22 state attorneys general in filing a lawsuit against Amazon for manipulating the auctions used to set advertising prices, replacing actual auction results with higher prices since 2019 and overcharging nearly 1.2 million U.S. advertising customers. The FTC estimates total improper surcharges from 2018 to 2026 exceed $20 billion, with costs ultimately passed to shoppers through higher prices. The states seek a permanent injunction and monetary relief; no penalty has been imposed yet as this is a newly filed complaint.

FTC

CMG Media Corporation

$930K

The FTC finalized orders requiring CMG Media Corporation (doing business as Cox Media Group), MindSift LLC, and 1010 Digital Works LLC to pay a total of $930,000 for falsely claiming they offered an AI-powered service that could target ads based on conversations captured from consumers' smart devices, and that consumers had opted into such targeting. The orders also prohibit the companies from making misrepresentations about their advertising services, voice data collection, and consumer consent.