Arizona Free Market Act

Jan 23

Written By fred slawson

ARTICLE 1: SHORT TITLE AND DEFINITIONS

Section 101. Short Title

This Act shall be known and may be cited as the "Arizona Free Market Act."

Section 102. Definitions

As used in this Act, unless the context otherwise requires:

1. "Agricultural producer" means any person engaged in the commercial production of agricultural commodities, including crops, livestock, poultry, dairy, aquaculture, or other farm products.

2. "Allocation practices" means the methods, criteria, and processes by which a distributor allocates products, inventory, or supply among its customers, especially during periods of shortage or high demand.

3. "Allocation restriction" means any reduction, limitation, or alteration in the normal supply of products to a customer, including but not limited to quantity limitations, geographic restrictions, product category restrictions, changes to delivery schedules, or prioritization schemes that affect customer access.

4. "Arizona-connected revenue" means revenue derived from sales, transactions, or services involving Arizona residents or businesses, or where Arizona serves as a substantial market for the activity.

5. "Bottleneck facility" means essential rural infrastructure for which no economically feasible alternative exists within a reasonable distance, generally defined as more than fifty miles for agricultural producers or thirty miles for other rural businesses.

6. "Channel conflict" occurs when a publisher engages in direct sales that compete with its authorized distributors' customers for the same products and customer base.

7. "Critical products" means products where shortage or disruption could reasonably be expected to:

(a) Threaten public health or safety;

(b) Cause significant economic harm to businesses or communities; or

8. "Digital labor platform" means any person that uses an online application, website, or system to connect individuals to tasks, services, or gigs for compensation, including but not limited to transportation, delivery, shopping, cleaning, and home services.

9. "Dominant distributor" means any person that meets either of the following criteria:

(a) Controls at least forty percent of the wholesale distribution market for any product category in Arizona; or

(b) Serves as the primary or exclusive wholesale supplier to at least one thousand Arizona-based retail businesses in any product category.

10. "Dominant publisher" means any person that meets either of the following criteria:

(a) Controls at least thirty percent of the production or licensing market for any product category in Arizona; or

(b) Serves as the primary or exclusive supplier of products to at least five hundred Arizona-based distributors or retailers in any product category.

11. "Distribution-dependent business" means an Arizona business that:

(a) Derives at least thirty percent of its inventory or supplies from a single dominant distributor; and

(b) Has made substantial relationship-specific investments exceeding ten thousand dollars with that distributor.

12. "Economically dependent worker" means an individual who performs services for compensation through a digital labor platform and meets either of the following criteria in any six-month period:

(a) Performs at least five hundred twenty hours of engaged time for such platform; or

(b) Derives at least twenty-five percent of their total personal income from such platform.

13. "Engaged time" means all time from when a worker accepts a work assignment or makes themselves available within a constrained area or timeframe as directed by the platform, until the worker is released from obligation for that specific assignment, including:

(a) Time spent traveling to locations for work assignments;

(b) Time spent waiting for assignments when the platform's policies effectively prevent the worker from disengaging; and

14. "Essential rural infrastructure" means facilities or services necessary for agricultural production or rural commerce, including but not limited to:

(a) Grain elevators, cotton gins, and other agricultural processing facilities;

(b) Livestock auction yards and packing plants;

(d) Farm equipment dealerships and repair facilities;

(e) Agricultural chemical and feed suppliers;

(f) Any other facility or service that a reasonable business would need to access to participate in the rural economy.

15. "Foreseeable shortage" means a supply restriction that a reasonable distributor or publisher would anticipate based on:

(a) Supplier notifications or warnings;

(b) Industry-wide supply chain disruptions;

(d) Publicly available information about production or logistics issues.

16. "Geographically isolated market" means any county with a population density of fewer than one hundred persons per square mile or any municipality with a population of fewer than twenty thousand persons that is more than thirty miles from a municipality with a population of fifty thousand or more.

17. "Net compensation" means total compensation received by a worker from a digital labor platform for engaged time, minus verified work-related expenses.

18. "Publisher-distributor relationship" means a commercial relationship where a publisher or manufacturer supplies products to a distributor for resale to retailers or end-users.

19. "Rural-dominant entity" means any person that meets any of the following criteria in a geographically isolated market:

(a) Controls at least fifty percent of the market for any essential product or service category within that market area;

(b) Is one of only two providers of an essential product or service within that market area; or

(c) Serves as the sole supplier of critical agricultural inputs, veterinary services, farm equipment, or food processing services to more than twenty-five percent of the producers in that market area.

20. "Rural small business" means a business with fewer than fifty employees that operates primarily in a geographically isolated market.

21. "Substantial relationship-specific investments" means investments made by a business that are specific to its relationship with a particular distributor, publisher, or rural-dominant entity and would lose significant value if the relationship were terminated, including but not limited to specialized equipment, training, facility modifications, or marketing materials.

22. "Unfair method of competition" means conduct that violates established standards of fair dealing in Arizona's markets or unfairly exploits the economic dependence of Arizona businesses.

23. "Work-related expenses" means reasonable and necessary costs incurred by a worker in performing services for a digital labor platform, including but not limited to:

(a) Vehicle expenses including mileage, fuel, insurance, maintenance, and depreciation;

(b) Telecommunications expenses including proportionate share of smartphone, data plan, and voice minute costs;

(d) Required commercial licenses, permits, or insurance; and

(e) Other costs documented as necessary for platform work.

ARTICLE 2: LEGISLATIVE FINDINGS AND PURPOSE

Section 201. Legislative Findings

The Legislature finds that:

1. Competitive markets are essential to Arizona's economic prosperity, consumer welfare, and the preservation of small towns and rural communities.

2. Market power abuses extend throughout traditional supply chains, where dominant publishers and distributors can exploit their positions through unfair allocation practices, channel conflicts, and inadequate notice of supply restrictions.

3. Arizona businesses deserve protection throughout the entire supply chain, from manufacturer to end consumer, ensuring fair access to products and transparent notice of disruptions.

4. Small towns and rural communities face unique competitive vulnerabilities due to geographic isolation, limited market participants, and dependency on single suppliers or service providers for essential goods and services.

5. Rural Arizona's agricultural producers, small manufacturers, and family businesses are disproportionately vulnerable to exploitation by dominant entities that control access to essential infrastructure, processing facilities, and transportation networks.

6. Essential rural infrastructure including grain elevators, processing plants, irrigation equipment suppliers, and specialized equipment dealerships often function as bottleneck facilities, creating unique opportunities for anti-competitive conduct that requires tailored regulation.

7. Agricultural producers face unfair contracting practices, timing-based exploitation during harvest seasons, and misuse of their production data by processors and buyers.

8. Ensuring fair compensation for workers after accounting for necessary work-related expenses is fundamental to Arizona's commitment to a living wage, particularly for workers in the platform economy who often bear substantial unreimbursed expenses.

9. Traditional antitrust thresholds developed for urban markets fail to capture market realities in rural areas where a single distributor, equipment dealer, or service provider may exercise de facto monopoly power without meeting statewide dominance thresholds.

10. The principles of fair dealing, transparency, and equitable access to markets are fundamental to Arizona's economic heritage and essential for preserving the viability of family farms, ranches, and small town businesses.

Section 202. Purpose

The purposes of this Act are to:

1. Prohibit unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in Arizona's physical markets, supply chains, and rural commerce.

2. Establish clear standards of conduct for dominant distributors, dominant publishers, and rural-dominant entities operating in Arizona.

3. Protect Arizona businesses from exploitative practices when dependent on dominant distributors or publishers.

4. Address the unique competitive vulnerabilities of rural Arizona businesses and agricultural producers through tailored protections and enforcement mechanisms.

5. Ensure fair access to essential rural infrastructure and bottleneck facilities on reasonable and non-discriminatory terms.

6. Prevent geographic discrimination and price exploitation based on rural isolation or limited market alternatives.

7. Support the viability of family farms, ranches, and small town businesses that form the economic and social backbone of rural Arizona.

8. Ensure fair compensation for Arizona workers in the platform economy by accounting for necessary work-related expenses.

9. Promote transparency, accountability, and competitive markets for the benefit of all Arizona consumers and businesses, regardless of location.

10. Preserve the principles of square dealing and fair markets that have long been central to Arizona's commercial heritage.

ARTICLE 3: STANDARDS OF CONDUCT

Section 301. General Standard of Fair Dealing

It is an unfair method of competition and an unfair or deceptive act or practice under Arizona law for any dominant distributor, dominant publisher, or rural-dominant entity to engage in conduct that has the foreseeable effect of unfairly exploiting the economic dependence of Arizona businesses or eroding established standards of fair dealing in Arizona's markets.

Section 302. Unfair Distributor Allocation Practices

(a) A dominant distributor shall be presumed to engage in unfair competition if it engages in any of the following practices:

1. Discriminatory allocation: Allocating scarce products, inventory, or supply in a manner that systematically favors:

(a) Its own subsidiaries, affiliates, or corporate-owned outlets;

(b) Customers who purchase additional, unrelated products or services; or

(c) Customers based on criteria unrelated to legitimate, transparent business factors such as historical purchase volume, payment history, or geographic need.

2. Failure to provide advance notice of allocation restrictions: Failing to provide distribution-dependent businesses with reasonable advance notice of foreseeable allocation restrictions, including:

(a) For critical products: At least sixty calendar days' written notice of any allocation restriction affecting critical products, unless prevented by genuinely unforeseen circumstances;

(b) For non-critical products: At least thirty calendar days' written notice of any allocation restriction;

(c) For emergency restrictions: Immediate notice followed by written explanation within seventy-two hours detailing the nature, duration, and criteria for the restriction.

3. Unreasonable allocation methodologies: Applying allocation methodologies that:

(a) Fail to account for historical purchase patterns or contractual commitments;

(b) Create sudden, dramatic shifts in supply without reasonable justification;

(d) Lack transparent, objective criteria that can be verified by affected businesses.

4. Tying of allocation: Conditioning product allocation on:

(a) Purchasing unrelated products or services;

(b) Accepting unfavorable payment terms; or

(b) Rebuttal Requirements: This presumption may be rebutted only by clear and convincing evidence that the distributor:

1. Maintains transparent, written allocation policies applied consistently to all customers;

2. Provided timely and adequate notice consistent with subsection (a)(2) requirements, or that the restriction was genuinely unforeseeable despite reasonable diligence;

3. Used reasonable allocation methodologies based on legitimate business factors; and

4. Took reasonable steps to minimize disruption to distribution-dependent businesses.

Section 303. Unfair Publisher Channel Practices

(a) A dominant publisher shall be presumed to engage in unfair competition if it engages in any of the following practices:

1. Discriminatory supply allocation: Allocating production capacity, inventory, or supply to distributors in a manner that systematically favors:

(a) Distributors that are wholly or partially owned by the publisher;

(b) Distributors that carry competing products at less favorable terms; or

2. Direct sales channel conflict: Selling products directly to retailers or end-users in competition with its authorized distributors, unless:

(a) The publisher provides the same products to distributors on terms that allow competitive pricing;

(b) The publisher provides clear territorial or customer segment demarcation; and

3. Unfair policy changes: Unilaterally changing distributor agreements, terms, or policies in ways that materially disadvantage Arizona distributors without:

(a) At least one hundred eighty days' written notice for material changes;

(b) Compensation for stranded investments; and

4. Failure to provide advance notice of supply restrictions: Failing to provide authorized distributors with reasonable advance notice of foreseeable production or supply restrictions, including:

(a) For critical products: At least ninety calendar days' written notice;

(b) For non-critical products: At least sixty calendar days' written notice.

5. Tying of supply: Conditioning product supply on:

(a) Purchasing unrelated product lines;

(b) Meeting unreasonable performance quotas;

(d) Limiting distribution of competing products.

(b) Rebuttal Requirements: This presumption may be rebutted only by clear and convincing evidence that the publisher:

1. Maintains transparent allocation policies shared with all distributors;

2. Provided advance notice consistent with subsection (a)(4) requirements;

3. Manages channel conflict through clear, consistent policies differentiating direct and distributor sales channels; and

4. Demonstrates that challenged practices serve legitimate business needs, not anti-competitive purposes.

Section 304. Exploitation of Geographic Isolation

(a) A rural-dominant entity shall be presumed to engage in unfair competition if it engages in any of the following practices:

1. Price exploitation in captive markets: Charging prices for essential goods or services that exceed by more than twenty-five percent the median price charged for substantially similar goods or services in Arizona's urban markets, adjusted only for:

(a) Documented transportation costs;

(b) Documented operational cost differences;

(d) Volume or scale economies.

2. Refusal to deal based on location: Refusing to provide essential goods or services to a rural business or agricultural producer based primarily on their geographic location, small size, or distance from population centers, without legitimate business justification.

3. Predatory exclusion of local alternatives: Engaging in conduct specifically designed to prevent the establishment or survival of competing local businesses, including but not limited to:

(a) Temporary price reductions below cost targeted only at new local entrants;

(b) Exclusive dealing arrangements with suppliers that prevent them from supplying new entrants; or

4. Failure to maintain essential rural services: Substantially reducing or eliminating services essential to the rural economy without:

(a) At least one hundred eighty days' notice to affected customers and communities;

(b) A plan to ensure continued access through alternative providers; and

5. Discriminatory terms for rural customers: Imposing terms or conditions on rural customers that are not imposed on similarly situated urban customers, including but not limited to:

(a) Higher minimum order quantities;

(b) Less favorable payment terms;

(d) Limited return or warranty policies.

(b) Rebuttal Requirements: This presumption may be rebutted only by clear and convincing evidence that the entity:

1. Documents legitimate cost differences showing that price differences reflect actual, unavoidable cost differences;

2. Demonstrates non-discriminatory practices showing that all customers face similar terms regardless of location;

3. Maintains reasonable investment levels in essential rural infrastructure; and

4. Provides transparent pricing by making pricing models and cost structures available to customers.

Section 305. Abuse of Essential Rural Infrastructure

(a) Any entity controlling essential rural infrastructure or a bottleneck facility shall be presumed to engage in unfair competition if it engages in any of the following practices:

1. Denial of reasonable access: Refusing to provide reasonable access to bottleneck facilities to competing businesses or agricultural producers on fair and non-discriminatory terms.

2. Discriminatory pricing for access: Charging different prices to similarly situated users of bottleneck facilities without cost-based justification.

3. Self-dealing in bottleneck access: Providing preferential access, pricing, or terms to its own affiliated businesses while disadvantaging unaffiliated users.

4. Strategic underinvestment: Failing to maintain bottleneck facilities at reasonable capacity or quality levels to create artificial scarcity or justify exclusionary practices.

5. Leveraging bottleneck power: Using control over bottleneck facilities to gain competitive advantages in related markets, including:

(a) Requiring users to purchase other products or services as a condition of access;

(b) Obtaining confidential business information from users through the access relationship; or

(b) Minimum Access Requirements: For bottleneck facilities, the following shall be required as a minimum:

1. Published access terms that are clear, written, and available to all potential users;

2. Non-discriminatory pricing based on objective, cost-based factors applied consistently;

3. Capacity allocation transparency with clear rules for allocating scarce capacity during peak periods;

4. Fair and timely dispute resolution processes for resolving access disputes; and

5. Investment transparency through regular reporting on maintenance and investment in the facility.

1. Provides reasonable access on fair, non-discriminatory terms to all qualified users;

2. Invests appropriately in maintenance and capacity of bottleneck facilities;

3. Maintains separation between bottleneck operations and competitive businesses to avoid self-dealing;

4. Engages in good faith planning with local stakeholders; and

5. Ensures access pricing reflects actual costs without anti-competitive margins.

Section 306. Unfair Practices Targeting Agricultural Producers

(a) Any entity doing business with agricultural producers in Arizona shall be presumed to engage in unfair competition if it engages in any of the following practices:

1. Unconscionable contract terms: Using form contracts with agricultural producers that contain:

(a) Mandatory arbitration clauses that require travel to distant venues unreasonable for the producer;

(b) Choice of law provisions favoring distant jurisdictions;

(d) Excessive liquidated damages or penalty clauses disproportionate to actual damages.

2. Timing-based exploitation: Taking advantage of seasonal vulnerabilities or perishable commodities to extract unfair terms, including:

(a) Demanding contract changes during harvest or planting seasons when producers have no alternatives;

(b) Imposing last-minute quality standard changes when produce is already harvested; or

3. Input-output tying: Requiring agricultural producers to purchase inputs (seed, chemicals, feed) from the same entity that purchases their outputs, unless:

(a) The tying creates demonstrable efficiency benefits shared with the producer;

(b) The producer receives fair market value discount for the bundled arrangement; and

4. Misuse of production data: Using data about production practices, yields, or techniques obtained from producers to:

(a) Advantage competing producers;

(b) Develop competing agricultural services; or

5. Failure to provide transparent grading and pricing: Failing to provide clear, consistent standards for:

(a) Quality grading of agricultural products;

(b) Price calculations and deductions; or

6. Retaliation for collective action: Taking adverse action against producers who:

(a) Join producer associations or cooperatives;

(b) Participate in price negotiations collectively;

(d) Support competing buyers or suppliers.

(b) Agricultural Producer Bill of Rights: Agricultural producers shall have the right to:

1. Clear contracts: Written contracts in plain language with all material terms specified;

2. Timely payment: Payment within thirty days of delivery unless otherwise agreed in writing;

3. Transparent pricing: Clear explanation of all price calculations, grades, and deductions;

4. Data ownership: Ownership of their production data with control over its use and disclosure; and

5. Fair dispute resolution: Dispute resolution in venues reasonably accessible to the producer.

1. Uses fair contract terms that are balanced and do not exploit producer vulnerabilities;

2. Respects the Agricultural Producer Bill of Rights outlined in subsection (b);

3. Provides clear information about grades, prices, and terms;

4. Does not interfere with legitimate collective action by producers; and

5. Supports producer viability through fair dealing and transparent practices.

Section 307. General Rebuttal Standards

(a) A dominant distributor, dominant publisher, or rural-dominant entity may rebut a presumption established under Sections 302 through 306 by demonstrating, by clear and convincing evidence, that the challenged practice:

1. Creates significant pro-competitive efficiencies that cannot be achieved through materially less restrictive alternatives;

2. Results in substantial, verifiable consumer benefits that demonstrably outweigh any anti-competitive effects; and

3. Is reasonably necessary for the entity's legitimate business objectives, not merely commercially convenient.

(b) In evaluating whether a presumption has been rebutted, relevant factors include but are not limited to:

1. The availability of less restrictive alternatives to achieve the same legitimate objectives;

2. The impact on innovation by the entity and by third parties;

3. The effect on quality, variety, and price of goods and services;

4. The impact on business and employment opportunities in Arizona; and

5. The overall effect on consumer welfare, particularly in affected rural communities.

ARTICLE 4: PROTECTIONS FOR PLATFORM WORKERS

Section 401. Minimum Net Compensation Standard

(a) Every digital labor platform operating in Arizona shall ensure that each economically dependent worker receives net compensation that meets or exceeds:

1. The Arizona minimum wage for all hours of engaged time; plus

2. Any overtime compensation required under Arizona law for hours worked in excess of forty hours per week.

(b) For purposes of this section, "net compensation" shall be calculated as:

1. Total compensation paid to the worker for engaged time during the pay period; minus

2. All verified work-related expenses attributable to that pay period.

Section 402. Calculation of Work-Related Expenses

(a) Worker documentation option. A worker may submit documentation of actual work-related expenses to the platform through a reasonably accessible method provided by the platform. Platforms must accept reasonable documentation including receipts, mileage logs, and expense reports.

(b) Default reimbursement schedule. If a worker does not submit documentation of actual expenses, the platform shall reimburse the worker at the following default rates:

1. For vehicle expenses: the current Arizona standard mileage rate published by the Department of Revenue, multiplied by documented platform-related miles;

2. For telecommunications expenses: one dollar and twenty-five cents per hour of engaged time, or actual documented costs if higher;

3. For equipment and supply costs: actual documented costs or reasonable estimated costs; and

4. For required licenses, permits, or insurance: actual documented costs.

1. Calculate whether the worker's compensation, after deduction of either documented or default work-related expenses, meets the minimum net compensation standard;

2. If the standard is not met, pay the worker the difference as a "platform compensation supplement" within the next regular pay period; and

3. Provide the worker with a clear, itemized statement showing all calculations, including gross compensation, itemized expenses, and any supplement paid.

Section 403. Transparency Requirements for Workers

(a) Before a worker accepts a work assignment, the digital labor platform shall provide a clear, itemized estimate showing:

1. The offered compensation for the assignment;

2. The estimated engaged time required;

3. The estimated work-related expenses using the default rates in Section 402(b);

4. The resulting estimated net compensation; and

5. The estimated effective net hourly rate.

(b) No digital labor platform shall advertise earnings potential to workers or prospective workers without clearly and conspicuously disclosing that such amounts are before deduction of work-related expenses, and providing a representative estimate of typical expenses based on the platform's historical data.

1. Total engaged hours;

2. Total compensation;

3. Total work-related expenses (itemized by category);

4. Net compensation; and

5. Compliance with minimum net compensation standards.

Section 404. Anti-Retaliation Protections

(a) No digital labor platform shall discharge, threaten, penalize, or in any manner discriminate or retaliate against any worker because:

1. The worker has made a complaint or filed a claim regarding compensation under this Article;

2. The worker has caused to be instituted any proceeding under this Article;

3. The worker has testified or is about to testify in any such proceeding; or

4. The worker has exercised any right protected by this Article.

(b) Any adverse action taken against a worker within ninety days of the worker engaging in protected activity under subsection (a) shall create a rebuttable presumption of unlawful retaliation.

1. Termination or suspension from the platform;

2. Reduction in work assignments or opportunities;

3. Negative changes to worker ratings or standing;

4. Exclusion from premium work opportunities; or

5. Any other action that materially disadvantages the worker.

ARTICLE 5: TRANSPARENCY AND DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS

Section 501. Annual Market Report

(a) Every dominant distributor, dominant publisher, and rural-dominant entity shall annually prepare and submit to the Attorney General a Market Report containing:

1. Business metrics: Aggregate data on distribution-dependent business economics, including median fees, growth rates, and termination rates for Arizona businesses;

2. Allocation data: Statistics on product shortages and allocation outcomes, including:

(a) Number of allocation restrictions by product category;

(b) Advance notice periods provided;

(d) Customer impact assessments;

3. Supply continuity planning: Summary of supply continuity planning measures for critical products;

4. Channel conflict data: For publishers, direct sales volume as percentage of total sales by product category, and distributor termination data and reasons;

5. Complaint data: Aggregate statistics on formal complaints received from Arizona businesses; and

6. Rural market reporting: For rural-dominant entities:

(a) Geographic service areas and customer demographics;

(b) Price comparisons with urban markets for similar goods/services;

(d) Access policies for bottleneck facilities; and

(e) Complaints from rural customers and resolution rates.

(b) The Attorney General shall publish anonymized summaries of these reports on a publicly accessible website, protecting confidential business information while ensuring transparency about market conditions.

Section 502. Terms of Service and Policy Transparency

(a) Dominant distributors and publishers shall provide distribution-dependent businesses or authorized distributors with clear, written notice of any material change to terms, policies, or allocation methodologies at least the notice period required under Sections 302(a)(2) or 303(a)(4), as applicable.

(b) Rural-dominant entities shall provide rural small businesses and agricultural producers with clear, written notice of any material change to terms, policies, pricing, or access to essential rural infrastructure at least ninety days before such changes take effect.

1. A plain-language summary of the changes;

2. An explanation of the business rationale for the changes;

3. Any available data supporting the necessity of the changes; and

4. Information about available transition options, grandfathering provisions, or compensation for stranded investments.

(d) Notices required under this section must be delivered in writing via certified mail, electronic mail with read receipt requested, or through a secure online portal with confirmation of access.

Section 503. Arizona Markets Ombudsman

(a) There is established within the Attorney General's office the position of Arizona Markets Ombudsman.

(b) The Ombudsman shall:

1. Receive and review complaints from Arizona businesses regarding distributors, publishers, and rural-dominant entities;

2. Facilitate voluntary mediation of disputes when appropriate;

3. Publish periodic reports on trends and issues in Arizona's markets;

4. Provide information and resources to Arizona businesses about their rights under this Act;

5. Make recommendations to the Legislature regarding needed updates to this Act; and

6. Designate a Deputy Ombudsman for Rural Markets who shall:

(a) Maintain an office in rural Arizona with regular travel to remote communities;

(b) Develop specialized expertise in agricultural markets and rural infrastructure;

(d) Facilitate mediation of disputes involving rural market participants; and

(e) Report annually on rural market competition issues.

(c) The Ombudsman shall establish a toll-free telephone number and online portal for receiving complaints and inquiries related to this Act.

ARTICLE 6: ENFORCEMENT AND REMEDIES

Section 601. Enforcement Authority

(a) The Attorney General shall have primary authority to enforce this Act.

(b) The Attorney General may:

1. Investigate possible violations of this Act;

2. Issue subpoenas and civil investigative demands;

3. Bring civil actions for injunctive relief, damages, restitution, civil penalties, and other appropriate relief;

4. Enter into assurances of discontinuance or consent judgments; and

5. Promulgate rules and regulations to implement this Act.

(c) The Attorney General may designate county attorneys to assist in enforcement of this Act, particularly in rural areas.

Section 602. Private Right of Action

(a) Any person injured in their business or property by a violation of this Act may bring a civil action to recover:

1. Actual damages sustained, which shall be trebled;

2. Injunctive relief as appropriate;

3. Reasonable attorney's fees and costs; and

4. For willful violations, punitive damages not to exceed three times the amount of trebled damages.

(b) In any action brought under this section:

1. Once the plaintiff establishes that the defendant is a dominant distributor, dominant publisher, or rural-dominant entity and engaged in a presumptively unfair practice under Article 3, the burden shifts to the defendant to justify the practice under Section 307;

2. Class actions may be maintained in accordance with the Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure; and

3. The court may appoint special masters, experts, or monitors as needed to fashion or oversee remedies, particularly in cases involving complex market relationships or essential infrastructure.

(c) Agricultural producers may bring collective actions on behalf of similarly situated producers, subject to court approval and consistent with Arizona's class action rules.

Section 603. Procedural Provisions

(a) Burden-shifting framework. In any enforcement action under this Act:

1. The plaintiff must first establish that the defendant is a dominant distributor, dominant publisher, or rural-dominant entity and engaged in a presumptively unfair practice under Article 3;

2. If such showing is made, the burden shifts to the defendant to justify the practice under Section 307; and

3. If the defendant fails to meet its burden, the practice shall be deemed an unfair method of competition.

(b) Market conduct inquiries. The Attorney General may issue written "market conduct inquiries" to dominant distributors, publishers, or rural-dominant entities seeking information relevant to compliance with this Act. Good faith, timely, and complete responses to such inquiries may be considered as a mitigating factor in any enforcement action.

(c) Cooperation with federal authorities. The Attorney General may share information and coordinate enforcement with federal antitrust authorities when appropriate.

Section 604. Remedies

(a) Injunctive relief. The court may order any equitable relief reasonably necessary to restore competitive conditions or prevent future violations, including but not limited to:

1. Access orders: Requiring owners of bottleneck facilities to provide non-discriminatory access to all qualified users on published, transparent terms;

2. Price parity orders: Requiring rural-dominant entities to justify price differentials with detailed cost accounting and reduce prices to reflect actual cost differences only;

3. Supply assurance orders: Requiring dominant distributors and publishers to provide minimum supply commitments to dependent businesses, particularly for critical products;

4. Transition assistance orders: Requiring entities that have engaged in exclusionary conduct to provide technical assistance in finding alternative suppliers and temporary financial accommodations;

5. Channel conflict remedies: Requiring publishers to clearly demarcate direct sales territories/customer segments and offer distributors right of first refusal on new products;

6. Agricultural market fairness orders: Requiring agricultural buyers and processors to provide standardized, transparent contracts and establish fair grading and pricing systems;

7. Reinstatement orders: Requiring reinstatement of wrongfully terminated distributors or restoration of supply relationships with restoration of previous terms; and

8. Monitoring orders: Appointing independent monitors to oversee compliance with court orders, particularly for bottleneck facilities or essential infrastructure.

(b) Structural relief. Structural remedies, including divestiture or separation of business units, may be ordered only if:

1. The court finds a clear violation of this Act that has caused substantial harm to competition;

2. Behavioral remedies have been tried and failed, or would be clearly inadequate;

3. The structural remedy is narrowly tailored to address the specific violation; and

4. The remedy would not create undue disruption to consumers or the broader market.

1. For violations of transparency or disclosure requirements: up to 0.1% of the defendant's Arizona-connected revenue;

2. For engaging in unrebutted presumptively unfair practices: up to 5% of the defendant's Arizona-connected revenue from the affected market segment;

3. For willful, recidivist violations that substantially harm competition: up to 10% of the defendant's Arizona-connected revenue;

4. For violations involving inadequate notice of allocation restrictions: additional penalties of up to ten thousand dollars per affected business, per violation;

5. For violations involving exploitation of geographic isolation: penalties of up to 15% of Arizona-connected revenue from the affected rural market, plus mandatory price reductions to affected customers;

6. For violations involving abuse of bottleneck facilities: penalties of up to twenty-five thousand dollars per day of access denial, plus mandatory access provisions; and

7. For violations targeting agricultural producers: penalties of up to triple the damages to affected producers, plus mandatory contract reforms.

(d) Worker-specific remedies. In actions involving violations of Article 4, the court shall order:

1. Payment of all unpaid compensation supplements;

2. Reimbursement of all unpaid work-related expenses;

3. Liquidated damages equal to 100% of the unpaid amounts; and

4. Reasonable attorney's fees and costs.

(e) Restitution. In addition to other remedies, the court may order restitution to injured parties, particularly for:

1. Overcharges resulting from price exploitation;

2. Lost profits due to unfair allocation practices;

3. Stranded investments resulting from unfair termination or policy changes; and

4. Other demonstrable economic harm.

Section 605. Statute of Limitations

(a) Actions under this Act must be commenced within four years after the cause of action accrues.

(b) In actions involving continuing violations, the limitation period shall run from the last occurrence of the violation.

(c) The statute of limitations is tolled during any period when the Attorney General is conducting an investigation or enforcement action related to the same conduct.

ARTICLE 7: IMPLEMENTATION AND MISCELLANEOUS

Section 701. Rulemaking Authority

The Attorney General, in consultation with the Department of Agriculture, Department of Labor, and other relevant state agencies, may adopt rules and regulations necessary to implement this Act, including:

1. Procedures for determining market dominance under Sections 102(9), (10), and (19);

2. Standards for calculating work-related expenses under Section 402;

3. Forms and procedures for annual reports under Section 501;

4. Standards for determining what constitutes "essential rural infrastructure" and "bottleneck facilities";

5. Methodologies for comparing rural and urban prices for purposes of Section 304(a)(1);

6. Guidelines for fair allocation practices and advance notice requirements;

7. Standards for agricultural contract fairness and transparency;

8. Procedures for the Ombudsman's complaint handling and mediation services; and

9. Any other rules necessary to effectuate the purposes of this Act.

Section 702. Severability

If any provision of this Act or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of the Act that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application. The provisions of this Act are severable to the maximum extent possible.

Section 703. Coordination with Existing Laws

(a) The provisions of this Act are in addition to, and not in lieu of, any other law of this state. Nothing in this Act shall be construed to limit rights or remedies available under Arizona's antitrust laws (Title 44, Chapter 10), consumer protection laws, agricultural laws, or any other provision of law.

(b) Conduct that violates federal antitrust laws shall be deemed to violate this Act. This Act shall be construed to complement, and not conflict with, federal antitrust laws to the extent consistent with this Act's purposes.

(c) Nothing in this Act shall be construed to authorize conduct that is prohibited by federal law or to prohibit conduct that is required by federal law.

Section 704. Graduated Implementation

(a) For entities with Arizona-connected revenue under ten million dollars, compliance deadlines shall be extended by twelve months from the effective date.

(b) Small businesses with fewer than fifty employees shall receive technical assistance from the Attorney General's office for compliance.

1. Rural-dominant entities in counties with populations under one hundred thousand: eighteen months for full compliance;

2. Agricultural market participants: twenty-four months for contract and pricing system reforms;

3. Owners of bottleneck facilities: twelve months to develop and publish access policies; and

4. Technical assistance program for rural businesses and agricultural producers.

(d) Worker protection implementation:

1. Digital labor platforms with more than one thousand economically dependent workers in Arizona: twelve months for full compliance;

2. Digital labor platforms with one hundred to one thousand economically dependent workers in Arizona: eighteen months for full compliance; and

3. Digital labor platforms with fewer than one hundred economically dependent workers in Arizona: twenty-four months for full compliance.

Section 705. Rural Competition Impact Assessment

(a) Any proposed merger, acquisition, or market consolidation that would create or enhance a rural-dominant entity shall require a Rural Competition Impact Assessment filed with the Attorney General at least ninety days before the proposed transaction.

(b) The Assessment shall include:

1. Analysis of impacts on rural customers, including price, quality, and access to essential goods and services;

2. Plan for maintaining essential rural services;

3. Analysis of impacts on local businesses and agricultural producers;

4. Commitments regarding investment in rural infrastructure; and

5. Analysis of geographic market definition specific to rural areas.

(c) The Attorney General may condition approval of such transactions on specific commitments to protect rural competition, including but not limited to:

1. Price caps or monitoring;

2. Service level commitments;

3. Access guarantees for bottleneck facilities; and

4. Support for local business development.

(d) Failure to comply with commitments made in a Rural Competition Impact Assessment shall constitute a violation of this Act.

Section 706. Annual Report to Legislature

The Attorney General shall submit an annual report to the Legislature on the implementation and enforcement of this Act, including:

1. The number and nature of complaints received, categorized by issue type and geographic region;

2. Enforcement actions taken and outcomes achieved;

3. Economic impact assessment on Arizona businesses and consumers, with separate analysis for rural and urban areas;

4. Analysis of compliance by different entity types and market segments;

5. Detailed analysis of rural vs. urban market competition, including:

(a) Comparison of prices for essential goods and services;

(b) Analysis of market concentration in rural counties;

(d) Evaluation of agricultural market fairness;

6. Recommendations for addressing rural-specific competitive harms;

7. Recommendations for legislative updates based on market developments; and

8. Assessment of Arizona's competitive position in key markets and supply chains.

Section 707. Appropriation

There is appropriated from the state General Fund to the Attorney General the sum of three million dollars in fiscal year 20XX-20XX+1 for the implementation and enforcement of this Act, allocated as follows:

1. One million five hundred thousand dollars for rural market enforcement and agricultural producer protection;

2. Seven hundred fifty thousand dollars for supply chain and distribution market enforcement;

3. Five hundred thousand dollars for the Arizona Markets Ombudsman and technical assistance programs; and

4. Two hundred fifty thousand dollars for rulemaking, reporting, and coordination with federal authorities.

Section 708. Effective Date

This Act shall take effect on January 1, 20XX+1, except that:

1. The rulemaking provisions of Section 701 shall take effect on July 1, 20XX;

2. The first annual reports under Section 501 shall be due on March 1, 20XX+2;

3. The Ombudsman position under Section 503 shall be established by September 1, 20XX;

4. Rural market compliance:

(a) Rural-dominant entity registration and reporting: Effective July 1, 20XX+1;

(b) Agricultural producer protections: Effective January 1, 20XX+2; and

5. Worker protection compliance:

(a) For platforms with more than one thousand workers: Effective January 1, 20XX+2;

(b) For platforms with one hundred to one thousand workers: Effective July 1, 20XX+2; and

fred slawson

Arizona Free Market Act

Arizona Anti Dirty Dealing Act

Arizona Brass Tacks Act