One federal notice erased two very different protections on the same day. On February 12, 2026, the Federal Trade Commission published a single Federal Register action that withdrew its rule against hidden car-dealer fees and struck its ban on employer non-compete agreements from the federal code. Both rules had already spent more than a year losing ground in court before the agency made the removal official. For a household financing a car or weighing a job offer, the paperwork protection that was supposed to exist is gone, and something older and thinner has taken its place.
The CARS Rule Would Have Stopped Dealer Add-On Fees at the Signing Table
The Combating Auto Retail Scams Trade Regulation Rule, known as the CARS Rule, was published by the commission in January 2024 to govern what happens at the financing desk after a buyer has already agreed on a car. It would have required dealers to state the true offering price before add-ons, get a separate and express yes from the buyer for every optional charge, and stop selling add-on products, such as paint sealant or VIN etching, that give the buyer no real benefit. It also would have required dealers to keep records of advertisements and customer transactions that regulators could later check.
The rule never got the chance to work. The National Automobile Dealers Association and the Texas Automobile Dealers Association sued in the Fifth Circuit within days of publication, and the commission delayed the CARS Rule’s effective date before it ever applied to a single sale. On January 27, 2025, the Fifth Circuit ruled that the commission had skipped a legally required step, an advance notice of proposed rulemaking, and vacated the rule outright. The February 12, 2026 notice is the commission’s formal paperwork closing that chapter: it withdraws the CARS Rule from the Code of Federal Regulations, so there is no version of it left standing to enforce without the agency starting the entire rulemaking process over.
For a household walking out of a dealership with a five- or six-year auto loan, that difference is not academic. Add-on charges rolled into financing, extended service contracts, gap insurance, theft-deterrent etching, can run into the thousands of dollars once interest is added on top, and the CARS Rule’s core promise was a clear price and a separate consent for each of those charges before they hit the contract. With the rule gone, that specific disclosure-and-consent requirement does not exist at the federal level; a dealer’s obligations fall back to older consumer-protection law and whatever a given state’s own rules require.
Free download: The first-hour steps in order, who to call at banks, agencies and credit bureaus, and what to document. Get the free scam and identity-theft action card.
The Non-Compete Ban Would Have Freed Workers to Take a Higher-Paying Offer
The Non-Compete Clause Rule, published in May 2024, took a different kind of protection: it would have made it an unfair method of competition for an employer to enforce a non-compete against a worker. New non-competes would have been banned outright starting September 4, 2024. Existing non-competes covering senior executives could stay in force, but existing non-competes covering everyone else would have stopped being enforceable on that same date.
That rule also never took effect. Employers and trade groups sued in three federal districts. A Pennsylvania court declined to block the rule, a Florida court issued a narrow injunction covering only the plaintiff in front of it, and a Texas court went further, ruling that the commission had exceeded its statutory authority and setting the rule aside nationwide before its September 2024 start date. The commission spent a year appealing that Texas ruling before voting 3-1 on September 5, 2025, to drop its appeals and accept that the rule was dead. The February 12, 2026 notice carries out that vote: it removes the Non-Compete Rule’s text from Part 910 of the federal code entirely.
The financial stakes sit underneath the legal language. A non-compete tells a worker that taking a competitor’s offer, even one that pays substantially more, can trigger a lawsuit from the current employer. Without a federal ban, that leverage stays fully intact everywhere a non-compete is otherwise enforceable under state law. A worker deciding whether to accept a raise elsewhere is back to weighing that choice against whatever contract was already signed, with no nationwide floor underneath the decision.
What Is Left to Protect Buyers and Workers Now That Both Rules Are Gone
Neither withdrawal means the underlying conduct became legal overnight. The commission still has its general authority under Section 5 of the FTC Act to sue an individual dealer over an outright false claim or a hidden fee that amounts to a deceptive practice; it just cannot point to the CARS Rule’s specific disclosure and consent requirements to make that case faster. The same is true for non-competes: nothing in the February 12, 2026 notice makes a non-compete automatically enforceable, but it also removes the federal rule that would have voided most of them by default. What is left is whatever a given state already bans or allows, plus the commission’s slower, case-by-case enforcement tools.
The same document also restored an older version of the FTC’s Negative Option Rule, the one governing subscription and free-trial cancellations, after a separate court fight over that rule’s 2024 update. Three rulemakings, three different circuit or district court challenges, one Federal Register notice closing all of them out on the same date. The commission’s own filing lists the effective date for every part of it as February 12, 2026, covering Parts 425, 463, and 910 of Title 16 of the federal code, the parts that, as of today, no longer contain either the CARS Rule or the Non-Compete Rule.
Rules Get Pulled Overnight; A Recovery Plan Doesn’t
No form was ever printed telling car buyers or workers that a federal backstop like this could disappear inside a single Federal Register notice, and none exists now to flag the next one. Spotting a hidden dealer fee or a bad-faith non-compete threat still depends on a household noticing the problem itself and knowing exactly who to call, in what order, with what proof in hand. That gap, between a rule quietly leaving the books and a household already having its own plan, is where preparation matters most.
The Senior Fraud Defense & First-Hour Recovery Kit combines the first-hour recovery plan with a fraud evidence and report log, giving a household a ready script and a paper trail for a dealer dispute, an imposter call, or identity theft.
See the first-hour recovery plan in The Senior Fraud Defense & First-Hour Recovery Kit.
AI-assisted research and drafting; reviewed by an editor.
