PDF editor plans should show the exit fee beside the price

Our view is simple. A PDF editor that sells a cheaper plan in return for a yearly commitment should show what it costs to leave early next to the monthly price, in the same size of type, before the buyer pays. A settlement involving Adobe, the best known PDF editor maker, shows that this is a reasonable standard to ask for. It should not be limited to one company.

What happened

In March 2026, the US Department of Justice announced a proposed order that would settle a case against Adobe over its subscription practices. According to the Justice Department press release, the order requires Adobe to pay $75 million in civil penalties and offer customers $75 million in free services. The case was brought under the Restore Online Shoppers' Confidence Act.

The same release says Adobe must clearly disclose any early termination fee, and how it is calculated, before enrolling customers. For any free trial lasting longer than seven days, it must remind customers before the trial converts into a paid subscription that carries such a fee. It must also give subscribers easy ways to cancel.

The government's original complaint made specific allegations. As summarised by the law firm Hunton, the complaint said Adobe did not adequately disclose that its "Annual, Paid Monthly" plan was a year-long commitment with a significant early termination fee. It alleged the fee was 50% of the remaining annual payments if a customer cancelled after a two-week period. It also alleged these terms sat in fine print and behind optional hyperlinks.

Adobe disagrees with those claims. Digital Production reports that the company said it denies wrongdoing. These are allegations that were settled, not findings by a court, and we make no claim beyond what the official record and the company itself say.

The consumer benefit is still being delivered. Adobe's own settlement FAQ says eligible customers were emailed an offer of two months of free access to selected apps. Eligibility covers US customers who subscribed to a Creative Cloud app between January 2019 and July 2025 and paid an early termination fee that, with their monthly fees, exceeded the cost of a month-to-month plan. Acrobat Studio is among the products former customers can choose.

Why this is a PDF editor story

PDF editing is a category where buyers often need a tool for one project: a contract to sign, a form to fill, a scanned file to correct. That is exactly the kind of purchase where a commitment hurts. A yearly plan that looks like a monthly price becomes a poor deal when the need ends in week three.

The monthly figure is the number that gets the largest type on a pricing page. The commitment length, the renewal behaviour and the cost of leaving are the numbers that decide whether the deal was good. When those sit in a footnote, buyers compare the wrong figures. A reader scanning a comparison table of PDF editors sees a row of low monthly prices, and the table cannot tell them which of those prices come with an exit charge.

That is why we think the order's disclosure test is a reasonable general standard, not a special punishment for one vendor. It is also modest. It does not tell a company how to price. It asks that the fee, and the way the fee is worked out, are visible before the buyer commits.

What we think sellers should do

• State the term next to the price. If a monthly price requires twelve months, say so in the same line.
• Show the exit cost in plain numbers. A formula is not enough on its own. Show the worked amount for cancelling in month two and month six.
• Make the trial end visible. If a free trial converts into a paid commitment, remind the buyer before the charge.
• Offer the same exit route as the entry route. If a buyer can sign up in a few clicks, they should be able to cancel in a few clicks.

The strongest counter-argument

The fairest objection is that commitment plans are a legitimate trade. A seller that knows a customer will stay twelve months can offer a lower monthly price, and some customers prefer that. An early termination fee is the other side of that bargain. On this view, banning or heavily restricting such fees would raise prices for people who would happily commit, and a buyer who wants flexibility can choose a month-to-month plan.

We accept most of that. The order in the Adobe case does not ban commitment plans or early termination fees. As the Justice Department describes it, it requires disclosure before enrolment, a reminder before a long trial converts, and easy cancellation. Our position asks for no more than that. A commitment that is clearly shown, and priced lower in return, is a fair deal. Our objection is to the commitment that a buyer only discovers when they try to leave. A trade only works if both sides can see the terms.

There is a second limit worth noting. The free-service remedy is not cash. It is available only to US customers who meet the eligibility rules in Adobe's FAQ, and it takes the form of free months. Disclosure before the sale is worth more to a buyer than a credit after the dispute.

What buyers can do now

Free or cheaper tools are often enough for occasional PDF work, and a month-to-month plan costs more per month but removes the exit problem. Whatever you pick, find these before you pay: the length of the term, whether the plan renews automatically, what happens if you cancel in the first month and the sixth, and whether the free trial turns into a paid plan on its own. If the pricing page does not answer those questions, ask the seller in writing before you enter card details. This is general consumer information, not legal advice. For a dispute about a specific charge, speak to a qualified professional or your consumer protection agency.