30-day lowest price under section 9a of the Austrian Price Marking Act: how traders document discount advertising, channels, progressive reductions and price history.
, Mag. Bernhard Brandauer, Rechtsanwalt
Discount advertising using a lowest price or a saving communicates an immediate benefit. That is precisely why the statement must rest on a reliable price history. For announced price reductions on goods, section 9a of the Austrian Price Marking Act generally requires the lowest price that the business charged at least once for the same goods in the same sales channel during the preceding 30 days.
The rule concerns more than the number beside a struck-through price. Goods, sales channel, date, progressive reductions and the actual advertising design all matter. An online price cannot simply be compared with a shop price. A later discount must not manufacture an artificially high starting value.
This article explains the Austrian 30-day lowest price under section 9a of the Price Marking Act and its connection with section 2 UWG. It focuses on calculation, records and responses to challenges. General price marking and a recommended retail price comparison follow different tests.
The short review path separates a planned discount campaign, live or challenged advertising and a competitor's lowest-price claim. You can send the relevant records to the firm after the assessment.
Goods, channel, period and price history determine the initial legal review.
This review path does not determine a legal infringement. It organises goods, channel and period for the initial assessment.
List the goods, channel, lowest price in the preceding 30 days, planned discount and approved advertising version. Record whether the promotion is progressive or the goods are new to the market.
Preserve the advertisement, landing page, price record, channel, change history and correspondence. Keep the version that was actually displayed.
Document the goods, advertising, date, channel and observed price development. Keep the factual record separate from the legal assessment.
Section 9a of the Price Marking Act applies to an announced price reduction for goods. Where a reduction is stated in euros or percentages, the previous lowest price must also be indicated. This is a statutory reference value. It cannot be replaced by a freely selected, particularly high former price.
Section 2 UWG adds an assessment of the overall impression. A commercial practice is misleading where incorrect information or a deceptive presentation about price or a special price advantage can cause a market participant to make a transactional decision that would not otherwise have been made. Discount figure, percentage, footnote, product image and surrounding copy work together.
Directive (EU) 2019/2161 shaped the European price reduction rule. For the specific advertisement in Austria, however, the wording of the Austrian Price Marking Act remains decisive. A directive does not replace the assessment of the Austrian sales channel or the review under the UWG.
The reference value is the lowest price actually charged for the same goods in the same sales channel at least once during the preceding 30 days. The Act does not refer to a merely recommended or usual price. It concerns a price that was actually requested within the relevant period.
An online shop, a physical store and a seller account on a marketplace may be different sales channels. That must be assessed from the business structure and the way the offer is presented to the public. An online reduction cannot automatically use the higher shop price as its reference. Different delivery areas or seller accounts may also matter.
The goods must also be the same. Model, version, package size, accessories and scope of supply must not be changed in a way that makes a different item look identical. A new article number does not answer the legal question by itself. Conversely, a minor naming change should not remove the same item from its price history.
For a progressively increasing reduction, the previous price is the lowest non-reduced price before the first application of the reduction. A second or third stage must not be advertised against a new, already reduced artificial starting value. The course of the promotion should be recognisable and recorded as one connected sequence.
Example: an item is first reduced from 100 to 80 euros and later to 70 euros. The reference for the progressive reduction must be assessed against the non-reduced price before the first reduction. The concrete copy must nevertheless make clear which stage and which benefit are being advertised. A new campaign after a break may require a new review.
If the goods have been on the market for less than 30 days, the lowest price during the actual period on the market replaces the full window. This is not permission to treat an established product as new. A narrow exception applies to rapidly perishable or short-life goods where the reduction is made because the best-before date is expiring.
A reliable evidence chain starts with actual prices. For each item and channel, it should be possible to reconstruct which price was charged on which day. Point-of-sale systems, shop databases, price lists, marketplace records and unchanged archive states can be useful. A spreadsheet created after the event is persuasive only if it rests on verifiable underlying data.
For the specific advertisement, add approval time, copy, product page, banner, newsletter, search advertisement and social-media version. Record which version was published first and whether a voucher, regional delivery condition or customer segment changed the price. The evidence must show the price the audience could actually see.
When a challenge arrives, preserve the complete letter, service date, challenged version and internal change record. The article on recommended prices and strikethrough advertising covers the different comparison with a manufacturer recommendation. The advertising claims self-check helps organise the visible claim and its supporting records.
The 30-day lowest price under section 9a is not the same as a manufacturer recommended retail price. An RRP advertisement uses a manufacturer figure as its benchmark. An announced price reduction uses the lowest own price in the relevant channel. Both statements may appear in one asset, but they must be attributed clearly.
The wording "formerly" can also create different expectations. It may point to the advertiser's former price, whereas "RRP" points to a manufacturer recommendation. If several values appear together, source, period and channel should be recognisable immediately. A remote explanation on another page will not reliably correct the overall impression of the main advertisement.
In 4 Ob 226/22x, the Austrian Supreme Court held that section 9a does not create a general duty to state a specific promotion period in every advertisement. That clarifies the period disclosure issue but does not remove the duty to use the correct reference value. The decision concerns the promotion period, not the accuracy of the advertised price.
An online price may change through a voucher, customer account, app, delivery area or automated campaign. The review should record the price generally visible and the conditions attached to any reduction. A discount available only with a personal code should not be presented without explanation as a general lowest price.
In a store, shelf label, product display, leaflet and checkout price interact. The goods, time of removal and price charged must be considered together. On a marketplace, it is also important to identify who is the seller and whether the advertising is controlled by the trader or the platform.
The records should not be reconstructed only after a dispute. A practical approval file lists article, channel, period, lowest price, calculation, advertising asset and responsible approval. This also allows mobile views and shortened social-media formats to be checked before publication.
A challenge should not be answered from one screenshot alone. Preserve the complete advertising version, price history, channel attribution and approvals first. Only then can it be distinguished whether the issue is a calculation error, an unclear presentation or a broader misleading practice under section 2 UWG.
Section 15 of the Price Marking Act classifies breaches of the listed price marking duties as administrative offences. The provision was amended with effect from 1 July 2026. Alongside a civil dispute about an injunction, the administrative classification should therefore also be considered carefully.
In an application for interim protection, current evidence, risk of repetition and urgency may matter. The topic on injunctions and interim relief explains the relevant questions. A possible damages claim is addressed in the article on damages and lost profit. The response should be chosen only after the complete file has been reviewed.
For an announced reduction on goods, the previous lowest price is generally the lowest price the business charged at least once for the same goods in the same sales channel during the preceding 30 days. The goods and channel attribution must be checked in the individual case.
Section 9a refers to the same sales channel. An online shop and a store must therefore not be combined without review. The business structure, public presentation and actual price history are relevant.
For a progressively increasing reduction, the relevant reference is the lowest non-reduced price before the first reduction. Each stage should be documented with price, date, advertising version and approval.
Section 9a concerns price reductions for goods. Services do not fall under this specific 30-day rule. Their advertising may nevertheless be reviewed under other provisions, including section 2 UWG.
In 4 Ob 226/22x, the Austrian Supreme Court did not derive a general duty from section 9a to state a specific promotion period in every advertisement. The correct reference price and a non-misleading overall impression remain necessary.
Distinguish manufacturer recommendation, former own price and lowest price.
Organise advertising wording, audience and supporting records.
Review the advertised price together with actual availability.
Separate price advantage, extra charges and overall impression.
Classify evidence, risk of repetition and protective objective.
Prepare facts, original versions and evidential value in an organised file.
Topics
Give us a concise outline of the situation. We will clarify which documents are needed and which next step is appropriate.
Office
BRANDAUER Rechtsanwälte GmbH Giselakai 51 5020 Salzburg Österreich
Phone
+43 662 6280000