AI Regulation Tracker / Regulator enforcement
Canada's Competition Bureau warns AI marketing claims and algorithmic pricing face the Competition Act
The Competition Bureau's January 2026 report and its 2025-26 enforcement plan tell any business selling AI to Canadians that overstating what a product does, or pricing by algorithm, can trigger investigations and penalties under existing law.
Canada's competition regulator has told businesses that it does not need a new artificial intelligence statute to police AI marketing and algorithmic pricing. It already has the Competition Act.
On January 22, 2026, the Competition Bureau published "Consultation on Algorithmic Pricing and Competition: What We Heard," a report summarizing the feedback it received during a public consultation that ran in the summer of 2025. According to the Bureau, the consultation drew more than 100 submissions from individuals, businesses, industry associations, academics, legal experts and consumer advocacy groups, both domestic and international. The report is a "what we heard" summary rather than a rule, so it does not create new obligations by itself. What it does is signal where the regulator is looking.
What the report says
The Bureau grouped the feedback into four themes. Dynamically setting or recommending prices can create efficiencies. Algorithmic pricing can also enable anticompetitive behavior. A lack of data transparency could harm consumers, workers and competition. And any government response should address anticompetitive conduct without discouraging innovation. The report stops short of proposing legislation. It is a stocktaking exercise that maps the risks the Bureau now takes seriously, including algorithmic collusion and pricing tools that coordinate market behavior without an explicit agreement between competitors.
AI is now an enforcement priority
The consultation does not stand alone. The Bureau has identified artificial intelligence as a sector-specific enforcement priority in its 2025-26 Annual Plan. It has also acted, taking part in scrutiny of RealPage, the US software company whose algorithm landlords use to set rents. For businesses, the practical takeaway is that AI is not a future file at the Bureau. It is a current one.
The AI-washing exposure
The sharper warning is for marketers. The Bureau has emphasized that the Competition Act's prohibition on false or misleading representations applies fully to AI claims and AI-generated content. In plain terms, "AI-washing," meaning overstating what an AI product can do, falsely claiming an AI product performs a task better than a non-AI product, or fabricating that a product uses AI at all, is treated as deceptive marketing. A company that cannot substantiate an AI claim is exposed to the same investigative and penalty machinery that applies to any other false representation, including corrective orders and monetary penalties.
Why the false-representations angle matters most
For most businesses, the algorithmic collusion questions are abstract. The AI marketing exposure is concrete and immediate. The Competition Act's civil and criminal deceptive-marketing provisions turn on whether a representation to the public is false or misleading in a material respect, and whether the claim can be adequately and properly tested. AI claims fit that test cleanly. A statement that a product is "AI-powered," that it "learns" from a user, or that it "outperforms" a rival because of AI is a performance claim. If the seller cannot show adequate and proper testing behind it, the claim is exposed regardless of whether any consumer was actually deceived. The Bureau has made clear it reads these long-standing provisions to cover AI claims and AI-generated content in full, which means marketers do not get a grace period while Parliament debates a dedicated AI law. The law that applies is the one already on the books.
What it does not do
The report does not ban algorithmic pricing, and it does not declare that using AI in marketing is unlawful. It does not set a compliance deadline or a filing requirement. It also does not resolve the harder legal question of when algorithmic pricing crosses into unlawful coordination. Those points remain matters for case-by-case enforcement under the existing Act. The value of the report for a working professional is the clear statement of posture: the regulator sees AI marketing claims and algorithmic pricing as live enforcement territory under current law.
For a US reader, the direction is familiar. The approach parallels the US Federal Trade Commission's enforcement against AI-washing, where inflated AI claims are treated as deceptive advertising rather than a regulatory blind spot. US firms that advertise AI products or services to Canadians are within the Bureau's reach, so a claim written for a US audience can create Canadian exposure if it cannot be backed up.
The operational response is not complicated. Businesses should treat every AI capability claim as a factual assertion that must be provable, and they should be able to explain how any algorithmic pricing tool actually sets or recommends prices. The Bureau has said, in effect, that the burden of proof sits with the seller.
Frequently Asked Questions
What did the Competition Bureau actually publish in January 2026?
A report titled "Consultation on Algorithmic Pricing and Competition: What We Heard," released January 22, 2026, summarizing more than 100 submissions from its 2025 public consultation on algorithmic pricing. It is a summary of feedback, not a new law or rule.
Who does this affect?
Any business marketing AI capabilities, using algorithmic or dynamic pricing, or deploying AI-generated marketing to Canadian consumers. It reaches US firms advertising AI products to Canadians, because the Competition Act applies to representations made to the Canadian market.
Is there a new AI law behind this?
No. The Bureau is applying the existing Competition Act. Its false or misleading representations provisions already cover AI claims and AI-generated content, and AI is named an enforcement priority in the Bureau's 2025-26 Annual Plan.
What is "AI-washing" and why is it risky?
AI-washing is overstating what an AI product does, falsely claiming it outperforms non-AI alternatives, or fabricating that a product uses AI at all. The Bureau treats it as deceptive marketing, which can lead to investigations, corrective orders and monetary penalties if the claim cannot be substantiated.
Sponsored Training
Browse the full AI Regulation News tracker
Informational analysis for working professionals, not legal advice. Confirm how any rule applies to your situation with qualified counsel.