Strong Turnout at Summit Signals Industry Unity on Key Policy Issues
IAB hosted its 2025 Public Policy & Legal Summit in April in an event that brought together legal experts, policymakers, and leaders from across the digital advertising ecosystem. With major changes looming in privacy, AI, competition, and advertising standards, the Summit served as a timely forum for thought leadership, building industry relationships and engaging with regulators to help shape the future of responsible digital policy.
One of the day’s standout moments came during a fireside chat between IAB General Counsel Michael Hahn and Christopher Mufarrige, the newly appointed Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. Mufarrige signaled a shift toward a more measured, evidence-based approach to enforcement, urging regulators to look past charged terms like “surveillance advertising” and instead focus on actual consumer harm. He emphasized the need for policies rooted in objective data and a clearer understanding of how digital advertising serves both consumers and the broader economy.
That focus on practicality and nuance carried through in a panel of legal experts, who broke down recent FTC enforcement actions involving sensitive data, location tracking, and vendor oversight. From there, discussions expanded to address the fast-changing state privacy landscape. Leaders from Paramount, Foot Locker, Samsung Ads, LVMH, and others offered real-world strategies for navigating new state privacy laws. Breakout sessions explored the European privacy environment, the future of responsible AI, and the evolving role of consumer privacy signals in the U.S.
As the only trade association that brings together the full digital advertising distribution chain, IAB is proud to create space for these important conversations. Our commitment to equipping members with the insights, tools, and advocacy they need remains stronger than ever.
Digital Advertising Fuels 28.4 Million U.S. Jobs and $4.9 Trillion in Economic Activity
As conversations turned to the real-world stakes, IAB released new data to underscore the industry’s role in powering jobs and growth.
According to the study Measuring the Digital Economy: Advertising, Content, Commerce, and Innovation, the digital economy now contributes $4.9 trillion to U.S. GDP—18% of the total—and supports 28.4 million jobs across all 435 congressional districts. Since 2020, digital employment has grown nearly 12 times faster than the broader labor market. Full-time creator jobs alone have surged from 200,000 to over 1.5 million.
And these gains aren’t confined to Silicon Valley or big tech brands. While the top 10 congressional districts have higher concentrations of internet-based employment, they account for just one-eighth of the total. Job growth is coming from small businesses, platform workers, ecommerce entrepreneurs, and independent creators using digital tools to drive revenue and local hiring in communities nationwide.
As Congress debates new rules around privacy, AI, and competition, these numbers serve as a vital reminder: responsible digital advertising is not just an industry—it’s a jobs engine and a pillar of American economic strength. Later this month, IAB will take these findings to Capitol Hill to ensure lawmakers have the facts they need to craft thoughtful, forward-looking policies that protect innovation and consumer trust.
IAB Urges Congress to Enact National Privacy Law That Balances Privacy Protection and Innovation
That urgency is guiding IAB’s top legislative priority: securing a strong, clear national privacy framework.
Previous proposals like the American Data Privacy and Protection Act (ADPPA) and American Privacy Rights Act (APRA) gained momentum but ultimately fell short. Key sticking points included whether federal law should preempt state laws, whether individuals should be allowed to sue for violations, and how to divide enforcement authority between federal and state agencies. IAB and others also flagged the risk that vague language or overly broad restrictions could hurt small businesses, nonprofits, and creators who rely on responsible data use to grow.
Most recently, the launch of a new House Energy & Commerce Working Group offers fresh momentum. While the effort isn’t yet bipartisan, it’s a promising step—and IAB is hopeful that leaders from both parties will come together to create a privacy framework that protects consumers while balancing innovation and the ad-supported internet.
IAB submitted a detailed letter outlining practical recommendations. We called for clear definitions of data roles—like controllers and processors—modeled on successful state laws. We urged Congress to preempt conflicting state standards and avoid disrupting key use cases like loyalty programs or culturally relevant advertising. On data minimization, we emphasized the need for a reasonable, purpose-based standard—one that limits collection to what’s necessary for disclosed uses and meets reasonable consumer expectations, but avoids overly rigid frameworks that could undermine personalization, innovation, and consumer choice. We also recommended that enforcement remain with expert agencies like the FTC and state attorneys general—not through a sweeping private right of action that could overwhelm courts.
The formation of the new working group shows that Congress is taking privacy seriously. IAB stands ready to partner with policymakers to help pass a law that protects consumers, supports businesses, and keeps the digital economy strong and fair for all.
As always, IAB is doing the work on the ground. More than 1,300 companies already rely on the IAB Multi-State Privacy Agreement to navigate nearly 20 different state privacy laws. It’s clear evidence that the business community is committed to protecting privacy while finding practical ways to operate across a fragmented legal landscape. But it also underscores the need for a more unified, workable national framework.
Small Businesses Head to Capitol Hill to Defend the Ad-Supported Internet
As lawmakers debate the future of the digital economy, Internet for Growth (I4G) is making sure small business and creator voices are part of the conversation. An initiative of IAB, I4G champions the role of digital advertising in helping entrepreneurs build brands, reach new markets, and grow jobs in communities across the country.
In May, I4G brought small business owners and creators to Washington, D.C., for its annual National Small Business Week Fly-In. Representing industries from hospitality and construction to media, fashion, and interior design, the group met with 21 congressional offices—including Speaker Mike Johnson (LA), Senators Shelley Moore Capito (WV), John Kennedy (LA), and Raphael Warnock (GA), and Representatives Buddy Carter (GA-1), Lucy McBath (GA-7), and Riley Moore (WV-2).
During meetings, coalition members stressed that digital advertising isn’t just a tool for Big Tech—it’s a vital engine for small businesses, creators, and startups. They urged Congress to pass a strong national privacy law that preempts state regulations and protects the responsible use of personalized advertising. Members also discussed new digital ad taxes that would disproportionately hurt small firms and local media outlets.
With thousands of supporters across the country, I4G has facilitated nearly 200 meetings with federal and state lawmakers and reached a nationwide audience through digital campaigns and earned media—amplifying the value of advertising, media, and marketing to every American.
And we’re just getting started. Internet for Growth will continue building connections between policymakers and the small business community—ensuring that Main Street voices help shape the future of the internet
IAB Urges Supreme Court to Clarify Outdated Video Privacy Law
Also in May, IAB joined the National Retail Federation in filing an amicus brief in National Basketball Association v. Salazar, urging the Supreme Court to clarify the scope of the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA) and align the law with modern technology and consumer expectations. Originally enacted in 1988 to protect the privacy of physical video rental records, the VPPA is now being stretched to cover digital platforms—raising significant legal uncertainty for publishers, advertisers, and content providers across the internet.
At issue is whether websites and apps that host or embed video content and use standard tools—such as pixels, cookies, or analytics software—can be considered “video tape service providers” under the law. Conflicting court rulings and a growing wave of class-action lawsuits have exploited ambiguities in the statute.
In its brief, IAB argues that these expansive interpretations go far beyond the law’s original intent and could have serious consequences. A broad application of the VPPA could discourage platforms from offering video features, limit personalized advertising, or lead to the removal of free, ad-supported content—especially harming smaller publishers and businesses that rely on these tools to grow and compete.
IAB supports strong privacy protections, but they must be rooted in legal clarity and reflect how digital platforms actually function today. We’re urging the Court to hear the case, resolve the split between the circuits, and restore the VPPA to its intended scope.
FTC Delays “Click-to-Cancel” Rule, Reflecting IAB’s Ongoing Advocacy
After nearly two years of pushing back on the FTC’s proposed overhaul of subscription service rules, IAB welcomed the Commission’s recent decision to delay its sweeping “Click to Cancel” mandate. Officially known as the Negative Option Rule, the regulation was set to take effect last month but has been postponed until July 14, 2025, following strong industry concerns and legal challenges.
At first glance, the rule may seem simple—to make subscription cancellation as easy as signing-up. But in practice, it creates major challenges, limiting how businesses can offer consumers additional choices, incentives, or helpful information during the process.
These restrictions would disrupt proven customer retention strategies and penalize legitimate businesses that rely on subscriptions to deliver value. Many ad-supported services depend on flexibility to personalize user experiences and keep pricing accessible. A rigid, one-size-fits-all rule banning win-back offers or loyalty incentives could degrade the user experience and reduce access to digital tools that benefit everyday consumers.
We’ve explained that digital subscriptions are vital for creators, small businesses, and direct-to-consumer brands. They support jobs, provide flexible access to essential services, and help keep the internet affordable and open. The FTC’s rule, if left unchanged, could put that progress at risk. That is why IAB and other organizations filed a legal challenge, which is now under review by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.
The FTC’s postponement is a welcome signal that the agency may be open to revisiting key concerns. While the rule is set to take effect on July 14, 2025, the Commission has indicated it may consider amendments if enforcement reveals unintended consequences or practical challenges. IAB will continue advocating for a clearer, more balanced framework—one that targets bad actors without stifling innovation or placing undue burdens on responsible businesses.
IAB Defends Innovation in the States as Privacy Rules Multiply
While federal privacy law remains a top priority, IAB is engaged in state-level policymaking—working with trade partners to shape smart digital advertising rules. Right now, California and New York are demanding particular attention due to sweeping proposals that could affect nearly every digital business.
In California, IAB submitted comments on proposed regulations for Automated Decision-Making Technologies (ADMTs) under the state’s privacy law. We urged regulators to focus safeguards on truly high-risk uses—like employment or credit decisions—and to clarify that “significant decisions” should apply only to individual consumers, not businesses. As written, the rule is vague enough to extend into business-to-business contexts, stretching beyond the California Consumer Privacy Act’s intent. We also raised concerns about an overly broad definition of “sensitive location,” which could impose compliance burdens on routine marketing. The draft rule sweeps in locations like schools, pharmacies, food pantries, union halls, political offices, and legal aid centers—meaning basic location-based ads, like an ad for a coffee shop near a college or a campaign flyer near a polling site, could trigger regulatory obligations and chill lawful commercial or political speech. We also objected to a proposal to make the currently optional “Opt-Out Request Honored” disclosure mandatory—a confusing and costly shift for small and mid-sized businesses, especially without a clear standard for what qualifies as a valid signal.
California’s DELETE Act also remains a serious concern. In comments submitted last week, IAB and other ad trade groups warned that proposed rules implementing the DELETE Act could exceed the state’s legal authority and lead to unintended harms. The regulations would expand the definition of “data broker” so broadly that many consumer-facing brands could be forced to register, even if they have a direct relationship with the consumer—undermining the law’s intent. Additional provisions could enable mass deletion requests by unauthorized agents, invite security risks, and conflict with existing privacy regulations. Taken together, the rules may jeopardize consumer trust, erode free expression, and hinder basic advertising and analytics functions that support a free, open internet.
Meanwhile, in New York, the proposed New York Privacy Act (S3044) would impose sweeping new restrictions on data-driven services without clear standards or enforcement clarity.
The bill introduces vague and inconsistent definitions for key terms that deviate from those used in nearly 20 other states—making it difficult for businesses to adopt a uniform compliance approach. It also imposes rigid data minimization requirements that could limit routine personalization, product improvements, or fraud prevention efforts. On top of that, the bill would require processes for New York residents—driving up compliance costs and increasing legal risk. IAB joined leading ad and media organizations in a letter of concern, warning that the bill would hurt consumers, disadvantage smaller publishers, and conflict with existing state and federal frameworks. As drafted, the legislation could undermine access to free, ad-supported content and create a fragmented patchwork of compliance obligations across states.
As more states consider their own approaches to data, advertising, and AI, IAB remains a trusted voice on the ground—engaging with policymakers, educating stakeholders, and fighting for rules that empower consumers without cutting off the digital tools they rely on every day.
