Feeling oversubscribed? Why Americans are considering cutting their subscriptions
Feeling oversubscribed? You are not alone.
Most things these days – food delivery, ride hailing, TV and music streaming, fitness classes, digital storage apps – seem to come with a monthly payment.
Few people have a system to manage the steady stream of autopilot charges on their credit cards or to track price hikes. What's more, they underestimate how much they spend each month on subscriptions.
But as cost-conscious Americans tighten their belts in an uncertain economy, they are noticing how quickly these monthly charges can add up. Some 6 in 10 U.S. adults are considering breaking up with some of their paid subscriptions, according to a recent CNET survey.
'When people's budgets are tighter, they start asking themselves: Do I need to be paying over time for this?' asked Marco Bertini, a marketing professor at Esade, a university in Barcelona, who was not affiliated with the CNET survey. 'It just feels like a heavier burden.'
What is the average amount of money spent on subscriptions?
Cassandra Navarro of Scottsdale, Arizona, canceled her Hulu, Amazon and DoorDash subscriptions earlier this year.
Streaming services have been too quick to drop titles and raise rates, she said, and she'd rather shop in person at Walmart or pick up a takeout order directly than deal with the extra costs associated with delivering goods directly to her doorstep.
Navarro and her husband aim to cut out more music and movie streaming services after they move into their new home and have more space to collect CDs and DVDs.
'It just all adds up so much,' Navarro, 30, told USA TODAY. 'We don't mind having one or two subscriptions, but when you have so many subscriptions at once, you start to feel like you don't have control of your life anymore. … You can't keep track of your own finances.'
The average American spends over $1,000 a year on subscriptions – $200 of it on unnecessary or unused subscriptions, according to the CNET survey.
Why is the subscription model so popular?
Nearly 75% of companies that sell directly to customers offer some sort of subscription, according to an industry and background note coauthored by Harvard Business School marketing professor Elie Ofek.
The model makes sense in certain industries and can help consumers access big-ticket items, according to Bertini. But companies 'cannot and should not fit subscriptions to everything.'
"There are some places where it makes sense, and some places where it doesn't," Bertini said, adding some bank on consumers simply forgetting the recurring charge.
Those companies risk losing customers, especially as Americans tighten their purse strings. Retail sales were down 0.9% from the previous month in May, following a 0.1% dip in April, according to the Commerce Department.
"Disposable income, during tough times, is a little more uncertain. It may be higher one month, lower another, then maybe I'm unemployed. Do I want to have a recurring expense when my disposable income is a bit fluctuating?' Bertini asked.
McCarthy said the biggest risk to subscription companies is a lack of new subscribers, rather than a drop in the current subscription base. And that drop off will hit certain industries harder than others.
"If you're a utility like a telecom provider, (the risk is) probably pretty low," he said. "If you start moving toward streaming services, I think the risk goes up. When you move toward a box subscription, the risk becomes pretty high.'
Is the 'click to cancel' rule in effect?
While subscription companies aren't immune to the effects of increasingly cost-conscious consumers, McCarthy says subscription-based companies are expected to weather economic turmoil better than purely transactional businesses.
'It takes effort to cancel, where it takes no effort to not purchase,' he said, adding that subscription companies fared well during the Great Recession. Netflix, for instance, closed the fourth quarter of 2008 with a 26% year-over-year leap in subscribers, and another 31% increase in the fourth quarter of 2009. Software company Salesforce also saw a jump in revenue and its customer base between 2008 and 2009.
But a new rule from the Federal Trade Commission could make it much easier for consumers to click "unsubscribe."
The agency's "click to cancel" rule, adopted last year under former Democratic Chair Lina Khan, requires businesses to make it as easy to cancel a service as it was to sign up. In other words, if a company allows you to sign up in two clicks, canceling should take no more than two clicks.
Originally set to go into effect in May, the rule has faced legal and political challenges. Business associations have sued to block it, arguing it places too many burdens on businesses. Andrew Ferguson, the current Republican FTC chair, said he voted against 'click to cancel' because it came during the lame-duck period.
The FTC has delayed enforcing the rule until July to give companies more time to comply.
"I really hope that sticks, because this is hurting people," Khan said during an appearance on the 'Pablo Torre Finds Out' podcast in June. "Nobody should be stuck paying for a subscription that they either never signed up for or want to cancel."
Will 'click to cancel' get canceled? New FTC rule faces legal, political challenges
How to cancel an unwanted subscription
Looking to trim monthly expenses? Here's how to break up with paid subscriptions.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
44 minutes ago
NBA approves sale of Boston Celtics to private equity mogul Bill Chisholm
BOSTON -- The NBA on Wednesday unanimously approved the sale of the Boston Celtics to a group led by private equity mogul Bill Chisholm, a deal that values the franchise at more than $6.1 billion — the largest ever for an American professional sports team. The league said the transaction is expected to close shortly. When it does, Chisholm will take ownership of at least 51% of the team, with full control coming by 2028 at a price that could bring the total value to $7.3 billion. The previous record for a U.S. sports franchise was the $6.05 billion paid for the NFL's Washington Commanders in 2023. The record price for an NBA team was the $4 billion mortgage firm owner Mat Ishbia paid for the Phoenix Suns in 2023. A Massachusetts native and graduate of Dartmouth College and Penn's Wharton School of business, Chisholm is the managing partner of California-based Symphony Technology Group. The new ownership group also includes Boston businessmen Rob Hale, who is a current Celtics shareholder, and Bruce Beal Jr. Wyc Grousbeck led the ownership group that bought the team in 2002 for $360 million and presided over NBA championships in 2008 and '24. The franchise's 18 NBA titles is a record. Chisholm outbid at least two other groups, one led by previous Celtics minority partner Steve Pagliuca. Pagliuca has since announced plans to but the WNBA's Connecticut Sun for $325 million and move them to Boston, but the women's league has balked at the deal.
Politico
an hour ago
- Politico
A new way the US may be falling behind China
The United States and China — the world's largest climate polluters — went in opposite directions during the first half of the year. Chinese carbon dioxide emissions fell 2.7 percent during the first six months of 2025, while U.S. CO2 emissions were up 4.2 percent, according to Carbon Monitor, a global emissions tracker led by an international team of academics. That's a reversal of the usual trend over the past decade, when global heat-trapping emissions inched higher in large part because U.S. reductions have been offset by higher CO2 output from China. It also comes after decades of American politicians of both parties complaining about China failing to clean up its act. Analysts say it's too soon to declare the reversal a trend. Weather and short-term economic factors like natural gas prices have a lot to do with the numbers from the first half of the year. Both can change quickly. But there are also signs of structural changes in the global economy. China emits more planet-warming pollution than any other nation, thanks to its robust appetite for coal, by far the most carbon-intensive fossil fuel. The country accounts for more than half of global coal consumption. But Chinese coal consumption fell 2.6 percent compared with the first half of 2024, according to the International Energy Agency. A solar boom is the primary reason for the shift. China installed a staggering 92 gigawatts of solar capacity in May alone, taking the total capacity of its solar fleet to more than 1 terawatts, according to IEA. To put that number in context, total U.S. solar capacity was about 134 GW at the end of June. Glen Peters, a senior scientist at the Center for International Climate Research, said the decrease in greenhouse gas emissions reflected a fundamental shift in how China consumes energy. But he added: 'Even if Chinese emissions decline this year, I would not start saying they have peaked. I would want to see emissions trending down for a few years.' The US is the wild cardCarbon emissions have steadily declined in the U.S. over the past 15 years, thanks in large part to falling coal consumption. That was even true during President Donald Trump's first term, when almost a fifth of the country's coal capacity shut down. But major questions exist about whether the U.S. can continue to pull down climate emissions over time. U.S. coal generation was up 14 percent through the first half of 2025, thanks to robust power demand and higher natural gas prices. Trump has taken emergency action to keep some coal plants open while utilities including Arizona Public Service, a big power company in the West, are announcing plans to postpone future coal retirements in the face of rising electricity demand from data centers. Rob Jackson, an earth system scientist at Stanford University, said it is too early to draw conclusions from the 2025 data. But he said the broader economic trends taking place in the U.S. and China are already clear. 'It's fair to say that China and the U.S. are on different trajectories now,' he said. Chinese emissions are likely to drop in absolute and relative terms over the next five years thanks to the adoption of clean technologies. The U.S., meanwhile, is 'heading in the opposite direction,' he said. 'We're scaling back renewables. We're scaling back the adoption of EVs.' It's Wednesday — thank you for tuning in to POLITICO's Power Switch. I'm your host, Benjamin Storrow. Power Switch is brought to you by the journalists behind E&E News and POLITICO Energy. Send your tips, comments, questions to bstorrow@ Today in POLITICO Energy's podcast: Chris Marquette breaks down the latest Republican moves on electric vehicle policies, including a potential federal fee on EVs. Power Centers This renaissance needs more fuelThe nuclear industry is in the midst of a comeback, but it will need a domestic fuel supply that for now is not guaranteed, Francisco 'A.J.' Camacho writes. For decades, the U.S. has relied on uranium shipments from Russia. Now, the Department of Energy has started to attract more startup companies to build a domestic supply chain. 'We are in the game, but we've got to get better at the game if we are ever going to be able to power our new nuclear fleet,' Rep. Chuck Fleischmann (R-Tenn.), chair of the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Subcommittee, told A.J. Defending the plasticsThe U.S. and other fossil-fuel-producing nations are threatening to derail a global treaty to cut plastic production, Sara Schonhardt writes. Oil and gas feedstocks are a key ingredient of plastics, and curbing plastics is considered important to reducing the effects of climate change. But the U.S., Saudi Arabia and other countries with big oil and petrochemical producers see plastics as a significant driver of business. A State Department spokesperson told Sara in an email that the U.S. opposes 'impractical and ineffective global approaches,' referring to plastic production targets or bans and restrictions that 'would increase the costs of plastic products.' Countries are negotiating for a sixth time this week, widely seen as the last attempt to strike a deal. More than 100 countries are backing a treaty that would limit plastics production. Al Sharpton steps into the Sierra Club frayCivil rights leader Al Sharpton is warning of 'serious racial implications' of the Sierra Club's firing of its Executive Director Ben Jealous, Robin Bravender reports. Sharpton criticized the Sierra Club's move earlier this week to fire Jealous, a Black former civil rights leader. The green group said its board voted unanimously Monday to terminate Jealous' employment 'for cause following extensive evaluation of his conduct.' Jealous has retained attorneys at a civil rights and employment law firm and said in a statement Tuesday that he is fighting the decision. In Other News TikTok and protests: Nuclear reactors are having their pop culture moment. Fashion model Isabelle Boemeke posted pro-nuclear messages on social media. Later, she organized a push to keep California's Diablo Canyon plant operating. Unleash the projects: Some states are pushing to get renewable energy projects out the door before tax credits are shut off. Subscriber Zone A showcase of some of our best subscriber content. A melting glacier in Alaska is causing flooding and threatening residents of the state's capital, Juneau, for the third year in a row. The Department of Energy picked 10 small nuclear reactor developers to develop pilot projects and compete for safety design approvals. Texas House Republicans are urging U.S. energy regulators to expeditiously approve the Rio Grande liquefied natural gas export project in South Texas after previous regulatory and legal setbacks. That's it for today, folks! Thanks for reading.
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
China hawks skeptical of Trump chip deal
Trump on Monday agreed to allow tech giants Nvidia and AMD to secure export licenses to sell their advanced artificial intelligence (AI) chips in China in exchange for a 15 percent cut of the profits. The White House said Tuesday that more such deals could be on the table. The unusual deal doesn't just raise legal questions. Experts say the U.S. should be wary of turning over American-made technology that could boost its adversary's AI capabilities, at a time when the two countries are fiercely competing for dominance. The security concerns appear to be a two-way street. China urged tech companies there to avoid any purchase of Nvidia's H20 chip, citing security issues. The move once again has Trump at odds with Congress's China hawks, who argue the administration is shortchanging America's national security interests to make a buck. Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (Ill.), the top Democrat on the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party, in a statement said the most troubling part of the deal was a contradiction at the heart of the policy. 'The administration cannot simultaneously treat semiconductor exports as both a national security threat and a revenue opportunity,' he said. 'By putting a price on our security concerns, we signal to China and our allies that American national security principles are negotiable for the right fee.' The same panel's GOP chair, Rep. John Moolenaar (Mich.), said there are 'questions about the legal basis' for such a deal. 'Export controls are a frontline defense in protecting our national security, and we should not set a precedent that incentivizes the Government to grant licenses to sell China technology that will enhance its AI capabilities,' he said in a statement.
