The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) has taken a significant step toward recalibrating federal aviation consumer protection policy. In early July, DOT took three separate actions that collectively signal a pivot toward reduced regulatory burdens and expanded procedural protections for airlines and ticket agents. These actions reflect a broader regulatory philosophy that emphasizes statutory restraint, regulatory flexibility, and a more limited regulatory footprint. Viewed together, these developments represent some of the clearest indications to date that the Trump administration is pursuing a meaningful deregulatory agenda in the aviation consumer protection space.
Recent DOT Actions
On July 1, 2026, DOT published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), titled “Enhancing Flexibility of Air Fare Price Advertising,” proposing to amend its longstanding rule on airfare advertising (Full Fare Rule)1 to allow the total fare, inclusive of taxes and fees, to be displayed with the same prominence as any individual components.2
Under the proposal, airlines and other sellers of travel would be free to display taxes, fees, and other fare components with the same prominence as the total advertised fare, as opposed to the current requirement in the Full Fare Rule that the total fare be displayed more prominently than individual components. DOT states this proposal would provide “greater flexibility” to sellers of air travel and that there is “nothing inherently unfair or deceptive in having components of a fare be displayed ‘prominently,’ so long as the total price is just as prominent.”3
Alternatively, the NPRM states that DOT is “considering repealing” the Full Fare Rule in whole or in part, primarily due to the following three factors:
-
an IRS law (26 U.S.C. § 7275) that already requires advertised total prices for air transportation to be presented at least as prominently as any separately displayed base fare or federal excise tax on air transportation;
-
direction from the Trump administration to federal agencies to revise regulations that are “based on anything other than the best reading of the underlying authority,”4 and
-
“unnecessary regulatory layering,” given the IRS law.5
DOT notes that, were the Full Fare Rule repealed, it would retain authority to regulate advertising under 49 U.S.C. § 41712 (DOT’s prohibition on unfair or deceptive practices in the provision or sale of air transportation).
The NPRM solicits comments from industry regarding “quantifiable or qualitative cost-savings and benefits,” as well as any other information that would assist DOT in “weighing the economic impacts of a variety of deregulatory options.” Comments are due by July 31, 2026.
Also on July 1, DOT published a final rule, titled “Procedures in Regulating and Enforcing Unfair or Deceptive Practices” (Final Rule)6 amending its procedures governing rulemakings that declare practices to be “unfair” or “deceptive” under 49 U.S.C. § 41712. The Final Rule largely restores procedural protections that were adopted in 2020 under the first Trump administration and subsequently modified in 2022 by the Biden administration.
Among other changes, the Final Rule:
-
restores a more permissive standard for obtaining a hearing by requiring a petitioner to make a “plausible prima facie showing” that one or more scientific, technical, economic, or other factual issues warrant a hearing, rather than satisfying the more demanding “clear and convincing” standard adopted in 2022;
-
restores the requirement that hearings be conducted by a neutral hearing officer;
-
restores the right of hearing participants to present testimony and written submissions and requires the hearing officer to issue proposed findings of fact addressing disputed factual issues; and
-
provides a new right to appeal to the Secretary if the General Counsel denies a request for a hearing.
DOT states that these changes are intended to provide greater due process protections, improve the factual foundation of future aviation consumer protection rulemakings, and enhance transparency in the rulemaking process.
The Final Rule also rescinds the Biden administration’s 2023 “Clarification of Formal Enforcement Procedures for Unfair or Deceptive Practices” regarding DOT’s authority to bring enforcement actions in federal district court. DOT concludes that the 2023 clarification is unnecessary because such authority is already established by statute.
Finally, the Final Rule consolidates certain existing regulatory provisions governing unfair or deceptive practice rulemakings and reiterates DOT’s intent to separately rescind Biden-era guidance on the interpretation of “unfair” or “deceptive” practices in the provision or sale of air transportation.
On July 7, 2026, DOT published a “Notice of Enforcement Discretion,” titled “Airline Refund and Other Consumer Protections,” (Notice)7 formally extending its prior enforcement discretion regarding renumbered flights (which was issued on December 5, 2025, and expired on June 30, 2026) to July 7, 2027. Consistent with the December 2025 notice, DOT states it will continue not to enforce the ticket refund and related notification requirements for renumbered flights, provided that a passenger is rebooked on a flight with a new number and the flight operates without any significant change or delay (as defined at 14 C.F.R. Part 260).
The Notice also states that DOT is continuing work on a new rulemaking, titled “Airline Refund and Other Consumer Protections III” (Refund III). DOT states that Refund III will aim “to reduce unnecessary regulatory burdens by modifying the definition of a flight cancellation that would entitle consumers to ticket refunds.”8
Opportunities for Industry
Taken together, these actions suggest that DOT will place greater emphasis on procedural safeguards, statutory limits on agency authority, and flexibility for regulated entities. These developments present several opportunities for airlines, tour operators and other ticket agents, and other aviation stakeholders.
Most immediately, stakeholders should consider filing comments on the Full Fare Rule NPRM. As noted above, DOT is expressly seeking input not only on its proposed amendments to the Full Fare Rule, but also on whether the Full Fare Rule should be repealed in whole or in part. Given DOT's request for information concerning deregulatory options, this rulemaking presents a meaningful opportunity for industry to help shape DOT’s consumer protection advertising requirements.
Stakeholders should also closely monitor DOT's forthcoming Refund III rulemaking. The recent Notice suggests that DOT continues to evaluate whether aspects of the current refund framework impose unnecessary compliance burdens and may be receptive to further reforms. Regulated entities should be prepared to engage when the Refund III rulemaking is published.
Conclusion
These actions may signal the beginning of a wider review of aviation consumer protection regulations. DOT’s references to statutory authority, regulatory burden, and the Trump administration’s deregulatory objectives suggest that other consumer protection requirements may face increased scrutiny in the near term. Aviation stakeholders should remain attentive to future DOT rulemakings, requests for comment, and enforcement policy notices that may create additional opportunities to advocate for regulatory reforms and operational flexibility.
1 See 14 C.F.R. § 399.84(a).
2 Enhancing Flexibility of Air Fare Price Advertising, 91 Fed. Reg. 39932, 39938 (July 1, 2026). The NPRM also proposes to rescind nine (9) airfare advertising-related DOT guidance documents that have become “outdated and unnecessary.”
4 See Executive Order 14219, Ensuring Lawful Governance and Implementing the President’s ‘Department of Government Efficiency’ Deregulatory Initiative, 90 Fed. Reg. 10583 (Feb. 25, 2025).
5 91 Fed. Reg. at 39937.
6 Procedures in Regulating and Enforcing Unfair or Deceptive Practices, 91 Fed. Reg. 39872 (July 1, 2026).
7 Notice of Enforcement Discretion, 91 Fed. Reg. 41556 (July 7, 2026).