Sneaking · Australia
Sneak into basket
Sneak into basket is a working label for this design mechanism: A paid or consequential item is added to a basket or transaction without a clear, deliberate and specific user choice. This is editorial implementation guidance for Australian journeys, not a finding of unlawfulness. From 1 July 2027, a similar interface is relevant to ACL section 28B only if the complete consumer-connection, manipulation or unreasonable-distortion and actual-or-likely-detriment test is met. Current ACL rules require a separate assessment.
- Family
- Sneaking
- Also known as
- Journey stages
Definition
What is this pattern?
A paid or consequential item is added to a basket or transaction without a clear, deliberate and specific user choice. This is a design and research taxonomy for learning and evidence review, not a statutory offence label or an automatic finding that an interface is unlawful.
How it works
A paid or consequential item is added to a basket or transaction without a clear, deliberate and specific user choice. An item or donation enters or re-enters the basket without a current add action, so the payable state changes independently of the shopper’s recorded choice.
Warning signs
- A line item or quantity appears after a transition.
- No preceding deliberate action specifically selected that item or quantity.
- The addition creates cost, commitment or another material consequence.
Potential harms
- The shopper may pay an additional amount that was never deliberately added.
- A removed item can re-enter the transaction and create an unintended charge.
Learn by comparison
What does this look like?
These fictional examples make the design mechanism easier to recognise. They do not depict a real company and do not establish that an individual interface is unlawful.
Illustrative example 1 · Donation added without a deliberate choice
A fictional grocery service inserts a $2 charity donation into the basket when the shopper chooses a delivery slot, without showing a selection control.
Potential consumer harm: The shopper may pay an additional amount that was never deliberately added.
Illustrative example 2 · Removed accessory returns after cart refresh
A fictional store adds a cable bundle to a laptop order, lets the shopper remove it, then silently restores it when the delivery postcode changes.
Potential consumer harm: A removed item can re-enter the transaction and create an unintended charge.
Donation added without a deliberate choice
A fictional grocery service inserts a $2 charity donation into the basket when the shopper chooses a delivery slot, without showing a selection control.
Order total · $64. A $2 donation appears after delivery selection without an add action.. Donation included. Add $2 donation
Order total · $62. Donation choices are optional, unselected and visible before the total changes.. Amount affected: $2. Add $2 donation. Donation included. Payable total and selected items, expanded: The summary shows the line items and total before “Add $2 donation” is activated.
Why the first version can mislead: The final commercial state diverges from the choice represented earlier in the journey. The problematic state records: “A $2 donation appears after delivery selection without an add action.” Review the timing and affirmative selection needed before “Donation included” changes price, product or recurring liability. The shopper may pay an additional amount that was never deliberately added.
What a fairer design does: Leave donations out of the basket until the shopper selects a clearly priced option.
Show annotated differences (4)
- A $2 donation appears after delivery selection without an add action.Why this state matters: The final commercial state diverges from the choice represented earlier in the journey. The problematic state records: “A $2 donation appears after delivery selection without an add action.” Review the timing and affirmative selection needed before “Donation included” changes price, product or recurring liability. The shopper may pay an additional amount that was never deliberately added.
- Add $2 donationReview prompt: Which affirmative action authorises “Donation included”, and where is the resulting price, product or recurring state shown before commitment?
- Donation choices are optional, unselected and visible before the total changes.Fairer design: Leave donations out of the basket until the shopper selects a clearly priced option.
- Payable total and selected items, expanded: The summary shows the line items and total before “Add $2 donation” is activated.Review prompt: Compare the basket before and after the action, including total and line items; does the mutation satisfy “A line item or quantity appears after a transition”?
Review questions (3)
- Which affirmative action authorises “Donation included”, and where is the resulting price, product or recurring state shown before commitment?
- Compare the basket before and after the action, including total and line items; does the mutation satisfy “A line item or quantity appears after a transition”?
- Which specific affirmative event creates the final commercial state, and could “Tax or unavoidable charge represented separately” explain the observed outcome instead?
Removed accessory returns after cart refresh
A fictional store adds a cable bundle to a laptop order, lets the shopper remove it, then silently restores it when the delivery postcode changes.
Updated order · $829. The $30 cable bundle returns after a postcode edit.. Accessory restored. Add cable bundle $30
Updated order · $799. The shopper’s removal persists through recalculation.. Amount affected: $30. Add cable bundle $30. Accessory restored. Payable total and selected items, expanded: The summary shows the line items and total before “Add cable bundle $30” is activated.
Why the first version can mislead: The final commercial state diverges from the choice represented earlier in the journey. The problematic state records: “The $30 cable bundle returns after a postcode edit.” Review the timing and affirmative selection needed before “Accessory restored” changes price, product or recurring liability. A removed item can re-enter the transaction and create an unintended charge.
What a fairer design does: Persist removal across all cart updates and require a new deliberate add action before restoring an accessory.
Show annotated differences (4)
- The $30 cable bundle returns after a postcode edit.Why this state matters: The final commercial state diverges from the choice represented earlier in the journey. The problematic state records: “The $30 cable bundle returns after a postcode edit.” Review the timing and affirmative selection needed before “Accessory restored” changes price, product or recurring liability. A removed item can re-enter the transaction and create an unintended charge.
- Add cable bundle $30Review prompt: Which affirmative action authorises “Accessory restored”, and where is the resulting price, product or recurring state shown before commitment?
- The shopper’s removal persists through recalculation.Fairer design: Persist removal across all cart updates and require a new deliberate add action before restoring an accessory.
- Payable total and selected items, expanded: The summary shows the line items and total before “Add cable bundle $30” is activated.Review prompt: Compare the basket before and after the action, including total and line items; does the mutation satisfy “No preceding deliberate action specifically selected that item or quantity”?
Review questions (3)
- Which affirmative action authorises “Accessory restored”, and where is the resulting price, product or recurring state shown before commitment?
- Compare the basket before and after the action, including total and line items; does the mutation satisfy “No preceding deliberate action specifically selected that item or quantity”?
- Which specific affirmative event creates the final commercial state, and could “user-selected bundle whose included items were clearly disclosed” explain the observed outcome instead?
What is a fairer alternative?
Add an item only after a deliberate selection, preserve removal through every recalculation and show the updated line item and total before commitment.
Legal and information status
How Australian law may apply
A paid or consequential item is added to a basket or transaction without a clear, deliberate and specific user choice. An item or donation enters or re-enters the basket without a current add action, so the payable state changes independently of the shopper’s recorded choice. These harms describe a review risk, not an automatic legal conclusion. Australian section 28B commences on 1 July 2027 and requires its complete, context-specific test. Existing ACL provisions remain a separate current-law assessment.
ACL section 28B, inserted by the 2026 Act
Possible risk indicator
In checkout journeys, the sneak into basket mechanism may warrant review where it manipulates a consumer or unreasonably distorts the decision environment and causes, or is likely to cause, detriment. The sneaking label and an interface similarity do not establish a contravention; the complete section 28B test, scope, facts and evidence must be applied from 1 July 2027.
Dark-pattern research taxonomy
Editorial analysis
The cited research sources support this working pattern within the sneaking family. It is editorial implementation guidance, not an Australian statutory category, regulator finding or legal safe harbour.
Evidence layers and open questions
Applicable law, enforcement records, policy preparation, stakeholder input, editorial analysis and unknown future details remain visibly distinct.
Final Act mappingEditorial implementation guidance
This editorial practice label is not itself an express statutory prohibition. Apply the complete provision and its scope to the facts.
Possible general-test applicationCommences 1 July 2027
ACL section 28B, inserted by the 2026 Act: In checkout journeys, the sneak into basket mechanism may warrant review where it manipulates a consumer or unreasonably distorts the decision environment and causes, or is likely to cause, detriment. The sneaking label and an interface similarity do not establish a contravention; the complete section 28B test, scope, facts and evidence must be applied from 1 July 2027.
Existing ACLCurrent enforcement
Existing ACL provisions continue to apply on their own elements before and after commencement. The 2027 provisions must not be applied early.
Verified enforcement contextCurrent enforcement
No named pattern-specific enforcement example is asserted on this page. Existing ACL analysis remains fact-specific and separate from the 2027 provisions.
RegulationsRegulation pending
Later regulations may affect specified exclusions, matters or exceptions. That uncertainty does not postpone a core enacted rule unless the provision itself depends on prescription.
Regulator implementation materialGuidance pending
Government funding and parliamentary material anticipate regulator education and guidance. No dedicated final ACCC implementation guide is treated here as published.
Journey and evidence recommendationsEditorial implementation guidance
Add an item only after a deliberate selection, preserve removal through every recalculation and show the updated line item and total before commitment. This is editorial portal guidance, not a statutory duty, regulator safe harbour or compliance certificate.
Context matters
Context and boundary cases
- A line item or quantity appears after a transition.
- No preceding deliberate action specifically selected that item or quantity.
- The addition creates cost, commitment or another material consequence.
- Boundary to test: Tax or unavoidable charge represented separately
- Boundary to test: user-selected bundle whose included items were clearly disclosed
- Boundary to test: free non-consequential item
When a similar design can serve a legitimate purpose
- Tax or unavoidable charge represented separately
- user-selected bundle whose included items were clearly disclosed
- free non-consequential item
Operational review
What teams should review
- Teams
- Which affirmative action authorises “Donation included”, and where is the resulting price, product or recurring state shown before commitment?
- Compare the basket before and after the action, including total and line items; does the mutation satisfy “A line item or quantity appears after a transition”?
- Which specific affirmative event creates the final commercial state, and could “Tax or unavoidable charge represented separately” explain the observed outcome instead?
- Which affirmative action authorises “Accessory restored”, and where is the resulting price, product or recurring state shown before commitment?
- Compare the basket before and after the action, including total and line items; does the mutation satisfy “No preceding deliberate action specifically selected that item or quantity”?
- Which specific affirmative event creates the final commercial state, and could “user-selected bundle whose included items were clearly disclosed” explain the observed outcome instead?
Evidence to retain
- Annotated checkout screenshots at each responsive breakpoint
- The complete state sequence before, during and after the consumer decision
- Design-system component, content, default and configuration records for the reviewed release
- Operational records substantiating price, availability, timing and eligibility claims
- Usability, accessibility, reversal, complaint and support evidence relevant to consumer impact
- A dated product and legal review record identifying evidence, uncertainties and release decisions
Legal map and implementation tools
Evidence base
Sources
- Dark commercial patternsOrganisation for Economic Co-operation and Development · Secondary · checked 2026-09-14 · OECD Digital Economy Papers No. 336
- Competition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) Act 2026Federal Register of Legislation · Primary · checked 2026-09-14 · C2026A00064
- Competition and Consumer Act 2010, including Schedule 2: Australian Consumer LawFederal Register of Legislation · Primary · checked 2026-09-14 · C2004A00109
- Unfair trading tricks and traps to be bannedTreasury Ministers · Primary · checked 2026-09-14
- Inquiry into the Competition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) Bill 2026Senate Economics Legislation Committee · Primary · checked 2026-08-09