Introduction
In February 2026, lawmakers in both California and New York introduced new legislation aimed at capping ticket resale prices.
In California, Assembly Bill 1720 — the Fans First Act — proposes limiting resale prices to no more than 10% above face value. In New York, similar measures were introduced through amendments to the Affordable Concert Act.
The message is clear:
US regulators are stepping in to address frustration around ticket affordability, speculative resale, and fan access.
But while price caps respond to visible symptoms, they do not address the underlying infrastructure problem behind resale.
Why lawmakers are intervening
According to data cited by California lawmakers, tickets with an average face value of $80 have been resold for more than $1,000 on secondary markets.
For policymakers, this has become politically and culturally unacceptable.
Their argument is straightforward:
- Bots and professional scalpers dominate supply
- Fans are priced out
- Value is captured by intermediaries
- Artists and venues lose control
From this perspective, price caps appear to be a logical response.
Limit markups and the problem disappears.
In practice, it is not that simple.
The real problem: Resale happens outside platform control
Most resale activity in the US still operates outside primary ticketing systems.
It takes place on external marketplaces, with limited integration, weak governance, and fragmented oversight.
This creates three structural failures:
1. No System-Level Price Enforcement
Platforms can publish policies, but they cannot enforce them across disconnected marketplaces.
2. Limited visibility
Primary ticketing companies often lack real-time insight into how, where, and at what price tickets are resold.
3. Fragmented financial logic
Payouts, fees, refunds, and taxes are managed across multiple systems, increasing risk and complexity.
When resale lives outside infrastructure, control is inherently limited.
Why price caps alone won’t solve it
Price caps may reduce extreme markups in regulated environments.
But without integrated systems, they create new challenges:
- Enforcement becomes manual and reactive
- Compliance relies on third parties
- Activity shifts to unregulated channels
- Monitoring costs increase
In other words, regulation without infrastructure produces friction, not stability.
Platforms are asked to comply, but lack the tools to do so at scale.
From policy to systems
What this new legislation signals is not just concern about pricing.
It signals a shift in expectations.
Regulators are no longer satisfied with:
- Terms and conditions
- Platform disclaimers
- After-the-fact enforcement
They increasingly expect platforms to govern resale through technology.
That means:
- Automated price controls
- Built-in eligibility rules
- Real-time monitoring
- Integrated financial reporting
Governance must move from documents to systems.
Resale is becoming core infrastructure
Leading ticketing platforms are responding by bringing resale in-house.
Instead of outsourcing secondary activity, they are embedding it into their core architecture.
This enables:
- Platform-controlled pricing logic
- Jurisdiction-based rules
- End-to-end transaction tracking
- Unified financial flows
- Brand-consistent user experiences
In this model, resale is no longer an external market.
It becomes part of the primary lifecycle.
How menta enables governed resale
At menta, our infrastructure is designed for this regulatory reality.
We enable ticketing platforms to operate resale:
- Inside their own environment
- Under their own brand
- With configurable rule engines
- With automated compliance logic
- With integrated payout systems
Instead of reacting to legislation, platforms can adapt through system-level controls.
As regulations evolve, governance evolves with them.
Turning regulation into advantage
Price caps in California and New York reflect growing political pressure.
But they also create opportunity.
Platforms with integrated resale systems can:
- Comply faster
- Reduce enforcement costs
- Maintain pricing integrity
- Protect fan trust
- Retain economic value
In regulated markets, infrastructure becomes differentiation.
Conclusion
The proposed resale caps in California and New York are not isolated events.
They are signals of a broader shift toward formal regulation of secondary ticketing.
But lasting solutions will not come from legislation alone.
They will come from systems that make governance automatic, scalable, and transparent.
Resale is no longer a marketplace issue.
It is an infrastructure challenge.
And platforms that treat it as such will define the next phase of ticketing.
