The proposed $1.5 million Saks OFF 5TH class action settlement stems from a long-running controversy in retail: “compare-at” or “market” pricing that can make discounts look bigger than they really are. Saks OFF 5TH, the outlet arm of Saks Fifth Avenue, sells designer and luxury-branded goods in an outlet setting where shoppers expect meaningful markdowns. According to the lawsuit, certain Saks Fifth Avenue–branded items were advertised with an “advertised Market Price” and a discounted price, but the “Market Price” was allegedly not a genuine, prevailing price—creating the impression of savings that shoppers may not have actually been getting. The suit was filed on behalf of California purchasers who bought qualifying items between January 1, 2011 and November 1, 2024, alleging deceptive advertising and pricing practices; Saks OFF 5TH denies wrongdoing. If approved, eligible class members can receive up to a $20 merchandise certificate (coupon), with claims generally due by March 16, 2025, and proof required for those who didn’t receive direct email notice. Beyond individual payouts, the significance is the pressure these cases put on retailers to substantiate reference prices and ensure “% off” claims reflect real comparisons, because even small per-customer harm can add up across years of transactions. This case fits a broader wave of “false discount” litigation that has targeted outlet and department-store chains, including suits alleging inflated list prices, fictitious “original” prices, or reference prices that were rarely (or never) used in actual sales. California is a focal point because consumer-protection and false-advertising rules—such as the Unfair Competition Law (UCL), False Advertising Law (FAL), and Consumer Legal Remedies Act (CLRA)—as well as regulations around former-price comparisons, can make it risky to advertise a markdown unless the higher reference price is bona fide and properly supported by pricing history or prevailing market evidence.