Published:
Readtime: 5 min
Every product is carefully selected by our editors and experts. If you buy from a link, we may earn a commission. Learn more. For more information on how we test products, click here.
You sign up for a “free” trial, forget about it, and six months later, you’re quietly paying for a service you barely use. Maybe your gym lets you join in two taps but demands a phone call, three forms and a motivational speech to let you leave.
The Albanese Government says that’s not just annoying; it’s unfair. As part of a major consumer law overhaul, Assistant Minister for Competition Andrew Leigh has announced plans to ban so-called subscription traps, making it as easy to walk away from a service as it is to sign up. Draft laws are expected in early 2026, with a national ban on unfair trading practices to follow once legislation passes.
Leigh says the real problem is not the subscription itself but the design wrapped around it. Hidden terms, confusing pathways, and sneaky defaults can steer people into paying longer than they intended, even when they’re trying to leave.
As he puts it, the reform is not just about making cancellation easier. It is about setting a new standard for fairness so people know what they are signing up for, can manage their commitments and are not trapped by design.
What Exactly is a Subscription Trap?
Leigh’s definition is straightforward. If joining takes seconds and cancelling takes persistence, you have hit a subscription trap.
“Problems arise when the subscription is structured so that joining is swift and effortless while leaving involves added frictions or becomes confusing or emotionally loaded,” added Leigh. “That imbalance is what turns an ordinary subscription into a subscription trap.”
Australians know the feeling all too well. And the data shows the problem is widespread. Three in four people say they have had a bad experience trying to cancel a subscription, and one in ten gave up and kept paying.
The Consumer Policy Research Centre estimates unwanted subscriptions drain around $46 million a year from Australian households.
These traps show up in all sorts of everyday situations: auto-renewal buried in fine print. Free trials that quietly flip into pricey annual plans. Cancellation paths that jump from app to website to phone. Guilt-tripping prompts, like “are you sure you want to leave us?”
If any of that sounds familiar, you’re not alone. These are the tactics the government want to eliminate.
A $2 Question That Became a $90 Problem
One of the clearest examples comes from the ACCC’s latest Federal Court case against US-based platform JustAnswer.
The service advertised access to ‘experts’ for $2, pitched as a quick, one-off payment to get help. According to the ACCC, many users were quietly rolled into subscriptions costing between $50 and $90 a month.
The regulator alleges the recurring charge was not clearly disclosed. It only showed up later on a payment screen “in a way many consumers would not have seen”. So what looked like a cheap solution became a monthly bill 25 times higher.
The ACCC also claims JustAnswer gave the impression it was linked to government bodies such as the Fair Work Ombudsman. A big no-no that likely made the service seem more legitimate than it was.
The case is ongoing, but the pattern is obvious. People saw a small fee and ended up with a subscription they never meant to buy.
What the New Rules Will Require
Under the reforms, any business offering subscriptions will need to follow a simple set of rules:
- Clear terms upfront: Key information must be visible before sign-up and not hidden several screens deep.
- Reminders before renewals: No more quiet rollovers at the end of a free trial.
- Easy cancellation: If you can join in a few taps, you should be able to cancel in the same way. No phone-only exits. No menu mazes. No guilt-based persuasion.
Leigh says the aim is not to punish business but to raise the bar. He cites Apple’s clean renewal emails and simple subscription dashboard as proof it can be done. And customers notice, with nine in ten Australians more likely to stick with companies that make cancelling easy.
Why the Government Says It’s Needed
Australia already bans misleading conduct, but it does not address friction. With subscriptions now baked into everything from entertainment to fitness to apps and software, these small hurdles make cancelling harder than staying.
Plenty of Australians encounter hidden fees, unclear terms and cancellation processes that feel designed to exhaust them.
Leigh says this erodes trust and hurts honest operators. If one company makes cancelling simple while its competitor hides the exit, the honest one loses out.
“We are restoring symmetry,” Leigh says. “If joining a service takes seconds, leaving it should not take persistence and luck.”
What It Means for You
Once the laws take effect, you should notice fewer surprise renewals after “free” trials, fewer mystery subscription charges on your bank statement, cancellation options that match the way you signed up, and more transparency when comparing subscription services.
The changes support businesses that already treat customers fairly by setting one clear standard. They no longer have to compete with rivals using tricks to hang onto subscribers. As Leigh puts it, removing these burdens “makes it easier for Australians to make informed choices, and easier for responsible businesses to compete.”
The Bottom Line
Subscription traps are more than a minor irritation. They cost money, waste time and rely on the fact that most people are too busy to fight a poorly designed cancellation process.
The government’s proposed ban aims to shift the balance back towards fairness and make the unsubscribe button behave the way it should.
For anyone who has tried to cancel a trial and ended up in a digital maze, these reforms will not remove every frustration. But they should make life online feel a little less tricky and a lot more transparent.
Comments
We love hearing from you. or to leave a comment.