Deputy Speaker of the State Duma Boris Chernyshov, a member of the LDPR, openly criticized the practice of pricing taxi rides with a label that signals higher charges for journeys advertised as suitable for children. He argued that price hikes tied to services marketed for families with kids are unfair and deserve closer scrutiny by regulatory authorities. The comments capture a broader worry about how urban taxi markets set rates for individual rides, especially when safety features like child seats are involved, and they reflect ongoing debates across major cities about the fairness and transparency of price signals in transport. The issue has drawn attention from consumer groups and industry observers who worry about the potential for price discrimination in everyday mobility.
Chernyshov sent an official appeal to Maxim Shaskolsky, the head of the Federal Antimonopoly Service, requesting a formal check on the validity of such prices. He pointed to tariff differentials that can be substantial, sometimes several times larger than the base fare, and questioned why child and economy tariffs are offered by drivers using similarly equipped vehicles and providing comparable service. The deputy suggested that price structures should reflect actual costs and service value rather than exploiting parental needs, noting that in many cases the added requirements for child passengers do not justify dramatic price gaps.
He stressed that simply having a child seat should not justify a significant fare increase, arguing that the seat is a standard safety amenity rather than a feature that adds meaningful value to the ride. In his view, pricing should be anchored in cost recovery for the operator and the platform, not in perceptions of parental vulnerability or consumer convenience. This stance aligns with calls for more consistent pricing rules across cities and platforms in order to protect families from hidden surcharges.
According to Chernyshov, the costs of providing taxi access to families with children should be borne by the taxi operator or the aggregator, rather than passed directly to consumers. To realize this, he proposed that ride-hailing platforms establish a zero commission on tariffs reserved for child passengers, effectively subsidizing these rides through the broader business model. The proposal aims to reduce price pressure on families and to discourage price discrimination based on passenger demographics.
He argued that such a policy would make travel more affordable for drivers who want to attract family customers and would ease the financial burden on parents, contributing to a fairer pricing environment where charges reflect service quality rather than branding or categorization. In addition, the move could encourage platforms to innovate around family-friendly features without creating profit-killing surcharges, a dynamic that could benefit urban mobility in large North American cities as well.
Regulators signaled in March the possibility of applying antitrust measures to Yandex Taxi, underscoring a broader regulatory focus on how major ride-hailing platforms set prices and manage commissions. The development highlights a pattern seen in many jurisdictions where competition authorities scrutinize pricing practices and seek to ensure that cost structures are transparent and fair for all riders, including families with children.
Industry observers have previously outlined five reasons why taxi prices might rise in 2024, including higher operating costs, regulatory shifts affecting licensing and insurance, changes in platform commissions, investments in safety features, and evolving demand patterns. In Canada and the United States, regulators continue to monitor fare differentials to determine whether prices for family riders are justified and whether operators cross-subsidize or pass on costs to casual riders. The ongoing dialogue reflects a wider concern about equity in urban transportation and the responsibility of platforms and operators to provide affordable options for households with kids.