Watch what happens when the total appears on the screen while standing in any Montreal grocery checkout line. The customer hesitates a little before tapping their card. There has always been something unsaid about that pause: a suspicion that the number on the screen is not quite the whole story, that a few dollars have subtly moved somewhere they shouldn’t have between the shelf price and the bank statement. For years, Quebec has worked to reduce that disparity. Bill 72, the province’s most recent legislative attempt, targets not only the obvious fees but also those hidden deep within credit card agreements that the majority of cardholders sign without reading and pay for years without realizing.
In September 2024, the bill was presented to the National Assembly under the formal title An Act to protect consumers against abusive commercial practices and to provide better transparency with regard to prices and credit. Although it makes numerous changes to Quebec’s Consumer Protection Act, including tipping calculations, grocery shelf pricing, door-to-door sales restrictions, and subscription cancellations, its most important provisions deal with the structure, disclosure, and final charging of credit card fees. Credit card fees would be restricted to yearly charges under the legislation. The constellation of secondary fees—balance transfer fees, cash advance fees, foreign transaction surcharges, and over-limit penalties—that build up subtly in the background of regular spending could be taken away from Canadian financial institutions for decades, depending on how that one clause is interpreted and applied.
Restricting credit card fees to yearly charges and requiring the express consent of the customer for any increases in credit rates or fees.”
| Field | Detail |
|---|---|
| Legislation | Bill 72 — An Act to protect consumers against abusive commercial practices and to offer better transparency with respect to prices and credit |
| Introduced By | Quebec Minister of Justice, National Assembly of Quebec |
| Date Introduced | September 12, 2024 |
| Governing Law Amended | Consumer Protection Act (CPA) of Quebec |
| Key Credit Provision | Limits credit card fees to annual charges only; all other hidden fees must be disclosed or eliminated |
| Minimum Payment Rule | As of August 1, 2025 (Bill 134): minimum credit card payment set at 5% of outstanding balance monthly |
| Tip Transparency Rule | Tips must be calculated on pre-tax base price — not the post-tax total as many POS terminals previously defaulted to |
| Door-to-Door Restrictions | Itinerant merchants banned from entering credit contracts or selling heating/cooling appliances at the door |
| Price Accuracy Threshold | Items under $15 mispriced at checkout must now be given free (raised from the previous $10 threshold) |
| Fraud Refund Obligation | Financial institutions must refund unauthorized or fraudulent debits within 5 business days of consumer request |
| Related Bill | Bill 10 (December 2025): targets hidden subscription fees, “hard to cancel” designs, and inflated ticket resales |
| Reference Website | opc.gouv.qc.ca — Office de la protection du consommateur (Quebec) |
In this regard, Quebec has form. It was the first province in Canada to impose minimum credit card payments. The rule was first enacted in 2017 and gradually implemented through regulations, reaching the current monthly minimum of 5% as of August 2025. At the time, the banking sector viewed the action as an unwarranted intrusion into private contract terms, while consumer advocates said it was long overdue. The banking sector’s objections were incorrect, or at the very least premature. The household debt-to-income ratio in Canada had risen above 173%, which meant that for every dollar of disposable income, Canadians owed about $1.70. Legislators in Quebec came to the conclusion that allowing people to service credit card balances by paying only the interest was a kind of institutional cruelty disguised as financial flexibility.
Bill 72 adopts and expands upon that same philosophical position. Additionally, the law mandates that any increases in credit rates or credit charges must first receive express consent from consumers. This may seem straightforward, but it is not customary. Most cardholders have had the experience of receiving a letter with small print on the back informing them that, unless they cancel their card, the interest rate will rise in thirty days. That isn’t consent. It’s a reverse opt-out, and Quebec seems to have had enough of it. Reading the bill’s provisions gives the impression that Quebec’s legislators have been observing what Californians have been doing with Gavin Newsom’s consumer fee transparency laws and have chosen to create something more stringent.
It’s difficult to ignore how much of this legislation focuses on items that the majority of consumers are unaware are legal in the first place. One excellent example is the tip calculation clause. Restaurant point-of-sale screens in Quebec have been recommending tip percentages (15%, 18%, and 20%) based on the post-tax total instead of the pre-tax price for years. This subtly increased the recommended tip amount by a few dollars, which most diners were either unaware of or too uncomfortable to inquire about in front of a server. According to Bill 72, those percentages must only be applied to the base price. Contrary to popular belief, restaurant owners may actually profit from lower credit card processing fees on tips because those fees are computed as a percentage of the total transaction.
The door-to-door and subscription options are equally direct. A companion piece of legislation, Bill 10, was introduced in December 2025 and mandates that merchants offering subscriptions provide clearly labeled cancellation buttons. This legislation aims to address the purposefully annoying “hard to cancel” design, which consumer protection attorneys have begun referring to as the “Roach Motel” pattern: easy to enter, nearly impossible to exit. It is now forbidden for itinerant merchants—the door-to-door salespeople who offer contracts for home insulation and heating systems—to make any kind of credit agreements with customers. This restriction is in line with a pattern of abuse that Quebec consumer advocacy groups have been documenting for years, especially in lower-income neighborhoods where residents are forced into financing arrangements they did not understand or want due to high-pressure tactics.
It’s still genuinely unclear if the banks and credit card companies will file legal challenges to certain provisions of Bill 72. Canada’s consumer credit laws are a convoluted patchwork of jurisdictions; there is no national fee transparency standard, no federal minimum payment requirement, and no federal counterpart to Quebec’s Consumer Protection Act. Quebec has consistently been able to take the lead while other provinces have watched because of that absence. Some of the bill’s provisions, especially those that directly restrict how card issuers set their fee schedules, might be delayed or weakened by a successful legal challenge. It’s also possible that the bill remains unaltered and that other provincial governments, such as those in British Columbia, Ontario, and Alberta, start discreetly drafting their own versions. This is not the first time Quebec has visited. Usually, it turns out to be correct.
