AB 578 amends California’s Business and Professions Code to tighten transparency, refund, and customer service rules for food delivery platforms. The bill bars platforms from pocketing tips or using tip amounts to reduce a driver’s base pay; requires itemized pay breakdowns to delivery workers; mandates a customer service pathway to a natural person when automated systems cannot resolve an issue; and creates express refund rules that include returning gratuities to customers without deducting them from drivers.
The law matters because it rewrites revenue and refund flows that many platforms built into their business models. Platforms operating in California will need to change payment routing, customer-service architecture, and order-accounting systems; restaurants, drivers, payment processors, and compliance teams will also see downstream operational and legal effects.
At a Glance
What It Does
AB 578 prohibits platforms from charging customers more than the restaurant price, from retaining tips, and from using tips to subsidize driver base pay. It requires itemized pay statements to drivers, a clear customer service route to a human agent when needed, and specific refund rules that include returning paid gratuities to customers while protecting driver pay.
Who It Affects
Companies that operate food delivery platforms in California, the drivers who deliver food, participating restaurants and their ordering interfaces, payment processors that handle tip routing and refunds, and customer-service vendors that support platforms.
Why It Matters
The bill clarifies tip ownership, increases refund liability for platforms, and forces technical changes to how gratuities and refunds are processed. That shifts operational risk from drivers and restaurants back onto platforms and raises implementation questions for payment infrastructure and customer-service staffing.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
AB 578 tightens several strands of California law that govern how food delivery intermediaries operate. It reinforces price parity by making it unlawful to charge customers more than the facility’s posted price at order time.
It makes explicit that tips and gratuities designated for deliveries belong in full either to the delivery person (for deliveries) or to the food facility (for pickups), and it forbids payment models that treat tips as a credit against drivers’ guaranteed or base pay.
The bill also expands transparency obligations. Platforms must provide customers and restaurants with an itemized cost breakdown on each transaction; separately, the platform must give the person who delivers the order a clear, itemized statement of what they are paid for that delivery — base pay, tips, and any promotional or incentive bonuses.
That is designed to prevent opaque pay calculations and permit drivers to audit how a trip was compensated.On customer service and refunds the law requires two practical capabilities. First, the platform must include a prominent customer-service feature that provides access to a natural person when automated tools cannot resolve a complaint; the automated tools may be used, but a human fallback is required and must be prompt.
Second, the platform must issue full refunds (taxes, commissions, fees, and gratuities) when an order is not delivered or is incorrect, except where the platform reasonably determines the customer caused the failure or the request appears fraudulent. If refunding the paid gratuity to the original payment method is not technically feasible, the platform must offer an alternate refund method for that gratuity.
For partially fulfilled orders the platform must charge only for what the customer received and allow on-order gratuity adjustments and tax/fee recalculations tied to undelivered items.The statute preserves a platform’s ability to remove customers suspected of fraud, and it includes rules limiting deceptive phone-forwarding practices by listing websites. It leaves several operational details unspecified — for example, what counts as a prompt human response or how platforms should prove a customer caused a nondelivery — which will matter for implementation and enforcement.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill expressly prohibits any payment model that uses amounts designated as tips or gratuities to reduce a delivery person’s base pay.
Platforms must give each delivery person an itemized, prominent breakdown of pay for each delivery that shows base pay, tips, and any promotional bonuses.
If an order is not delivered or is incorrect, the platform must provide a full refund that includes taxes, fees, commissions, and the original paid gratuity, unless the platform reasonably suspects customer responsibility or fraud.
Platforms may use automated customer-service systems but must ensure customers can promptly reach a natural person if automation fails to resolve the issue.
For partially fulfilled orders the platform must charge only for delivered items, adjust taxes/fees/gratuities tied to undelivered items, and provide a way for customers to change a pre-delivery gratuity.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Price parity and tip protections
This subsection reiterates that platforms cannot charge customers more than the restaurant’s posted price and it adds two concrete tip rules: platforms cannot retain any portion of amounts labeled as tip or gratuity, and they cannot operate pay models that treat tips as offsets to a driver’s base pay. Practically, platforms will need to separate tip pools and accounting so that tip receipts and base pay are recorded and disbursed separately, rather than netting tips against wages or guarantees.
Itemized transaction and driver pay disclosures
Subsection (b) requires itemized cost breakdowns for customers and restaurants, including purchase price, platform fees, and any tip. Subsection (c) creates a parallel duty to disclose to drivers an itemized pay statement for each delivery showing base pay, gratuities, and promotional bonuses. This imposes record‑keeping and UI requirements: platforms must produce machine-readable, clearly labeled line items that reconcile to the amounts moved through payment rails.
Phone-forwarding and fee disclosure for listing interfaces
This provision stops listing websites from linking to contact methods that the site knows will forward calls (a common practice to hide third‑party fees) and requires notice if a customer-initiated phone or interface may create fees paid to someone other than the food facility. It targets opaque routing and disclosure practices on restaurant listings and ordering pages, which can mask who earns fees.
Order status transparency and human customer service fallback
Platforms must regularly disclose order status and method of delivery to customers and restaurants. The new customer-service language allows automated systems but creates a mandate: if automation cannot resolve a concern, the customer must be able to promptly connect with a natural person. The statute does not define 'promptly,' so platforms must design escalation rules that will meet regulators’ reasonableness tests.
Full refunds and gratuity handling on nondelivery or wrong orders
This new section requires full refunds (taxes, fees, commissions, and gratuities) for nondelivery or incorrect orders unless the platform reasonably attributes fault to the customer or suspects fraud. It also requires returning the paid gratuity to the customer while explicitly prohibiting deducting that amount from the driver’s pay. If returning the gratuity to the original payment method is infeasible, the platform must offer an alternate refund route for that gratuity — a practical concession for complex payment flows.
Partial fulfillment, gratuity adjustments, and fraud exception
When orders are partially delivered, the platform must charge only for received items and adjust related taxes, fees, and gratuities. The bill also requires a mechanism for customers to change a pre-delivery gratuity and lets customers request refunds back to the original payment method. Finally, the statute preserves a platform’s right to remove customers reasonably suspected of fraud, which balances consumer protections against abuse.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Economy across all five countries.
Explore Economy in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Delivery workers — they keep tips in full and receive clearer, itemized pay statements (base, tips, bonuses), which reduces the risk that platforms will mask pay reductions by netting tips against base compensation.
- Customers in California — they gain stronger refund rights (including returned gratuities) and a guaranteed human customer-service pathway when automation fails, improving complaint resolution and accountability.
- Food facilities handling pickups — tips designated for pickup orders must be paid in full to the facility, removing uncertainty over tip routing and reducing disputes over collected gratuities.
- Consumer and worker advocates — the law creates a statutory baseline for transparency and tip ownership that supports enforcement actions, audits, and policy advocacy.
Who Bears the Cost
- Food delivery platforms operating in California — they must reengineer payment flows, expand refund-processing capabilities, maintain records for itemized disclosures, and likely increase customer-service staffing or escalation capacity to meet the human-contact requirement.
- Payment processors and merchant acquirers — they may need to support alternate refund methods or split-routing of gratuities that current processing setups do not readily handle, creating integration work and cost.
- Compliance and engineering teams at platforms — they will need to design, test, and maintain UI/UX, accounting, and audit trails to prove compliance and defend decisions about customer responsibility or suspected fraud.
- Restaurants with integrated ordering — they may need to alter menu price displays or interface disclosures to meet the law’s transparency requirements, and could face increased customer inquiries routed through them if listing disclosures are unclear.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill balances two legitimate aims — protecting drivers’ tips and ensuring consumers receive transparent refunds — against the operational reality that platforms have built flexible pay and refund systems for efficiency. Protecting tip income and giving customers full refund rights raises platform costs and technical complexity; requiring human-access customer service raises labor costs and slows automated resolution. The tension is between stronger, enforceable protections for workers and consumers and the practical burden of reshaping payment, staffing, and fraud‑prevention systems.
The statute leaves several implementation details undefined, which will drive litigation and regulatory guidance. Key uncertainties include what constitutes a 'prompt' connection to a natural person, what evidentiary standard a platform must use to 'determine' customer responsibility for nondelivery, and how regulators will evaluate a platform’s claim that refunding a gratuity to the original payment method is 'not feasible.' Those gaps create compliance risk and invite agency rulemaking or enforcement tests that could differ from one platform’s current practices.
Operationally, separating tips from base pay and ensuring gratuities are never used to offset wages challenges existing payment architectures. Many platforms currently aggregate commissions, fees, and customer payments before downstream disbursement; AB 578 requires more granular ledgering and potentially real‑time split routing.
That increases transaction complexity and can create timing mismatches where platforms temporarily advance driver pay or process refunds through alternative instruments. The law also tightens refund exposure for platforms, which may lead to stricter fraud-detection measures that in turn create false positives and customer friction.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.